or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by pfisher

It wouldn't matter if high end users migrated: They would have two machines, and they would keep their Macs for home use and Windows for work.\ If the high end market is only 5% of the sales, why let that hold you back? Just playing devil's advocate here. What if... Just have two platforms. Mac OS X and iOS laptops and so on. They you'd keep your Mac OS X people and wean most of the Windows users off that platform. Most iOS users use Windows.
iOS is the mass market. Windows apps that are Windows only are the niche now.   Apple is a mass market company.   Most people probably use an iOS device now and most of them are probably Windows users, not that that makes a difference.   iOS has the leverage.    Although we have Mac, Windows and Chromebook, our entire family uses iOS primarily (iPhone & iPad).   In fact, an iPhone 6+ could be your overall primary computer. Add a keyboard and you have your mobile...
Maybe they just might make a laptop out of an iPad. That would make things simple.
You wonder what the company's metric is for crossing a threshold and paying up.   I'm sure all of the friction is in place to pay as little as possible. And to admit there is an issue (to a fair measurable amount).   I think a lot of us remember the iBook G3 problems. Not sure if there was a recall, but they were fixing machines for free in a lot of cases. We turned ours in several times for repair and ended up with a new machine, despite an expiration of the three...
Most people could run an A-series laptop and be fine.   Apple could continue the Pro machines running OS X and be able to run iOS apps.   For now at least.   Anyway, Apple is a mass market company. Not niche. WIth most people using iOS and not Macs, makes sense, maybe to them, to later dump OS X.   OS X could later run, if that is the case, on A-series chips.   Look at what Apple did with Final Cut Pro and Aperture and their hardware. "Dumbing down"? Maybe. Or...
Many people now don't need or want a full-Intel computer. More specifically, a lot of people are only using iPhones as their primary computer.  iOS apps on an ARM laptop, but emulated or can run on OS X.
More and more people are using iOS as their primary computing device - or only device. Office is online. A cheaper, non-Intel iOS laptop should be a no brainer. 
I meant for all intent and purposes. Phones in the future will match a regular DSLR "for all intents and purposes". Close enough to be able to reproduce what a DLSR, like a T3i can do today. Why not have the camera lens on the side or top of the phone? Bend light.If there is a will, there is a way and cameras will match DSLR. Of course, in the future, you may have a much nicer DSLR and a phone that matches what you have today.
This is pretty exciting news. Always felt like it was a matter of when, not if. Having windows compatibility - not important to Apple. Apple will say, get an A-series Apple computer and then get a Windows machine if you need one. It feels like Apple has the leverage to make the jump. The tables will turn. The problem is 10 years from now. We will move beyond chips? Chips can only get so small, or so we think now.
The DSLR-defenders are going to be up in arms about a "REAL" camera and how a phone CANT compare. And a phone will never be as good as a DSLR.   Not sure why that group of people gets so worked up when they hear about a phone getting a new camera.   Here is my prediction: Within 6 years, our phone cameras WILL be as good as today's DLSRs in most every way - for all intent and purposes. We will have great depth of field and quality and all of that business. People will...
New Posts  All Forums: