KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
You were talking about Soccer moms and Gamers. Gamers don't use netbooks last time I checked (well maybe they do, but not for gaming).
Steve Jobs Still Involved in Apple, Still Expected to Return in June
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You were talking about Soccer moms and Gamers. Gamers don't use netbooks last time I checked (well maybe they do, but not for gaming).
Anuba
macrumors 68040
I think it's quite the overly bold assumption to claim that 95% of all Mac users don't care one single bit about these things (not merely my examples but the big picture). If that was indeed true, the remaining 5% must be the most vocal minority in history, and should get Guinness on the phone pronto.
The issue wasn't whether they suck or not (that's subjective) but the fact that Windows 7 isn't the golden opportunity that Vista was. Let's say that the entire 90% of the OS marketshare that sticks to Windows, feel that Windows sucks. OK, but the lion's share obviously isn't going anywhere. Not even when Vista was the latest offering. So why would they leave when Windows 7 comes along? Vista, Windows ME and Windows 1.0 were the only ones that were universally panned, Windows 7 is the first one that's been praised.
That's what I thought too, but it appears that the only significant change that happened was that a lot more Mac owners started using Windows on the side.
Right, but is that because they still work or because Macs are so costly that you have to keep the old ones around? And will they be installing Snow Leopard on their G5s from 2006?
At the time he switched, Macs (and PowerBook G4s in particular) were absolutely rotten when it came to audio performance. Intel had just come out with the Centrino platform and the Pentium-M (the forefather of the Core family), and those machines were running circles around their Mac contemporaries. Working with a song with numerous audio tracks and a bunch of software synthesizers and effects that have to be rendered in realtime is a task that can easily bring CPU usage up to 80-90%, and a Pentium-M could handle a 2-3 times heavier load than a G4 could. But that wasn't the only problem for my "friend" (more of a forum acquaintance really), it was about the money. And a Mac Pro is no less expensive than a PMG5 or G4 was, Intel processor or not.
IJ Reilly
macrumors P6
I believe it is true, but nothing so special as you suggest. These online forums are not the "real world," in that they don't represent an accurate cross-section of the population. I don't know about 95%, but certainly the overwhelming majority of computer users, if they care at all about the things computer geeks care about, it's because computer geeks are constantly telling them that they should care.
Anuba
macrumors 68040
I don't base my assessment on forums in general or MacRumors in particular.
Furthermore, the Mac community has an overrepresentation of geeks. The share of mainstream users is on the rise, certainly, but in the dark days (mid 1990's) you had to be a geek if you stayed with Mac.
Also... what's so geeky and specialized about the three examples I used? I don't consider it particularly geeky to want a certain mouse or to play a game once in a while. Logitech just sold their billionth mouse, and an estimated 63% of all Americans play games (PC or console), 43% are women, and 60% are between ages 25-44. And Google Chrome reached 2 million downloads in its first week alone.
thomas419924
macrumors newbie
yes i have to agree with that !
DELLsFan
macrumors 6502a
Yes, I have. A few of them actually. It's unfortunate that you refuse to acknowledge them. A shame, really - as you seem to be quite an intelligent person. Most of the fellow Mac folks I encounter tend to not be so rigid with their ideology and fanaticism over Cupertino. One might otherwise learn a great deal from your years of experience with the Mac. Maybe in another 27 years, you'll look at opinions differently.
I think there's room for both hard core purist thinking: "Mac is uber and if you don't like it, there's the road to Redmond ... " and the more tempered approach shared here in these forums and elsewhere. I love my MBP and Mac OS X, but I have experience with other hardware and OS' as well. Apple is a great company and they deserve all the credit they have earned in their success. However, they are not perfect and priced at quite a premium.
While you may disagree and continue to dismiss & bemoan my opinions and others', there are still many like me who would like to see Apple re-tool their "priceless experience" - to evolve into something better and more inclusive, providing more options, at a lower price as their market share and profit grows. If this model isn't a worthy endeavor in your opinion, we may never share any common ground here. Indeed, maybe this speaks more to the root of a problem at Apple than the evil, anti-trusting, Microsoft monopoly ever did for the PC side.
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
You can't have read much PC press in your years then. Every time there's a Windows Beta out, it gets praised by the likes of PC Mag or ZDnet or other publications like that.
It's. Always. The. Same. Story.
"This time..." "They finally got it right..." "This beta is more stable than the last release version ever was" "Wait until it's released, it'll just be even better!".
Frankly, we've heard it all and seen it all before. Let's just see what happens when it actually gets released before we start humping Microsoft's leg.
