"I'm looking at this thing and I think it's kind of trending against what people are really liking in phones nowadays, which are those little keypads - the BlackJack from Samsung, the BlackBerry obviously, kind of pushes this thing, the Palm... but I think Apple can do wrong and I think this is it." - John Dvorak on iPhone in 2007.
Really, if you don't know what it is, Google it or if you prefer Bing it or Yahoo it.
Great ! Where do these people hide ? Do they still dare making other similar predictions ?
We haven’t heard boo from Michael Dell or John C Dvorak for years. Dell is too busy trying to save the company he founded. In effect he “sold it and returned the money to the investors” when he took the company private. Dvorak lives in total obscurity on some planet. I believe the planet’s name is Tralfamadore.
The danger of articles like this is that hindsight is a wonderful thing and its very funny to compare a prediction based on info at the time to what has happened. Of course some of them were stupid at the time let alone after many years. Maybe we should have a predictions thread and we could see how well people do?
OT Could you please write something on the Android's and Apple's ecosystems? I think they represent the main difference between the Java ME/Symbian market domination before the iPhone and the current Android's popularity.
I find Dvorak somewhat inspirational, much like Rush Limbaugh, Rob Enderle, Paul Thurrot, et al: a third-rate intellect who somehow managed to indelibly affix himself to an income stream without resort to skill, fitness, or any other aptitude, and whose only principle is "get paid FIRST".
The poster child for scrapped expectations...your idiocracy at work....
Thank you, as always, Daniel - your clarity and focus and sense of history are more than welcome!
While I like John C. Dvorak, this well-written article is a great example of why "meteorologist" and "tech pundit" are the only two careers that any guidance counselor should ever recommend. After all, weathermen and tech writers have the envious opportunity to be great in their field despite being wrong most of the time!
I never understood why the media and others do not go back and follow-up with these people and ask them to explain why they were completely wrong and why should anyone trust anything they have to say about the future.
It is like those people who run around saying the world is about to end and everyone need to prepare themselves for judgement day, that day has come and gone how many times in recent years and no on going back and ask these people to explain first why they were wrong and what happen and ask them why anyone should ever believe them going forward.
AI should attempt to get an interview with all these folks and ask them to explain themselves.
"Gates keen insight in "not wishing" that Microsoft had developed the iPad helped to spare the company from another disastrous "Zune" or "KIN," which might have been fatal, especially considering the financial hardship the company was already enduring from the spectacular failure of Surface, a netbook that could disassemble itself into a paperweight and an expensive, rubbery keyboard."
Microsoft has a market capitalization of $233.5 billion dollars. In other words, the "trouble" that Microsoft is allegedly in now is a rip-roaring steam of success compared to the real trouble that Apple was in for quite awhile, such as when Steve Jobs was forced out in the 1980s where he founded NeXT (failed venture) and in the 1990s when Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple to keep it from going under:
Gates depicted it as an altruistic move, but it was likely done to keep the federal government from filing another anti-trust suit against Microsoft.
And as a corrective to the myth that Microsoft got rich by copying Apple, the truth is that Microsoft and Gates locked up the non-Apple PC business by providing MS-DOS to IBM for IBM's wildly successful PC line, and then propagating it to the IBM PC clones that IBM accidentally created. Microsoft got MS-DOS by getting 86-DOS from Seattle Computer Products. Seattle Computer Products got 86-DOS by porting CP/M from Digital Research.
Also, Microsoft introduced a tablet computer in 1999, years before the I-Pad. It was merely a failure, as were plenty of new product ideas from Microsoft and Apple during the 1990s.
Further, Microsoft Basic preceded AppleSoft Basic. Gates and Allen sold the predecessor to Microsoft Basic to a hardware company called MITS in 1976. It was Microsoft's first contract. AppleSoft Basic was not even the first Apple Basic: that was Integer Basic, which came along in 1977 for the Apple I. Apple copied Microsoft Basic for their own AppleSoft Basic for the Apple II. How do we know they copied it? Because Microsoft gave Microsoft Basic to Apple so they could do so. Microsoft's first hardware product? A card that allowed the Apple II to run business software, which was a critical market for any computer company in the late 70s/early 80s as the consumer market hadn't taken off yet. So had it not been for the critical early help that Microsoft gave Apple (giving them a far superior version of Basic to the one that Wozniak developed and giving them the ability to run business software) Apple never would have survived.
