The cancellation of the standalone versions of IE for Windows and Mac were related. Microsoft wants to focus its efforts on revenue streams. Which means that it wants you to pay to use its browser software. Windows users pay whenever they buy Windows, or when they subscribe to MSN, so IE persists as a component of the OS and as the core of MSN.
Mac users pay when they subscribe to MSN, and thus get the 6.0 IE software. There will be a 7.0, and maybe even 8.0, release of IE for the Mac (if MS continues its current strategy), but it will only be available to people who pay for it in the form of MSN subscriptions.
Kirk
So make IE 6.0 nagware. The basis of the browser already exists in MSN. OMNIWeb and Opera seem to do well enough as shareware browsers. You're right. MS is money driven. Taking that last 2-3% will make MS more money than charging for IE ever would.
The web is becoming increasingly IE centric. The current Mac IE gets us into most of browser-specific websites, but not all of them. The number of websites we can't reach without IE is only going to increase in the near future. At one point does this affect our productivity and force us to go Windows either via Virtual PC or an real PC?
Unless it facilitates the arrival of the most amazing Office suite from Apple and a steady increase in marketshare, I'll take your statement as hyperbole or naivete.
And what makes you think MS won't do that? Hundreds of millions of dollars is chump change If they ever feel the least bit threatened, that's precisely what they're going to do.
I don't know where people get this idea about M$ being so ****ing rich that they can just give up MAJOR streams of revenue at a whim. $400 million is alot of money for anyone. Sure they have 50 billion in the bank, but that's already priced in the stock. They need to keep revenue going UP and if they throw away the mac market they have to get it back somewhere else. As well with increased competition coming from Linux, and blood letting projects like the X-box, they have to manage their money as smartly as possible.
I don't think that dumping the MBU because of the threat of Apple "reclaiming" the other 90% is a logical course of action at all.
I don't know where people get this idea about M$ being so ****ing rich that they can just give up MAJOR streams of revenue at a whim. $400 million is alot of money for anyone. Sure they have 50 billion in the bank, but that's already priced in the stock. They need to keep revenue going UP and if they throw away the mac market they have to get it back somewhere else. As well with increased competition coming from Linux, and blood letting projects like the X-box, they have to manage their money as smartly as possible.
I don't think that dumping the MBU because of the threat of Apple "reclaiming" the other 90% is a logical course of action at all.
You don't get it, do you? It's not about Apple reclaiming anything. It's about MS claiming it all.
$400M is no piss in the bucket, but it's not a permanent loss. It's an investment. Read my other posts in this thread, jeez.. Microsoft has more to gain by dropping Apple support than keeping it. The only reason why they haven't is fear of what the DoJ might finally have the balls to do. People who use Office v.X are not going to switch to AppleWorks or OpenOffice. They'll start using a Windows PC and the Windows version of Office. As kelib recently found out, not even web browsers can escape. MS dropped the Mac IE when it's clearly something regular people might need just to remain productive. They could have decided to make money off it, but they know they'll end up making that money elsewhere if they get the ball rolling.
Sounds like you'd like Macs to run Microsoft Friggin' Windows natively Eugene. Hell, that would solve compatibility, wouldn't it?
I don't know if the reasons you use Macs are the same as most people. I doubt it, based on your posts.
Barto
Where the hell did you get that idea? Why do the stark realities of how Microsoft works suggest anything about why *I* use Macs?
I use Macs because:
1) that's what I started out with.
2) I can't stand Windows
3) Macs are pretty
It should be plainly apparent that I detest Microsoft's business practices, so why are you seemingly trying to portray me as some kind of Microsoft apologist?
People who need to use Internet Explorer on the Mac still can, and can use the updated version, if they pay for MSN. Microsoft didn't kill Mac IE just to kill it -- they killed it as means of pushing people towards their revenue enhancing streams. Office is still a solid revenue stream.
Eugene is being absurdly paranoid. Microsoft does not have a psychopathic need to own the entire computer market. They're not interested in Apple's niche -- graphics, design, upscale consumer -- because their products are and remain a poor fit there.
Most Mac users do not buy Office. Most Macs do not have Office installed. The only Apple market where Office is key is its few remaining connections to big business, which aren't even secondary markets for Apple, they're tertiary ones. Adobe canceling Photoshop for Mac would kill the platform. The end of Office would not.