I think you have the wrong community. Of all my times hanging around geeks, the real die hard Mac fans have all been about as ungeeky as your typical high school goth kid. Most were artsy types or students.
In fact, it's only in recent years, with the release of NeXTST... err.. OS X that the geeks have all started paying attention to Apple, myself included. If you want geeks, look no further than the Linux crowd. Those are the true geeks (again myself included).
Bingo! *YOU* would like to see it. And I have never suggested that you're alone in your desire. However, your arguments are personal. You might not like Apple's pricing. You might not like the fact that their hardware isn't the most upgradeable. But, again, who cares? The vast majority of Apple's customers don't agree with you.
Apple continues to prosper doing exactly what they are doing. They have the highest margins in the industry. They're not hurting for customers or profits. That's been my point all along, one you don't seem to acknowledge. Just because you think Apple should do X or Y, doesn't really matter one bit. Apple is not just another PC company. They are a vertically-integrated and entirely holistic model of what technology should be (in their opinion). They don't believe in being open to everyone. They never have.
When you buy Apple, you buy more than a machine. You buy an experience. This is what they sell. Your (and a few other vocal individuals') focus on pricing is irrelevant. Complain all you want, but they're not going to suddenly release a cheap, upgradeable tower any more than they are going to license OS X to PC manufacturers. It's just not what they are about.
You've certainly made many points, but they are personal in nature and they completely ignore Apple's history as well as its very clear, very obvious philosophy as a company. If you don't like it, you have plenty of choices, but Apple isn't going to change. Thank goodness!!!
I'm not sure how offering cheap, low-margin products and diluting their brand allows them to "evolve into something better and more inclusive." It will just mean longer hold times for tech support, longer waits at the Apple store, fewer services to customers, etc. Your focus on pricing is totally off the mark. It's about margins, not pricing. If Apple can deliver an affordable computer with high margins, they will. In fact, they already do. It's called the Mini. No, it can't be upgraded. No, it doesn't offer cutting edge hardware. But it offers the Apple experience at a fair price point while maintaining Apple's high margins. Cutting into those margins isn't going to grow profits. In fact, it will do the exact opposite. They'll have more users and they'll make less money on each. Hardly a benefit!
Finally, the root of what problem at Apple? From where I'm sitting (and have been for the past 27 years), Apple doesn't have a problem.
I disagree completely. It definitely has an overrepresentation of zealots
, but not geeks. Mac users don't enjoy building their computers or spending their weekends troubleshooting.First off, before Mighty Mouse, I used a Logitech mouse with my Mac. No problem. Just plug it in and it works. Logitech doesn't focus on the Mac market because Mac users don't buy their products. Having a cheap Mac isn't going to change that. Mac users are, overwhelmingly, satisfied with Apple's offerings, so certain third party products will never gain traction. Logitech could write Mac drivers for every product they produce and I still don't think they'd sell well despite the fact that Apple is selling millions of Macs every quarter. Why? Because Mac users aren't interested.
As for gaming, as I said before, it's chicken and egg. Until the game companies really focus on Mac development, what is Apple supposed to do? They're busy selling tons of machines. If the gaming companies want to take advantage of all these users, they should write more games. It's not Apple's problem. And there are plenty of games available for the Mac. It is a complete misnomer that one can't play games on a Mac.
Finally, Google Chrome? Um, who cares? Yet another browser. Yawn. I haven't had any serious problems with Safari and I use the web A LOT. A few sites don't work well, so I keep Camino around for backup. I have no incentive or desire to use Chrome because my current experience is great. Sure, 2 million people downloaded it. But how many people are actually USING it? I bet when they do release their Mac version, few will care. Why? Because Mac users already have a great browser.
Your arguments, like so many others, essentially boil down to what you want personally. You have not demonstrated how Apple is going to benefit by doing X or Y. Furthermore, your arguments, again, like so many others, ignore Apple's history as well as its guiding philosophy. Just because you think it would be better if they did this or that doesn't mean Apple shares your opinion.
Anuba
macrumors 68040
I believe they said the same thing about the Intel switch.
"Bwhawhaha.... Suck it Wintel losers, PPC rulez!"
Boom.
Hello Mactel.
Oops.
"Ahem... I mean... Intel is... Intel is great. Go Apple!"
The simple fact of the matter is, you have no idea what they're going to do because you're extrapolating their future from their past. Which tells me you haven't paid much attention to their history, because if there's one thing we know about Steve Jobs, it's his ability to -- as Bill Gates put it -- "figure out where the next bet should be". Nobody could've predicted that Apple would one day go with Intel, or become the world's largest music store, or define the 21st century equivalent of the Walkman, or allow Macs to run Windows, or enter the cellphone market, or drop "Computers" from their name. And from this you conclude that Apple isn't going to change? And that they're never going into the mainstream market with products for the masses? So who is the iPod for... a small private club?
