If you can?t beat them, buy them.
Final Cut Pro, Shake, Logic, Apple innovations? Nope. Apple acquisitions. What else do they have in common? They were all great cross platform products. Yes! Even FCP, though I think it went by a different name at that time.
Consider some of Apple?s other great software ?innovations.? iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto, and (I believe) iDVD, OS X. What do they have in common? They are all platform defining programs that Apple didn?t write. To be sure, they improved them and slapped on the Apple brand. But innovate? Invent? No! What they did was invest.
If Apple is so dominant in the creative industries, if they are so obviously the best choice, why do they feel the need to buy the best cross platform companies and throw out the competition? Talk about anti competitive! Talk about predatory practices! If Apple is so dominant in the creative industries, wouldn?t that constitute a monopoly of sorts? Certainly, this could not be considered a legitimate way to maintain a monopoly. If Microsoft swallowed Adobe and ended Mac development of Adobe products, who in these forums would be praising Microsoft for their brilliant business maneuver?
I use to think of Apple as the Federation, at the very least, the Maquis, struggling against superior forces for a great cause. Now, I see them for what they really are, Ferengi! Success through acquisition.
There are many of us PC users who feel the same way about Apple as Mac users feel about Microsoft. Well I?ve got news for you. WE?RE BOTH RIGHT! End of rant. Flame away.
Consider some of Apple?s other great software ?innovations.? iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto, and (I believe) iDVD, OS X. What do they have in common? They are all platform defining programs that Apple didn?t write. To be sure, they improved them and slapped on the Apple brand. But innovate? Invent? No! What they did was invest.
If Apple is so dominant in the creative industries, if they are so obviously the best choice, why do they feel the need to buy the best cross platform companies and throw out the competition? Talk about anti competitive! Talk about predatory practices! If Apple is so dominant in the creative industries, wouldn?t that constitute a monopoly of sorts? Certainly, this could not be considered a legitimate way to maintain a monopoly. If Microsoft swallowed Adobe and ended Mac development of Adobe products, who in these forums would be praising Microsoft for their brilliant business maneuver?
I use to think of Apple as the Federation, at the very least, the Maquis, struggling against superior forces for a great cause. Now, I see them for what they really are, Ferengi! Success through acquisition.
There are many of us PC users who feel the same way about Apple as Mac users feel about Microsoft. Well I?ve got news for you. WE?RE BOTH RIGHT! End of rant. Flame away.
Comments
I don't really agree with what you're saying though. It's most definitely not monopolistic. Every product Apple has been buying up has a competitor that runs on other platforms. FCP has Avid, Shake has Discreet, and so forth.
Apple has bought these companies because they are trying to build a portfolio of pro level software products to further their brand. So why reinvent the wheel when you can just go out and buy one? Apple gets a solid product with a good development team, and an immediate user base. Sure, if you want to continue using the product, you have to do it on a mac... but what it does not mean is that the ONLY way to do what that product allows you to do is on a mac with that product. You still have options.
I can see where you're coming from, I guess I'm just not taking it as harshly.