And oh yes, Microsoft's first iteration of Microsoft Word came out in 1983, and was written for their failed attempt at marketing a UNIX-based operating system, Xenix.
So basically none of the nonsense in this article concerning Microsoft is remotely true. And Apple certainly hopes not, because if Microsoft goes belly up, who is going to host Apple's vital I-Cloud product? Microsoft Azure does so for the most part now, with some redundancy being handled by Amazon AWS EC2. Just like the claim that Microsoft released Office for I-Pad first because of "internal sales data" showing that the only Android tablets that are selling are the $50 toys. The reality is that Office Mobile for Android already exists, and full blown Office for Android will come out later this year in order to compete with Google Docs.
It is one thing to write editorials, but to make claims that are incontrovertibly false is beyond the pale. Apple would never have been a viable company without Microsoft's software and hardware in the late 1970s, and Apple would probably have gone bankrupt without Microsoft's cash in the 1990s. That is the truth no matter how this author wants to deny it. This stuff is actually beyond the bizarre "I have never seen an Android tablet in the wild" claims (which if were true, no one would still make and sell them) or the "no one buys those Samsung tablets at Best Buy nonsense" (again, were it true, Best Buy would stop selling it just they have with a ton of other failed products).
So just like Apple needed Microsoft yet again for their I-Cloud service because Apple lacks the ability to do it on their own, Microsoft is going to remain to provided critical assistance to Apple whenever they need it like they have in the past. Windows is dead/dying, but Microsoft can make as much money off the cloud and by solidifying their hold on enterprise software by accommodating every single major OS/manufacturer (yes, including Android and ChromeOS) instead of forcing everyone to try to use Windows. (And imagine if Natella figures out something innovative to do with the boatload of wasted potential that is XBox.)
Bottom line: Microsoft, Google, Samsung et al aren't going anywhere no matter how many yarns this fellow spins.
Comments
And let's not forget the iPhone funeral from Stevey B:
[IMG]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/41113/width/400/height/800[/IMG]
I'm surprised Balmer wasn't included...
...then again he doesn't really need a sarcastic take on his reality.
Chronicles of Conflict: the History of Adobe vs. Apple (April 14th, 2010)
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/04/14/chronicles-of-conflict-the-history-of-adobe-vs-apple/
Jobs saw his role in the industry as that of a Formula One driver, where these others were competing in a demolition derby.
Sometimes it matters less the skill of the driver, but what race is being run.
Jobs saw his role in the industry as that of a Formula One driver, where these others were competing in a demolition derby.
This, this is what sets Apple apart, even today, enjoy:-
"I'm looking at this thing and I think it's kind of trending against what people are really liking in phones nowadays, which are those little keypads - the BlackJack from Samsung, the BlackBerry obviously, kind of pushes this thing, the Palm... but I think Apple can do wrong and I think this is it." - John Dvorak on iPhone in 2007.
Really, if you don't know what it is, Google it or if you prefer Bing it or Yahoo it.
Innovation or Samsung at its best?
…Bill Gates, a philanthropist who got rich selling Apple software…
…Microsoft in 2000, the software knockoff firm…
YESH! YESH! (add either a dutch angle zoom with background music, “You’re the man now, dog!” or a third “YESH” plus rock riff)
Great ! Where do these people hide ? Do they still dare making other similar predictions ?
We haven’t heard boo from Michael Dell or John C Dvorak for years. Dell is too busy trying to save the company he founded. In effect he “sold it and returned the money to the investors” when he took the company private. Dvorak lives in total obscurity on some planet. I believe the planet’s name is Tralfamadore.
Dan, thanks for rowing your canoe up and over bullshit mountain.
OT
Could you please write something on the Android's and Apple's ecosystems?
I think they represent the main difference between the Java ME/Symbian market domination before the iPhone and the current Android's popularity.
This was a great read to start my workday!
The poster child for scrapped expectations...your idiocracy at work....
Thank you, as always, Daniel - your clarity and focus and sense of history are more than welcome!
I never understood why the media and others do not go back and follow-up with these people and ask them to explain why they were completely wrong and why should anyone trust anything they have to say about the future.
It is like those people who run around saying the world is about to end and everyone need to prepare themselves for judgement day, that day has come and gone how many times in recent years and no on going back and ask these people to explain first why they were wrong and what happen and ask them why anyone should ever believe them going forward.