Exactly!Plus, we really don't know what Apple has in store with Snow Leopard. And by the time M$ gets around to releasing Windows 7, Apple will probably be readying their next OS for release. We hear the same sorry song and dance from the Windows press every time M$ talks about their next generation OS. And, every time, it's the same can of worms.
Actually, it was very obvious that they would move to Intel, especially considering NEXTSTEP ran on Intel boxes. My NEXTSTEP machine was a DEC/486.
Furthermore, I never said they're not interested in the mainstream market. What market do you think they're in? How much more mainstream do you get than the shopping mall? What I said is that they don't care about low-margin, low-cost products. Never have, never will. And they like to control the entire user experience, which is why they're never going to license the OS or allow anyone else to sell Touch apps.
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
By boom, you mean a steady decline over 6 years ? That's some slow boom you have there.
Anuba
macrumors 68040
Geeks don't necessarily have to be people who build their own computers out of scotchtape and popsicle sticks, I'm talking about people whose lives revolve around their computers. Macs are very popular among developers, for example. I know software developers who barely know how to switch out a hard drive, but I still categorize them as geeks.I disagree completely. It definitely has an overrepresentation of zealots
Yeah, well, no. Logitech Control Center wreaks havoc on Leopard and due to the plethora of buttons on a Logitech mouse you only get a fraction of the functionality without a driver. My mouse of choice is the G9, best mouse I ever used for graphic design (technically it's for gaming). The Logitech forum has quite a few threads along the lines of "Uhh, so, any chance of a Mac driver soon?"
As for Apple's own input devices, funny story... I worked at a software company on a freelance basis last year, they have some 20 developers and most of them have both Mac and PC. So I was in their server room which also serves as storage for semi-retired spare gear, looking for a monitor I could borrow, and I noticed a pile of boxes with the new Apple keyboards and Mighty Mouses ("Mighty Mice" sounds weird), so on my way back I said to the IT guy "boy, the devs sure wear out a lot of mice and keyboards don't they?" and pointed at the pile. He said "nah, those were never used". Turns out nearly everyone hated the new keyboards and the MM so much they either kept their old plastic white Apple keyboards (the previous generation) or got something else, and most of them used Microsoft mice that the company buys in 5-packs.
In the beginning I used the mouse and keyboard included with my iMac but I later switched to Logitech. As cutting edge as Apple are in some areas, their wireless mice and keyboards with stinky old AA batteries are like something out of the 90's. How hard is it to make rechargeable Li-On mice and keyboards like everyone else?
Well somebody must be buying them because they have Mac editions of their DiNovo and DiNovo Edge keyboards. They're made from brushed aluminium and glossy black plastic, which matches the new Macs perfectly, and that's more than can be said about the white keyboards Apple currently offers. They appear to be designed to match Macs from the white era, circa 2003-2007.
Anuba
macrumors 68040
Boom. As in kaboom. As in whammo, you wake up one day and Macs suddenly use Intel processors. Then again I've grown to expect you to deliberately misinterpret pretty much anything I say if you spot an opportunity. But feel free to express yourself in Swedish and we'll see how well you fare in getting every nuance right.
I can't recall anyone other than Paul Thurrott, the most deluded fanboy in the universe, insisting that MS hit a home run with Vista. Everyone was whining, and CNET has Vista and WinME listed as 2 out of the 10 worst OS:es of all time. You're spot on with your observation on the pattern as such, but even you understand that the tops and the bottoms of the curve have some variation. The verdict on Win7 is leagues above what anyone said about Vista, XP, 98... if you were to rate them in terms of reception, it would be something like this:
1. Win7
2. Win2K
3. Win95
4. Win98
5. Vista
6. ME
This really came as no surprise. When NeXT acquired Apple, PPC offered superior performance. But NEXTSTEP ran on Intel, SPARC, PA-RISC, Moto68k, and PPC. Apple stuck with PPC for obvious reasons. Performance was great and they needed to support the older Mac "Classic" apps. But anyone who knew anything about NeXT knew that an Intel build was (probably) maintained from day one and that, at any given moment, Apple could and would jump to Intel. For me, it came as no surprise whatsoever, especially given the fact that the PPC architecture just wasn't cutting it any longer (when they finally made the switch).
Fair enough. But this isn't Apple's problem. It is yet another example of a peripheral manufacturer who half-asses Mac support. Maybe the reason Logitech doesn't sell well to Mac users is because their developers can't write decent Mac drivers? But this has NOTHING to do with Apple. Zip, zero, zilch.