But there's still no reason, paranoid delusions aside, to think Microsoft would walk away from a product that's almost entirely profit. Microsoft has more important battles to fight -- mainly with Linux, which is taking Microsoft's bread and butter away by swiping government contracts throughout the non-American world. That's where Microsoft's attention is focused. Microsoft would almost certainly prefer to face Apple, who will never break out again into the big leagues, than a burgeoning Linux market. Having Apple around helps stave off Linux, some, too.
People who need to use Internet Explorer on the Mac still can, and can use the updated version, if they pay for MSN. Microsoft didn't kill Mac IE just to kill it -- they killed it as means of pushing people towards their revenue enhancing streams. Office is still a solid revenue stream.
Eugene is being absurdly paranoid. Microsoft does not have a psychopathic need to own the entire computer market.
Time to brush up on your history there, buddy.
The cancellation of MS Office v. X is a juicy playing card for the intimidation of Apple... should MS choose to use it. Right now Apple is a very, very small fish. If Apple ever poses a significant threat to MS (which I don't think is going to happen any time soon, if ever) the status of Office v. X -- and Exchange support, and Remote Desktop Connection, and so on -- would change very quickly. MS cares much more about its dominant position in the OS market than a piddling 400m. (Only for MS would 400m be piddling, but it is.)
I actually don't think that people would abandon the Mac in droves if Office v. X was extinguished, though, *if* Apple stepped in quickly with their own Office-compatible suite.
My guess is that Apple will introduce very soon (possibly even this Apple Expo?) a new iWorks suite that, being Cocoa, could be rapidly expanded to fully take Office's place... should the need occur.
The cancellation of MS Office v. X is a juicy playing card for the intimidation of Apple...
Actually, it is M$ which will be screwed either way. If Apple releases it's own Office suit, it will be M$ office on the mac which will be abandoned in droves ... look at the humiliation IE suffered at the hands of Safari. Don't think for a second that they were trying to "punish" Apple for releasing Safari, they knew that they would get their asses kicked out of the ball park ala adobe premiere.
Apple is by FAR a superior software company than Microsoft, and they know this.
look at the humiliation IE suffered at the hands of Safari.
And what of PowerPoint and Keynote? I have yet to see an article or any numbers showing that people are abandoning PowerPoint "in droves" for Keynote.
You're forgetting that Microsoft Internet Explorer was already facing a lot of competition. Safari was just the final nail by a big name that sealed IE's coffin for a lot of users. Oodles of Mac users had already been abandoning IE for the past two years. We've had OmniWeb, Netscape/Mozilla, Chimera/Camino, Opera, and even little old iCab chipping away at Internet Explorer's user base. There was already a *lot* of public dissatisfaction with Internet Explorer.
People using Office, on the other hand, seem to be satisfied enough despite its quirks. Otherwise, some other products would have cropped up to meet the demand. Open Office has floundered. Why? Not enough people interested to devote time to developing it. Alternatives like Mariner look half-baked. Why? Not enough consumer interest to warrant devoting resources for major improvements.
Software titles like Premiere didn't have alternatives because they're so specialized and targeted at a much smaller market.
I'd love to see an Apple-branded office suite just as much as most people here, but I don't see it alone being a Microsoft Office-killer.
Apple is by FAR a superior software company than Microsoft, and they know this.
Perhaps they are in a way, but I would venture to guess the company that distributes 100+ million copies of Windows, and nearly as many copies of Office is superior in some ways.
People who need to use Internet Explorer on the Mac still can, and can use the updated version, if they pay for MSN. Microsoft didn't kill Mac IE just to kill it -- they killed it as means of pushing people towards their revenue enhancing streams. Office is still a solid revenue stream.
Where were you when Kevin Browne from the Mac BU accused Apple of not being more successful in getting its existing userbase to switch to OS X, citing poor sales of Office v.X? Microsoft is itching for the one big excuse.
Quote:
Eugene is being absurdly paranoid. Microsoft does not have a psychopathic need to own the entire computer market. They're not interested in Apple's niche -- graphics, design, upscale consumer -- because their products are and remain a poor fit there.
Of course I'm looking paranoid. I'm using scare tactics to try to convince you of the possibilities. Microsoft doesn't effin' care if its products are a poor fit in Apple's existing niche. There's no other viable replacement, so it doesn't even matter. Without Apple to fill the niche, Microsoft will fill it, and they won't need to care about how nicely everything fits.