AI should attempt to get an interview with all these folks and ask them to explain themselves.
With that cinematographic reference, my respect and admiration for you just leapt a hundredfold.
"Gates keen insight in "not wishing" that Microsoft had developed the iPad helped to spare the company from another disastrous "Zune" or "KIN," which might have been fatal, especially considering the financial hardship the company was already enduring from the spectacular failure of Surface, a netbook that could disassemble itself into a paperweight and an expensive, rubbery keyboard."
Microsoft has a market capitalization of $233.5 billion dollars. In other words, the "trouble" that Microsoft is allegedly in now is a rip-roaring steam of success compared to the real trouble that Apple was in for quite awhile, such as when Steve Jobs was forced out in the 1980s where he founded NeXT (failed venture) and in the 1990s when Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple to keep it from going under:
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-12-09/worst-deal-ever-microsofts-apple-investment
Gates depicted it as an altruistic move, but it was likely done to keep the federal government from filing another anti-trust suit against Microsoft.
And as a corrective to the myth that Microsoft got rich by copying Apple, the truth is that Microsoft and Gates locked up the non-Apple PC business by providing MS-DOS to IBM for IBM's wildly successful PC line, and then propagating it to the IBM PC clones that IBM accidentally created. Microsoft got MS-DOS by getting 86-DOS from Seattle Computer Products. Seattle Computer Products got 86-DOS by porting CP/M from Digital Research.
Also, Microsoft introduced a tablet computer in 1999, years before the I-Pad. It was merely a failure, as were plenty of new product ideas from Microsoft and Apple during the 1990s.
Further, Microsoft Basic preceded AppleSoft Basic. Gates and Allen sold the predecessor to Microsoft Basic to a hardware company called MITS in 1976. It was Microsoft's first contract. AppleSoft Basic was not even the first Apple Basic: that was Integer Basic, which came along in 1977 for the Apple I. Apple copied Microsoft Basic for their own AppleSoft Basic for the Apple II. How do we know they copied it? Because Microsoft gave Microsoft Basic to Apple so they could do so. Microsoft's first hardware product? A card that allowed the Apple II to run business software, which was a critical market for any computer company in the late 70s/early 80s as the consumer market hadn't taken off yet. So had it not been for the critical early help that Microsoft gave Apple (giving them a far superior version of Basic to the one that Wozniak developed and giving them the ability to run business software) Apple never would have survived.
And oh yes, Microsoft's first iteration of Microsoft Word came out in 1983, and was written for their failed attempt at marketing a UNIX-based operating system, Xenix.
So basically none of the nonsense in this article concerning Microsoft is remotely true. And Apple certainly hopes not, because if Microsoft goes belly up, who is going to host Apple's vital I-Cloud product? Microsoft Azure does so for the most part now, with some redundancy being handled by Amazon AWS EC2. Just like the claim that Microsoft released Office for I-Pad first because of "internal sales data" showing that the only Android tablets that are selling are the $50 toys. The reality is that Office Mobile for Android already exists, and full blown Office for Android will come out later this year in order to compete with Google Docs.
It is one thing to write editorials, but to make claims that are incontrovertibly false is beyond the pale. Apple would never have been a viable company without Microsoft's software and hardware in the late 1970s, and Apple would probably have gone bankrupt without Microsoft's cash in the 1990s. That is the truth no matter how this author wants to deny it. This stuff is actually beyond the bizarre "I have never seen an Android tablet in the wild" claims (which if were true, no one would still make and sell them) or the "no one buys those Samsung tablets at Best Buy nonsense" (again, were it true, Best Buy would stop selling it just they have with a ton of other failed products).
So just like Apple needed Microsoft yet again for their I-Cloud service because Apple lacks the ability to do it on their own, Microsoft is going to remain to provided critical assistance to Apple whenever they need it like they have in the past. Windows is dead/dying, but Microsoft can make as much money off the cloud and by solidifying their hold on enterprise software by accommodating every single major OS/manufacturer (yes, including Android and ChromeOS) instead of forcing everyone to try to use Windows. (And imagine if Natella figures out something innovative to do with the boatload of wasted potential that is XBox.)
Bottom line: Microsoft, Google, Samsung et al aren't going anywhere no matter how many yarns this fellow spins.
That was a great start to your workday? So you like to start off with myths eh?