I won't argue with you here. Personally, I find Apple's input devices more than adequate. I like the new slim keyboard very much. Mighty Mouse is ok, but more than adequate for my needs. And I imagine that many users feel the same way. But you're right. Apple could certainly do more in this arena. However, they're also not stopping anyone else from competing.
There are plenty of Mac-compatible keyboards and mice out there. The trouble is, as you point out above, the software usually sucks. And that's not Apple's fault. These peripheral companies are actually doing themselves a great disservice by claiming Mac support but offering a mediocre experience. This only reinforces the belief that one should just stick with Apple.
Anuba
macrumors 68040
I used to get into long and arduous arguments with a Mac user on a music software forum a few years back. He was The. Single. Biggest. Mac. Zealot. I ever encountered -- nobody on MacRumors comes close -- honestly, it was quite scary. He hated Intel processors with a passion, would rant forever about how poorly they performed and how their architecture was retarded, and actually insisted that any -- ANY G-series Mac was faster than the fastest Wintel desktop. OK, I said, so my Mac Mini G4 is faster than a dual core Pentium 4 minitower? Sure, no contest, he said. I then posted some screenshots to illustrate how the Mac Mini would stop playing a Cubase song after just a couple of bars when the CPU meter hit 100%, and how my feeble Pentium-M 1.6 GHz laptop could play the same song all the way through without breaking a sweat. His response was that the test was rigged (it wasn't) or that the software wasn't properly optimized (no amount of optimization would even begin to bridge the performance gap).
And I'm telling you, that guy... did not expect Apple to switch to Intel, and he probably cried for several days after the announcement. While it may have come as no surprise to you, I noticed a lot of dropped jaws at the time.
Haha. Funny story. Yeah, I know a lot of people were shocked. But those people also didn't know much about NeXT or the technology Apple acquired during the reverse take-over. NeXT had already moved to Intel when they dropped their hardware line and became a software company. Considering that MacOS X would be based on NEXTSTEP, it seemed pretty obvious that an Intel port would, at the very least, be maintained. But, since I was a NeXT fanboy (bigtime!), I can see why this was obvious to me and not others. I had actually abandoned the Mac platform for NeXT in the early 90s and only came back to the Mac when Jobs brought NeXT to Apple. Of course, I'm glad Apple made the switch to Intel. After all, who cares what processor they use, so long as performance is up to snuff? Since Jobs's return, it's been one smart move after another.
Anuba
macrumors 68040
The whole NeXT episode is mostly a mystery to me, I never looked into what happened there. I toyed around with one once when I was really drunk, so I don't remember much other than that it was black and vaguely resembled a 90's Mac, it had the same form factor, a flat thing that sat under the monitor. I was at a friend's house and his basement is like a museum of rare hi-tech gear. The NeXT sat next to a home-built analog vocoder.
Lisa, NeXT, Mac Pro... yeah, Jobs sure likes to create cost-prohibitive stuff.
For what it's worth, I think that Steve Jobs will still indeed return to the day-to-day running of Apple at the end of June, but that would still allow him to make a special appearance as keynote speaker for the WWDC in early June, and then announce his intension to return there.
Trajectory
macrumors 6502a
Lisa, NeXT, Mac Pro... yeah, Jobs sure likes to create cost-prohibitive stuff.
Boy, you really want to keep beating that dead horse, don't you.
WE. GET. IT. You like cheap crap. I don't.
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
But that's the point, you didn't wake up one day and WHAMMO Macs were Intel machines. You had clues such as slipping ship dates for the mobile G5s (biggest clue yet, their best line of computer was stuck 3 years earlier as far as processors went). This didn't happen overnight, signed on some pub napkin by Intel CEO's and Steve over a beer like you're trying to portray. It was a steady decline in the PPC platform over the years that lead to this deal.
And if you want to think I'm nitpicking your problems with the English language, please note that I am not a native English speaker myself, and as such would never make fun of someone else. I've argumented against your posts solely based on the facts you are trying to twist in favor of your Apple bashing.
But that's the point. All the supposed praise and positive press you've read about Windows 7 is the same press I've read about every Windows BETA before it, save the early NT days when it wasn't aimed at consumers (up to Windows NT 4.0).
And. Every. Time. It's the same story. Beta is great, super awesome, Windows done right. Shipping version gets in the hand of the less zealot crowd and suddenly it's Windows as usual, yet another Windows version, some stuff is better, some is worse.