[quote] Partial list of Microsoft Acquisitions ( ** A ** ), Investments ( $$ I
$$ ) and Partnerships ( // P // ):
INTERNET
Aspect Software Engineering. ( ** A ** ) Database software for the Web
Colusa Software: ( ** A ** ) Object-oriented software
Cooper & Peters ( ** A ** ) Java and Smalltalk interface
Dimension X. ( ** A ** ) Java software-authoring tools
Electric Gravity. ( ** A ** )\tInternet Gaming Zone
eShop. ( ** A ** ) Secure retail and payment software
Firefly Network. ( ** A ** ) Online-community-building and privacy
software
Hotmail.- ( ** A ** ) Free Web-based e-mail service
lnterse ( ** A ** ) Website analysis software
LinkAge Software. ( ** A ** ) E-mail software-
NetCarta- ( ** A ** ) Building and managing websites
Network Managers: ( ** A ** ) e-mail technology
One Tree Software. ( ** A ** ) Source-code management
ResNova: ( ** A ** ) Mac Web-server technology
WebTVNetworks ( ** A ** ) TV-set-top device for Internet access
Vermeer Technologies. ( ** A ** ) Web-publishing software
VXtreme. ( ** A ** ) Real-time Internet video
Individual Inc. ( // P // ) Personalized news via the Microsoft
Network
First Data Corp.- ( // P // )\tInternet bill payment
UUNET. ( // P // ) Internet service provider
E-Stamp Corp.-( $$ I $$ ) Internet post office
Navitei ( $$ I $$ ) Internet telephone software for Windows CE and
WebTV
Proginet Corporation. ( $$ I $$ ) Server-to-host integration
Elemental Software ( $$ I $$ ) Developer of DHTL tools
VDOnet. ( $$ I $$ ) Real-time Internet video
Wildfire Communications: ( $$ I $$ ) Voice recognition integrated into
e mail
MAIL / INSTANT MESSAGING
Flash Communications.,( ** A ** )\t"Buddy lists" and
instant-messaging networks
MESA Group: ( ** A ** ) Lotus Notes and cc:Mail migration
General Magic. ( $$ I $$ ) Integrated voice and data applications
NEWS, PUBLISHING, & MEDIA
Black Entertainment Television ( // P // ) Interactive entertainment
and information
DreamWorks SKG. ( // P // ) Interactive and multimedia entertainment
software
NBC ( // P // ) MSNBC, a 24-hour global-news source
Helicon Publishing ( $$ I $$ ) Reference publisher
TELEVISION & CABLE
TCI ( // P // ) Operating systems and online services for digital
cable TV
Comcast ( $$ I $$ ) High-speed video and data services
MULTIMEDIA
Blue Ribbon Sound Works. ( ** A ** ) Multimedia music products
Altamira: ( // P // ) Graphics software
AVC Inc.- ( $$ I $$ ) Visual networks and video-conferencing products
RealNetworks., ( $$ I $$ ) Real-time audio and video
INTERACTIVE ENTERTAINMENT
EXOS: ( ** A ** ) Joysticks and input devices
Bruce Artwick.( ** A ** ) Flight simulator
RenderMorphics. ( ** A ** ) 3-Graphics for games
Softimage. ( ** A ** ) 2- and 3-D animation
8 Digital Anvil ( // P // ) Interactive software gaming
SingleTrac Entertainment Technologies., ( $$ I $$ ) Game developer
NEW INTERFACES
Aha! Software. ( ** A ** ) Handwriting recognition
Lernout & Hauspie., ( $$ I $$ ) Voice recognition for operating-system
control
TRADOS.- ( $$ I $$ ) Translation support
DATABASE TOOLS
Panorama Software. ( ** A ** ) Multidimensional database
Netwise: ( ** A ** )\tLinking databases to mainframes
OTHER
Apple: ( // P // )( $$ I $$ ) Next generation Mac software
Total Acquisitions Known: 27
Total Partnerships Known: 10
Total Investments Known: 15
<hr></blockquote>
[quote]Final Cut Pro, Shake, Logic, Apple innovations? Nope. Apple acquisitions. What else do they have in common? They were all great cross platform products. Yes! Even FCP, though I think it went by a different name at that time. <hr></blockquote>
Oh really? How much experience did you have with Final Cut Pro(code name Key Grip) did you have before Apple maliciously bought them and killed the Windows version. Right..you had NONE.
I don't think anyone here has claimed that Apple innovated these apps. But you must keep in mind "innovation" isn't just the app but how you make that app better. iTunes is an improvement over it's predecessor UI wise IMO.
[quote] Consider some of Apple?s other great software ?innovations.? iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto, and (I believe) iDVD, OS X. What do they have in common? They are all platform defining programs that Apple didn?t write. To be sure, they improved them and slapped on the Apple brand. But innovate? Invent? No! What they did was invest.<hr></blockquote>
Ok..where did Apple get iMovie and iPhoto from. What were the "Parent" apps? "Platform Defining Apps"? What world are you on. Apple promotes them as key compenents in a Digital Hub but you're going a litte far in your statements. It's your opinion that they didn't innovate. That's fair ..i'm happy with how they turned out.
