__/ [ BearItAll ] on Wednesday 10 January 2007 11:59 \__
> Were you expecting a bit more from Apple.inc's announcement?
>
> Ok, the ApplePhone is likely to be big.
>
> The iTV (oops, someones already got that name) AppleTV, may do well I'm not
> sure about that one.
>
> But as the jernos have said, not a lot to say about computers.
>
> I thought there would have been something major in the Apple on Intel with
> Apple VM. Maybe even some sort of announcement that Apple computers and in
> particular software would be more reasonably priced. They are a bit of a
> long way off pricing for the masses and at this time when they are doing so
> well in other areas it would have been a good time for them to try to win a
> bit more of the PC market. Particularly by making it known that the Mac VM
> is said to be particularly good with Linux, giving you the best of both
> worlds and just switching between them with a key combination (from that
> I'm assuming both are active, rather than the switched out one being
> asleep).
>
> They do mention how the new Mac OS X shines in comparison with Vista, but
> that is of no use if the populus can not afford to give it a try.
What they should have done a long time ago is open their O/S to non-Apple
hardware. While it lowers Apple's revenue in the short-term, it helps it
increase market share. Many people would gladly install OS X and override
their Windows installation, if not set it up on a separate partition.
> I'm a potential traitor. Linux is good, the only OS I've used for years, I
> have to support MS Win at work of cause, but I don't have the slightest
> whim or need to use it in my office or at home.
Apple could divesify the market. As Draconian as they are, at least there
would be no /ONE/ so-called 'standard'. We would need to use /real/
standards to get along and this would help Linux interoperate. Apple is not
an enemy to Linux... well, not in many respects anyway. Earlier today I read
(and participated in) this discussion with some WordPress friends.
http://www.tamba2.org.uk/T2/archives/2007/01/09/just-points/#comments
As you can see, (at least some) Mac users actually /WANT/ to use Linux. They
want freedom and independence. See Mark J's comment.
> But the Apple is different, I'm less and less interested in messing around,
> distros that do stupid things that are more of a hindrence than a help.
> That was why I liked Debian so much (I posted in here that I converted a
> machine at home towards the end of last year), I could miss out the junk
> and just get what I wanted. But I don't want to mess around like that any
> more and Apple sounded like it was what I wanted.
What messing about? Consider the fact that Linux comes with plenty of
software that you needn't to chase and download off the Web (e.g. PDF
readers). Also, consider Automatix and bloated/overloaded distros. Speaking
of Automatix, the next version of Ubuntu will probably obviate the need for
all of this and also contain binary drivers.
> The menu for the off the shelf Apple, something like 20 items. Can you
> assume that it covers everything you might do with a computer, or is it
> inevitable that you will have to shell out that extra $400 to get your
> software, well actually the bit of software I'd of liked is $1,299.
>
> So really in my view Apple does itself no favours in it's attempts to win
> users. No way to prove to yourself its a good OS that you would get on well
> with. The only way is to pay for a machine and hope for the best. That
> isn't the best way to sell in my view.
I can see your point. Apple will find its way, I'm sure. Both Linux and Apple
and gnawing at Microsoft's market share as it struggles for survival as a
monopoly. Soon enough it will be forced to play fair and implement ODF
support, among other things. The bully will then be bullied for its crimes.
--
~~ Best regards
Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: 85% of plant life in in the oceans
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 131 total, 1 running, 128 sleeping, 0 stopped, 2 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
|
|