I'm reserving my judgment for the shipping versions (all 7, no wait, 10, or is it more ?) of them. Though in the end it makes little difference to me, my beef with Windows is ideological, not technical and is deeply rooted in my last 10 years with Linux, Unix and the open source community.
DELLsFan
macrumors 6502a
Strange bedfellows ...
Now who's being presumptuous? Naw ... never mind ... I've only been a Mac user for a couple years - just tell me when I get MY pass to presume to speak for the vast majority of Apple's customers! I can't wait!!
Of course my points are personal, sir. Yours aren't? Your experience lends credibility to your arguments. I don't discount them. However, I know the difference between an opinion and haughty presumption. Unless you ARE Steve Jobs (come clean now ...) how about we just state and claim our own opinions and let others claim theirs, ok?
No, I acknowledged it. It's just that you have a little problem dealing with the counterpoint. No, scratch that - you dismissed it entirely. You weren't very interested in my supposition that if they weren't hurting for customers, they wouldn't have been so aggressive with the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads. If they weren't hurting for profits, they wouldn't be trying to gain more market share by berating Vista, and then beckoning PC users to climb aboard the good ship Mac. No, you dismissed both premises soundly. There's a difference between acknowledgment and acceptance, friend. We appear to disagree. That's ok with me, but I can understand how disconcerting that can be for some folks.
Oh, you've made this quite apparent. I get it. As a related aside, I find it ironic that in my experience many folks who seem to champion the concepts and philosophies of Open Source, Net Neutrality, and Open Disclosure and the like make unique exception to all things Apple and their philosophies. How strange ... but I digress ...
Sure, the proprietary, closed door brilliant mindset has worked so far for Cupertino - as you've taken great pleasure to point out. However, I don't think brazen disregard to innovative, inclusive change that still returns decent profit should or will be ignored indefinitely. It's apparent to me you disagree with me on this as well. So be it.
Of course they don't. It's just me and my silly opinions ... well ... maybe mine and the other 90% market share still using non Apple products? Oh drat ... sorry ... I don't have that pass yet. Mind if I borrow yours? I feel like we're bonding now. Do you feel the love?
Don't take it personal, robbyx. It's ok that you like a more hands-off, purist approach to corporate growth for Apple. A lot of Mac enthusiasts do. Maybe eventually you'll all let the rest of us into your gated community to share some ideas. There are still a few good ones out there Apple hasn't patented, you know? The thing about strange bedfellows is we probably have more things in common than not. That's a start button I don't mind clicking.
Now who's being presumptuous? Naw ... never mind ... I've only been a Mac user for a couple years - just tell me when I get MY pass to presume to speak for the vast majority of Apple's customers! I can't wait!!
Of course my points are personal, sir. Yours aren't? Your experience lends credibility to your arguments. I don't discount them. However, I know the difference between an opinion and haughty presumption. Unless you ARE Steve Jobs (come clean now ...) how about we just state and claim our own opinions and let others claim theirs, ok?
No, I acknowledged it. It's just that you have a little problem dealing with the counterpoint. No, scratch that - you dismissed it entirely. You weren't very interested in my supposition that if they weren't hurting for customers, they wouldn't have been so aggressive with the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads. If they weren't hurting for profits, they wouldn't be trying to gain more market share by berating Vista, and then beckoning PC users to climb aboard the good ship Mac. No, you dismissed both premises soundly. There's a difference between acknowledgment and acceptance, friend. We appear to disagree. That's ok with me, but I can understand how disconcerting that can be for some folks.
Oh, you've made this quite apparent. I get it. As a related aside, I find it ironic that in my experience many folks who seem to champion the concepts and philosophies of Open Source, Net Neutrality, and Open Disclosure and the like make unique exception to all things Apple and their philosophies. How strange ... but I digress ...
Sure, the proprietary, closed door brilliant mindset has worked so far for Cupertino - as you've taken great pleasure to point out. However, I don't think brazen disregard to innovative, inclusive change that still returns decent profit should or will be ignored indefinitely. It's apparent to me you disagree with me on this as well. So be it.
Of course they don't. It's just me and my silly opinions ... well ... maybe mine and the other 90% market share still using non Apple products?
Oh drat ... sorry ... I don't have that pass yet. Mind if I borrow yours? I feel like we're bonding now. Do you feel the love?Don't take it personal, robbyx. It's ok that you like a more hands-off, purist approach to corporate growth for Apple. A lot of Mac enthusiasts do. Maybe eventually you'll all let the rest of us into your gated community to share some ideas. There are still a few good ones out there Apple hasn't patented, you know? The thing about strange bedfellows is we probably have more things in common than not. That's a start button I don't mind clicking.