[quote] If Apple is so dominant in the creative industries, if they are so obviously the best choice, why do they feel the need to buy the best cross platform companies and throw out the competition? Talk about anti competitive! Talk about predatory practices! If Apple is so dominant in the creative industries, wouldn?t that constitute a monopoly of sorts? Certainly, this could not be considered a legitimate way to maintain a monopoly. If Microsoft swallowed Adobe and ended Mac development of Adobe products, who in these forums would be praising Microsoft for their brilliant business maneuver? <hr></blockquote>
This statement makes NO sense. Apple had created it's dominant position in the Creative Industries by helping to make Adobe, Quark and other companies RICH. They purchased none of these companies. Photoshop along with many other apps started out on the Mac first and then eventually went cross platform. Do you feel your arguement dying about now?
"Talk about Anti Competitive" "Talk about Predatory practices" Puhleeze save your histrionics for a peecee board.
"wouldn't that constitue a monopoly of sorts"
<sigh> please go talk to a Lawyer or something. Monopolies are NOT illegal. It is the ABUSE of Monopolies that is. Antitrust means you have willfully set up roadblocks or impediments to your competitors outside of the realm of fair business practices. I would praise Microsoft for buying Adobe and killing the Mac version but it would very damaging to the Graphics Industry and would generate ill will towards MS. They also don't understand Graphics like Apple does. It's not their expertise.
[quote]I use to think of Apple as the Federation, at the very least, the Maquis, struggling against superior forces for a great cause. Now, I see them for what they really are, Ferengi! Success through acquisition. <hr></blockquote>
Look at my post above. Guess Microsoft must be the Klingons then huh? And Cisco must be the Kardassian because those two companies purchase DOZENS of companies a year.
[quote] There are many of us PC users who feel the same way about Apple as Mac users feel about Microsoft. Well I?ve got news for you. WE?RE BOTH RIGHT! End of rant. Flame away. <hr></blockquote>
No ..you're wrong. You've come on to these boards and tried to debate users who have far more knowledge about computers and technology in general. The "Mac" in your name fooled some of us at first but I realized you weren't up to snuff in a thread about USB vs Firewire. You have fledgling Tech knowledge(or if you do you don't display your "talents". You're currently out your league.
Feel free to keep posting as we will feel free to rip your posts to shreds....it's fun actually.
J :cool:
[quote]Look at my post above. Guess Microsoft must be the Klingons then huh? And Cisco must be the Kardassian because those two companies purchase DOZENS of companies a year.<hr></blockquote>
He acknowledged in the first post that Microsoft acquires a lot of companies to get apps/features as well. Hardly a world-beating revelation on your part.
His point still stands, in recent years Apple has had to buy all of its killer apps and futz with them a bit to keep themselves relevant. What Microsoft does has no bearing on that fact and whining about MS in light of that fact reeks of sour grapes and penis envy.
This article is part of the basis of my claim.
I didn't say that Apple was alone in the acquisition strategy. I also didn't say that they were a "legal" monopoly. I am stating a principle. I don't like the practice no matter who does it. Buying an industry and throwing out the competition is not exactly winning the hearts and minds of consumers in the marketplace of ideas and products.
As for the flame... I don't mind you flaming my ideas or correcting my errors. But why must your attack become personal? I never claimed to know everything about computers. Does that make me unworthy to discuss broad ideas about the industry? As far as the USB 2.0 thread... I think you misunderstood my position.
As far as the "Mac" in my name... Why should that fool any one? The rest of the name is "Voyer". (I know it is not spelled correctly.) I am an outsider peeking into the Mac universe. I have not yet bought a Mac because Apple has not yet successfully competed for my computing dollar. I'm sure they will at some point. I still follow the technology. I am neither a Mac fan or a PC fan. I am a computer fan and I don't care which brand is on the box. Good technology is good technology no matter who makes it.
I read a lot and post seldom. When I post, it is to express an idea or make a point that do not believe has been covered. I never claimed to be right all the time. But I do have my opinions and I am not afraid to state them, just like everyone else here. I am a competent amateur computist with over a decade of Windows/PC experience and a few months of Mac experience. I enjoy a vigorous debate and I don't mind having my statements corrected or my ideas challenged. But LAY OFF THE PERSONAL ATTACKS!!! That is unacceptable in any forum, even an entertainingly cut throat forum like this one.
"World Beating" are YOUR words grove...never came from me.
What's the point in his rhetoric. If Microsoft does it then why shouldn't Apple? Apple never asked to be the kings of Innovation and honestly I think they view themselves more as a company that provides "attention to detail". They based their company on perfecting ideas. Sure Xerox PARC was on of the first GUI's but Apple took the risk to push this forward. Think of Apple as Visionaries rather than "innovators".
[quote] His point still stands, in recent years Apple has had to buy all of its killer apps and futz with them a bit to keep themselves relevant. What Microsoft does has no bearing on that fact and whining about MS in light of that fact reeks of sour grapes and penis envy.<hr></blockquote>
Bullshit. Neither of us knows what Key Grip was before Apple purchased it. It may have been totally different from what the FCP became. Again why would MS be exempt. Apple has NEVER proclaimed themselves to be the great Innovators of computers. I don't have to whine I have my PC's and I have my Macs and the Macs are IMO better.
The FACTS are this whole thread is based on Baseless opinions. So what...Mac Voyer thinks Apple purchased most Tech...par for the course baby. Everyone does it.
For once I wish some people would STFU and create you OWN company before slandering one that's been around since many of you were drooling on yourselves in a crib.
So? It works
<strong>Some people actually wish that Apple would return to the NIH attitude that almost killed them the first time. Hmm, maybe that's what they want.</strong><hr></blockquote>
NIH?? - 'scuse my ignorance - what is that?
Jeff
What the hell does Microsoft have to do with anything?
Did you even read his post? If you did, try again, especially this part: Well I?ve got news for you. WE?RE BOTH RIGHT!
Reading comprehension: Learn it, Live it.
[quote]Neither of us knows what Key Grip was before Apple purchased it. It may have been totally different from what the FCP became.<hr></blockquote>
First off: The exact same thing could be said for all the stuff M$ has absorbed.
Secondly: Key Grip was bought for a reason. It wasn't a text-editor to start off with.
[quote]Apple has NEVER proclaimed themselves to be the great Innovators of computers.<hr></blockquote>
Are you joking?
Apple screams how creative and inventive and innovate they are at every possible opportunity.
[quote]I don't have to whine I have my PC's and I have my Macs and the Macs are IMO better.<hr></blockquote>
You don't have to whine... so why do you?
[quote]For once I wish some people would STFU and create you OWN company before slandering one that's been around since many of you were drooling on yourselves in a crib.<hr></blockquote>
What the hell are you talking about?
<a href="http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/troll.html"; target="_blank">troll def.</a>
my favorite line [quote] Trolls are recognizable by the fact that they have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. <hr></blockquote>
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: thegelding ]</p>
What gave you the impression that I thought that?
On topic: Apple is treading a thin line here, but I will maintain that they haven't yet crossed it. The thread's title is "If you can't beat them, buy them," but I see no evidence that Apple tried to beat anyone. They wanted an app that did something new, so they bought it. Heck, Casady & Green gets royalties on SoundJam; if that's stifling competition then I'd like to see more of it.
Why purchase these apps instead of writing them from scratch? Do you have any idea how long it takes to write something like FCP or DVD Studio Pro or Logic from scratch?! Apple would still be working on the first versions. By acquiring Key Grip and SoundJam, and especially by acquiring their developers, Apple gets enough of a head start to be able to move quickly.
This does not make them less innovative. Innovation can easily consist of taking an existing thing (or a collection of existing things) and redoing/assembling them in a way that creates a new paradigm, or brings it into a new market, or makes it unusually compelling. Also, in Apple's case, it allows them to push hardware configurations. What have iMovie and FCP done for digital video, which ties into FireWire and AltiVec? How about iDVD and DVD Studio Pro for the SuperDrive, and vice versa? With audio, Apple is pushing two new things: FireWire and their nonpareil Core Audio layer that allows several independent applications to simultaneously write to and read from separate audio tracks. This is huge, and unprecedented, and the best way to get people on the bandwagon is to release an app that exploits these abilities (including, note, the capability for several apps to work with the audio layer simultaneously - so this isn't necessarily about shutting anyone out). It's "whole widget" thinking. Apple could do this from scratch, theoretically, but if Gerhard had stopped developing Logic yesterday it would still take them 5 or 6 years to catch up to it. And, as any Logic user can tell you, Gerhard doesn't stop.
