Originally posted by mikef
The key to Mac prosperity is to offer something that PCs/Windows does not.
That's exactly what I have been arguing. I'd like to know though what do you think the apps that make the Mac special are? Is your Mac version of Photoshop that much better than the Windows version? Dreamweaver? Anything by any major software vendor? MS Office may be better in a few small ways, but that's pushing it and it is lacking in other areas. I'm betting that the things you like that Windows does not offer are made by none other than Apple, and perhaps a few smaller companies or our great shareware community. Face it: the major applications vendors offer versions for both platforms, and we are always bitching about how they screw us over because we are the minority. So I'm suggesting that the over consolidation of the industry and the domination by a few players has us in a rut. Apple is pushing toward new types of software design. Where does it go from here is the real question. Apple will offer even more that will differentiate the Mac, and it will allow new creative developers to do so also.
This all reminds me of a thread several years ago. I was arguing that the threat of copy protected CD's and Microsoft's desire to control the market would push Apple into offering a way of selling music for the iPod and iTunes. They had to. I got lots of replies about how it could not be done. One guy told me that he was in the music business and I just did not understand how difficult the licensing issues would be. Apple had to do it. And they did. Look how the tables have turned. Copy protected CD's could soon use Fairplay. Microsoft is looking a lot like Bill Gates at prom time.
I don't know if Transitive's tech really works, but I do know you shouldn't rule out anything based on past assumptions especially when your talking about Steve Jobs and Apple. There are plenty of ways to consider the possibility besides "emulators blow goats" and "no one will write for the Mac". How do you know Adobe isn't already planning to kill Mac support? What would Apple do then? What if QuickTransit really works and some of our Mac apps could run on the Dark Side? What then? What if the G6, eCLipz or whatever the hell else they have up their sleeves, leaps enough ahead that games for other platforms could actually be playable on the Mac. Would it be worth using the technology just to build a "game layer"? Could there possibly be markets where the ability to run legacy Windows and Linux apps would help Apple? Could Apple use it to allow easier porting of apps to the Mac as part of some Cocoa toolkit or framework? Who else in Transitive's list of 6 PC makers could integrate it into a OS besides Apple? What would those companies want the technology for? Make up your own wild ass idea. Try to think different. Try to think like Steve Jobs.
I'm not asking you to believe me (quite frankly, I know nothing), or Rothenberg's rumor, or even the Wired story. I'm just asking you to think about it. Are a few new features added to Photoshop every 18 months all you see for the future of computing? I see a new breed of apps that interact with the OS and their fellow apps and even the hardware in new ways. That's where the Mac's prosperity lies. As the future unfolds, if you could run almost any old app that hasn't been made obsolete yet, that might be a good thing. Think of it as being like the transition period when you needed Classic. If it doesn't happen by the time 10.9, no make that XI, ships I will be happy to admit I'm wrong.