Apple is in the clear as long as:
It offers their apps as discrete and replaceable (the Digital Hub screenshots from Jaguar look promising in this regard);
It offers documented APIs that allow third parties to compete, and;
It doesn't do anything to make it more difficult to use those third party alternatives.
(These are all abuses that Microsoft has been proven to indulge in, repeatedly.)
Also, they are in the clear as long as their intent is clearly to bolster the appeal of their platform rather than to cut off the air supplies of their erstwhile competitors. From the last paragraph of the above-linked article:
[quote]The Emagic deal makes Apple?s direction clear: The company intends to make the Mac and OS X the dominate platform for the creative market, and they see that market as all media, including audio.<hr></blockquote>
"The Mac and Mac OS X." Not Apple, the Macintosh platform. This is important. There is no worrying about the futures of Avid or Digital Performer or Cubase in this article. It's clear that the author sees the intent of the purchase as an enhancement of the Mac, rather than as stifling competition in the audio space. This doesn't prove that Apple's intentions are good, of course, but it shows that at least one other person agrees with my reading of their intentions. That article has an utterly different tone than this thread.
I'm not encouraging complacency here. All corporations bear watching, and although Apple is qualitatively different from Microsoft, not everything they do is going to be sweetness and light. So far I think they've done the right thing. With the Logic acquisition, it's too soon to tell; but if Apple uses it to provide an FCP companion that makes it Apple-simple to do serious digital A/V work at a previously unheard-of price point, and if they use it to provide an iMovie companion that makes it Apple-simple to do surprisingly high-quality digital A/V work for the cost of an iBook,; and if these apps can be optionally installed, and painlessly removed and replaced, then I don't think they're stifling anything.
[ah, this is what I get for being up this late: The competition is Windows. Duh. OK, then. The cancellation of Windows versions is really not great, but it's not like MS buying Adobe and cancelling the Mac versions of all their apps. The former is a relatively small PC company grabbing a few apps to gain a foothold in markets that it's moving into; the latter is an abusive monopoly buying a company whose product line is a smaller competitor's lifeblood, and killing support for that competitor. If Apple tunes these applications as well as they've done with their pro apps to date, and ships hardware that does them justice, it's all OK. Not great, but OK.]
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
[quote]Originally posted by Mac Voyer:
<strong>Consider some of Apple?s other great software ?innovations.? iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto, and (I believe) iDVD, OS X. What do they have in common? They are all platform defining programs that Apple didn?t write. To be sure, they improved them and slapped on the Apple brand. But innovate? Invent? No! What they did was invest.</strong><hr></blockquote>
With the exception of iTunes, your examples are tenuous at best. Mac OS X?! I suppose you can argue that Apple swallowed NeXT to improve their OS offering (well, duh).. but as opposed to what? To writing the next generation OS themselves? They tried, they failed. Reworking the new OS from the acquisition itself took 4 years.
Apple has stated that iMovie is not in any way related to FCP. Point me to a product/company they acquired used to create iMovie, thereby destroying iMovie's Wintel competition. In fact, iMovie does have Wintel competition, but the unanimous opinion seems to be that is sucks compared to iMovie, plain and simple. Has Apple had a hand in this? Not really.. it's hardly surprising to me that consumer video editing blows on the PC, considering Firewire's presence and hardware/software integration are spotty at best. Remember, these are Apple's strengths as a company - the whole widget.
AFAIK, iPhoto was written from scratch, and so was iDVD, with likely key technologies acquired to smooth its creation (Astarte, Disk Master?). These technologies would have had more to do with the infrastructure of the product itself, not with the product's execution and interface, which is where Apple's famed ease-of-use lies. Again, the reigning opinion (at least in the tech media) is that iDVD's Wintel competition is hardly even worth considering compared to iDVD. Apple has nothing to do with this. You can say they're not being innovators, but surely they are being market leaders, driving growth in a market (consumer DVD editing) that is still in its infancy. In fact, there was an article on the Net a while back that said this, in so many words.
Hey I agree. I feel for people who see their favorites apps die. Live Picture users probably remember the $4000 they kicked out Mtropolis users remember the hope and promise of that app before Quark purchased and killed the app. It's a Business however and consumers have short memories. Apple rarely kills off the competition but they have a clearly defined strategy which is to quickly develop a suite of Audio and Video applications. The principle of Mergers and Acquisitions is standard business practice. I'm sorry that you agree but once a company gets large they tend to become a little bureacratic and significant changes and product dev become harder IMO. I think History will show that pioneers of great products tend to be small. Large companies can generate a mediocre product and then market it like it's the best thing since sliced bread.
[quote]As for the flame... I don't mind you flaming my ideas or correcting my errors. But why must your attack become personal? I never claimed to know everything about computers. Does that make me unworthy to discuss broad ideas about the industry? As far as the USB 2.0 thread... I think you misunderstood my position. <hr></blockquote>
I totally agree. Posted my initial response when I was in a combative mood. I apologize.
In summation I agree and disagree with your points. I don't think Apple has ever promoted themselves as "Innovators" but they do pride themselves in their vision. Apple was the first Major company to ship a GUI OS, PDA 802.11, and many other "firsts". Mac users like that. Acquisitions help grow the company. I agreen with Buon "Not Invented Here" syndrome caused Apple to go through strains that they didn't have to. I've found that this industry doesn't always follow the BEST products but rather the product pushed by the largest companies(cough..Intel). Apple fighting that is a losing proposition. After all Apple was castigated for even daring attempt to charge licensing fees for Firewire.
[quote]What the hell does Microsoft have to do with anything?
Did you even read his post? If you did, try again, especially this part: Well I’ve got news for you. WE’RE BOTH RIGHT!
Reading comprehension: Learn it, Live it.
<hr></blockquote>
Thanks teach :cool: I read his post. Just couldn't get over the accusatory tone. This is a Mac board do you really expect objectivity?
[quote]First off: The exact same thing could be said for all the stuff M$ has absorbed.
Secondly: Key Grip was bought for a reason. It wasn't a text-editor to start off with.
<hr></blockquote>
Here is where you simply don't have the experience. I knew a Macromedia Project Mngr by name and spoke with him alot back in the days. Macromedia started to pull away from even wanting to ship Key Grip at all. That's why they shopped it and sold to Apple. Notice that Macromedia has focused on Web apps and for the most part stayed away from video? Without Apple...there's no guarantee that it ships at all. But since they DID ship it ..now they're being blamed. How rich <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
[quote] Are you joking?
Apple screams how creative and inventive and innovate they are at every possible opportunity. <hr></blockquote>
I don't hear it. And they have every right. If we used MVs post in other areas once could say that a Ferrari in NO innovation over a Model T Ford because Ferrari didn't start from scratch. Innovation doesn't always involve creation from scratch.
[quote] What the hell are you talking about? <hr></blockquote>
Ummm that post was english. Armchair CEO's are a dime a dozen. It's easy to say "Apple doesn't innovate" but until you've waged the warfare they have with your own company...can you really say anything worthy. That's debateable.
Grove...you should really just quit while you're ahead. Anyone can tell that MV's post was an attack on Apple. I don't blame MV but period and point blank Apple is a Business and not a charity they have no reason to keep PC support just as Microsoft had no reason to ship any new Mac Bungie games. Mac users dealt with it after the initial grief.
Amorph-Great post...as usual. I humbly bow.
No need to comment any further. read your post and that sums up almost exactly how I feel.
Mac Voyer...let's call a truce. I don't take things personal....ever. I just grew up in a family where if you didn't state an opinion with solidarity you were run over so I come of as bullheaded sometimes...hey i'm an Aries. Whatever happens let's hope that we see exciting apps. That's what it's about.
Grove...you still my dawg! I like arguing with you man it's fun.