Quote:
Most Mac users do not buy Office. Most Macs do not have Office installed. The only Apple market where Office is key is its few remaining connections to big business, which aren't even secondary markets for Apple, they're tertiary ones. Adobe canceling Photoshop for Mac would kill the platform. The end of Office would not.
This is of course complete FUD. More Mac users buy/use Office than Photoshop. Adobe canceling Photoshop for Mac would be another huge loss, but it's still not as big a loss as Microsoft dropping Office.
Quote:
But there's still no reason, paranoid delusions aside, to think Microsoft would walk away from a product that's almost entirely profit. Microsoft has more important battles to fight -- mainly with Linux, which is taking Microsoft's bread and butter away by swiping government contracts throughout the non-American world. That's where Microsoft's attention is focused. Microsoft would almost certainly prefer to face Apple, who will never break out again into the big leagues, than a burgeoning Linux market. Having Apple around helps stave off Linux, some, too.
If Office v.X was so profitable, why are they now bundling a free copy of Virtual PC and Windows XP Home with it? They're laying the cornerstone for something...
If Office v.X was so profitable, why are they now bundling a free copy of Virtual PC and Windows XP Home with it?
OMG, you said Linux!!
Maybe it's because there have been no new features added for a good 4-5 years now. So it's either drop the price or add new features. VPC was pretty much all they could do to "spice it up"
Maybe it's because there have been no new features added for a good 4-5 years now. So it's either drop the price or add new features. VPC was pretty much all they could do to "spice it up"
Ah, like Entourage, OS X compatibility, more templates and the project gallery, multi-selection, transparency, Excel and PowerPoint 2000/XP feature parity, auto-recover, just to name a few.
Where were you when Kevin Browne from the Mac BU accused Apple of not being more successful in getting its existing userbase to switch to OS X, citing poor sales of Office v.X? Microsoft is itching for the one big excuse.
Browne complained because Microsoft was itching, as you say, for more money. Due to low adoption rates for OS X until last year, sales of Office v.X did not track to expectations. After Browne's comments, Apple pushed Office bundles and that, on top of improved OS X adoption rates due to Jaguar, seemed to placate Microsoft and put sales numbers around where they should be.
If Microsoft wants to drop Office for the Mac, they don't need a reason. They would just do it. They wouldn't have complained. They would have just dropped it. They certainly wouldn't have gone to the trouble and expense of tripling the number of Office versions available, with unique packaging and skew tracking numbers for each, if they were as down on the Mac market as you want -- and I stress want -- to think they are.
Quote:
Of course I'm looking paranoid. I'm using scare tactics to try to convince you of the possibilities.
A cheap tactic that betrays either a lack of creativity or a weak position.
Quote:
Microsoft doesn't effin' care if its products are a poor fit in Apple's existing niche. There's no other viable replacement, so it doesn't even matter. Without Apple to fill the niche, Microsoft will fill it, and they won't need to care about how nicely everything fits.
Says you. Strange, others don't see it your way, Chicken Little.
Quote:
This is of course complete FUD. More Mac users buy/use Office than Photoshop. Adobe canceling Photoshop for Mac would be another huge loss, but it's still not as big a loss as Microsoft dropping Office.
I disagree. I work for a pre-press publishing company -- press and graphics, the paramount, core Apple industry. We have 35 Macs. 35 of them run Microsoft Office. Fifteen of them run Adobe's Design Collection. More copies of Office than PHotoshop.
However, if Office were to go away tomorrow, we wouldn't really blink. We'd hold onto our old versions -- the program isn't that important to us, so we don't need "new" features -- or move to software that can read .rtf files and require all submissions be in that format. Wouldn't miss a beat.
If Photoshop were cancelled, we would immediately begin organizing a transition to a Windows platform.
Why? Because Photoshop is a key application. Office is just part of the supporting material.
I know probably a dozen people who run their companies on their Macs. Many don't have Office. None would switch were Office cancelled. But all of them would go if Photoshop did.
This is Apple's core market, where Office is used because it's convenient, but it is not a killer app. And the loss of it would not kill the Mac. The Mac would still be a better tool for what it's purchased for -- color management, graphic design, font flowing, etc.
We do have a few computers that primarily are used to run Office. They are already PCs.
Quote:
If Office v.X was so profitable, why are they now bundling a free copy of Virtual PC and Windows XP Home with it? They're laying the cornerstone for something...
God, I hate conspiracy nuts.
Virtual PC is being bundled with Office because, frankly, they had to do something with it. Microsoft bought the Virtual PC line to get the OS hosting technology for their next version of Windows Server. They also got the Mac product, because it all comes part and parcel. So long as they have it, why not use it to push more sales of their almost-all-profit Office suite?
Not everything Microsoft does is about killing Apple. In fact, I'd wager that none of it is. Would Microsoft be upset if Apple went under? Not extremely. But at present, Microsoft doesn't have the tools in its software to suitably service Apple's key print and graphics demographic, and seems to have no interest in providing them.
If Microsoft really wanted to kill Apple, they wouldn't cancel Office. They'd create a color management system that tops ColorSync, and fix their font text flow issues. Then Apple would die.
If Microsoft wants to drop Office for the Mac, they don't need a reason. They would just do it. They wouldn't have complained. They would have just dropped it. They certainly wouldn't have gone to the trouble and expense of tripling the number of Office versions available, with unique packaging and skew tracking numbers for each, if they were as down on the Mac market as you want -- and I stress want -- to think they are.
Of course they need a reason. They may in fact have to answer to the government if their excuse isn't good enough.
Quote:
A cheap tactic that betrays either a lack of creativity or a weak position.
Says the guy repeating the term "Chicken Little." So what are *you* afraid of? Accept the possibility and move on. I hope you don't get blindsided.
Quote:
Says you. Strange, others don't see it your way, Chicken Little.
Others may not have as much prior experience with Microsoft as I. As I've had friends and siblings who have worked there, all of them know what it feels like to have a project unscrupulously axed for no reason at all, even when nearly completed.
Quote:
I disagree. I work for a pre-press publishing company -- press and graphics, the paramount, core Apple industry. We have 35 Macs. 35 of them run Microsoft Office. Fifteen of them run Adobe's Design Collection. More copies of Office than PHotoshop.
Bingo.
Quote:
However, if Office were to go away tomorrow, we wouldn't really blink. We'd hold onto our old versions -- the program isn't that important to us, so we don't need "new" features -- or move to software that can read .rtf files and require all submissions be in that format. Wouldn't miss a beat.
Output to RTF all you want, but Microsoft has the trump card in the DOC format. All they have to do introduce an extension on the DOC format and force both PC and Mac users to upgrade. Of course Adobe could do the same, but as you said, your workplace has 35 copies of Office and 15 copies of Photoshop
Quote:
If Photoshop were cancelled, we would immediately begin organizing a transition to a Windows platform.
Correct, Photoshop is a key application. So is Office.
Quote:
Why? Because Photoshop is a key application. Office is just part of the supporting material.
I just don't see the millions of Mac users out there being satisfied with OpenOffice (AbiWord) or AppleWorks, do you?
Quote:
I know probably a dozen people who run their companies on their Macs. Many don't have Office. None would switch were Office cancelled. But all of them would go if Photoshop did.
Riiiiight. Office for Mac OS is expendable, but it nets Microsoft $400M in profits a year. Make up your mind, which is it?
Quote:
This is Apple's core market, where Office is used because it's convenient, but it is not a killer app. And the loss of it would not kill the Mac. The Mac would still be a better tool for what it's purchased for -- color management, graphic design, font flowing, etc.
Apple's core market has shifted to the consumer. Under 200K Power Macs sold consistently over the past few quarters.
Quote:
God, I hate conspiracy nuts.
Me, a conspiracy nut? That's a good one. You may want to read some historic posts of mine.
Quote:
Virtual PC is being bundled with Office because, frankly, they had to do something with it. Microsoft bought the Virtual PC line to get the OS hosting technology for their next version of Windows Server. They also got the Mac product, because it all comes part and parcel. So long as they have it, why not use it to push more sales of their almost-all-profit Office suite?
Microsoft would have gone ahead an purchased VMWare if that's the case.
Quote:
Not everything Microsoft does is about killing Apple. In fact, I'd wager that none of it is. Would Microsoft be upset if Apple went under? Not extremely. But at present, Microsoft doesn't have the tools in its software to suitably service Apple's key print and graphics demographic, and seems to have no interest in providing them.
You seem to think Microsoft gives a hoot about Apple's would be displaced professionals.und for now, and they think they can get away with using
Quote:
If Microsoft really wanted to kill Apple, they wouldn't cancel Office. They'd create a color management system that tops ColorSync, and fix their font text flow issues. Then Apple would die.
Microsoft already has an acceptable ICC profile management system.
Ah, like Entourage, OS X compatibility, more templates and the project gallery, multi-selection, transparency, Excel and PowerPoint 2000/XP feature parity, auto-recover, just to name a few.
Yes, please name more, because none of those justify the price of an upgrade.
Yes, please name more, because none of those justify the price of an upgrade.
When has that stopped anyone?
I don't remember the list of upgrades for the last version of office:mac being all that impressive. Lots of eye candy, but not much new. And I think a lot of people would like an actual OS X application - although, given that Office hasn't been a native Mac application suite since v4 (in the sense that it's used a runt port of OLE for inter-application communication, and in the sense that it uses no native widgets), that's not likely to happen.
I'd bet people would upgrade for an app that leveraged OS X's text engine (and for that matter, its user interface!), supported long filenames, squashed a bunch of stupid longstanding bugs, had better compatibility with Office for Windows file formats (hello?!) and kept up with their typing.
Eugene has a real point here, folks. Microsoft is tactical and it is ruthless. The antitrust trial removed all doubt of that, but examples abound even beyond that. For exampe, from a Robert X. Cringely article some time ago:
Quote:
Back in December, 1991, just before the publication date for my book Accidental Empires, Microsoft attempted to keep the book from being published at all. Somehow they heard about the book, then got a copy of the galley proofs. Let's just admit up front that Accidental Empires set new records for criticism of Microsoft at a time when the company generally was adored by the press. Microsoft hated the book.
Marty Taucher, Microsoft's top internal PR guy, called Stewart Alsop, then my boss's boss at InfoWorld. Unless InfoWorld stopped publication of the book, Taucher said, Microsoft would never again cooperate with the magazine on product reviews or news stories. This was the threat, and it was characteristically made by telephone and never in writing. Alsop got off the hook in this case by pointing out that InfoWorld had nothing to do with publication of the book. He couldn't stop it. This conveniently ignored the fact that InfoWorld had already read and approved the manuscript.
Microsoft then turned against Addison-Wesley, the actual publisher of Accidental Empires. Taucher made another phone call, this time to A-W's headquarters in Reading, Massachusetts. The threat was the same: Cancel the book or Microsoft would never again cooperate with Addison-Wesley at any level on any project. Since A-W is a large publisher of computer books, and computer books generally require advance looks at products, this was a very serious threat. I was pulled into several conference calls over the 1991 Christmas holiday as A-W decided whether or not to defy Microsoft. There were already 25,000 bound copies sitting in the warehouse. Should those copies be destroyed?
They very nearly were destroyed. I argued over and over that the book was truthful, that Microsoft had no legal case, and that ultimately, they wouldn't follow through on the threat. Addison-Wesley finally decided to believe me and went ahead with publication. Microsoft never said another word.
Now, fortunately for Cringely he doesn't get bullied easily, and he was both willing and able to get Addison-Wesley's legal department to play chicken with Microsoft. That was in 1991, before the antitrust trial, and before Microsoft was anywhere near as dominant as they are now. Who wants to bet it would play out the same way now? Microsoft just got the Department of Justice to blink in a criminal trial in which they were guilty as hell.
Would they lose money to consolidate power? One word: Xbox.
BTW: Virtual PC is NOT compatible with the G5 (german article here) and would probably need major reworks to be compatible. So if Microsoft chooses to offer Virtual PC as base for a 'Mac' Office offering, there probably will be no solution at all...
Comments
Originally posted by Kirkland
Eugene,
The cancellation of the standalone versions of IE for Windows and Mac were related. Microsoft wants to focus its efforts on revenue streams. Which means that it wants you to pay to use its browser software. Windows users pay whenever they buy Windows, or when they subscribe to MSN, so IE persists as a component of the OS and as the core of MSN.
Mac users pay when they subscribe to MSN, and thus get the 6.0 IE software. There will be a 7.0, and maybe even 8.0, release of IE for the Mac (if MS continues its current strategy), but it will only be available to people who pay for it in the form of MSN subscriptions.
Kirk
So make IE 6.0 nagware. The basis of the browser already exists in MSN. OMNIWeb and Opera seem to do well enough as shareware browsers. You're right. MS is money driven. Taking that last 2-3% will make MS more money than charging for IE ever would.
The web is becoming increasingly IE centric. The current Mac IE gets us into most of browser-specific websites, but not all of them. The number of websites we can't reach without IE is only going to increase in the near future. At one point does this affect our productivity and force us to go Windows either via Virtual PC or an real PC?
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Be prepared?
I'm praying for it.
Unless it facilitates the arrival of the most amazing Office suite from Apple and a steady increase in marketshare, I'll take your statement as hyperbole or naivete.
Originally posted by Eugene
And what makes you think MS won't do that? Hundreds of millions of dollars is chump change If they ever feel the least bit threatened, that's precisely what they're going to do.
I don't know where people get this idea about M$ being so ****ing rich that they can just give up MAJOR streams of revenue at a whim. $400 million is alot of money for anyone. Sure they have 50 billion in the bank, but that's already priced in the stock. They need to keep revenue going UP and if they throw away the mac market they have to get it back somewhere else. As well with increased competition coming from Linux, and blood letting projects like the X-box, they have to manage their money as smartly as possible.
I don't think that dumping the MBU because of the threat of Apple "reclaiming" the other 90% is a logical course of action at all.
Originally posted by the cool gut
I don't know where people get this idea about M$ being so ****ing rich that they can just give up MAJOR streams of revenue at a whim. $400 million is alot of money for anyone. Sure they have 50 billion in the bank, but that's already priced in the stock. They need to keep revenue going UP and if they throw away the mac market they have to get it back somewhere else. As well with increased competition coming from Linux, and blood letting projects like the X-box, they have to manage their money as smartly as possible.
I don't think that dumping the MBU because of the threat of Apple "reclaiming" the other 90% is a logical course of action at all.
You don't get it, do you? It's not about Apple reclaiming anything. It's about MS claiming it all.
$400M is no piss in the bucket, but it's not a permanent loss. It's an investment. Read my other posts in this thread, jeez.. Microsoft has more to gain by dropping Apple support than keeping it. The only reason why they haven't is fear of what the DoJ might finally have the balls to do. People who use Office v.X are not going to switch to AppleWorks or OpenOffice. They'll start using a Windows PC and the Windows version of Office. As kelib recently found out, not even web browsers can escape. MS dropped the Mac IE when it's clearly something regular people might need just to remain productive. They could have decided to make money off it, but they know they'll end up making that money elsewhere if they get the ball rolling.
I don't know if the reasons you use Macs are the same as most people. I doubt it, based on your posts.
Barto
Originally posted by Barto
Sounds like you'd like Macs to run Microsoft Friggin' Windows natively Eugene. Hell, that would solve compatibility, wouldn't it?
I don't know if the reasons you use Macs are the same as most people. I doubt it, based on your posts.
Barto
Where the hell did you get that idea? Why do the stark realities of how Microsoft works suggest anything about why *I* use Macs?
I use Macs because:
1) that's what I started out with.
2) I can't stand Windows
3) Macs are pretty
It should be plainly apparent that I detest Microsoft's business practices, so why are you seemingly trying to portray me as some kind of Microsoft apologist?
Eugene is being absurdly paranoid. Microsoft does not have a psychopathic need to own the entire computer market. They're not interested in Apple's niche -- graphics, design, upscale consumer -- because their products are and remain a poor fit there.
Most Mac users do not buy Office. Most Macs do not have Office installed. The only Apple market where Office is key is its few remaining connections to big business, which aren't even secondary markets for Apple, they're tertiary ones. Adobe canceling Photoshop for Mac would kill the platform. The end of Office would not.
But there's still no reason, paranoid delusions aside, to think Microsoft would walk away from a product that's almost entirely profit. Microsoft has more important battles to fight -- mainly with Linux, which is taking Microsoft's bread and butter away by swiping government contracts throughout the non-American world. That's where Microsoft's attention is focused. Microsoft would almost certainly prefer to face Apple, who will never break out again into the big leagues, than a burgeoning Linux market. Having Apple around helps stave off Linux, some, too.
Kirk
Originally posted by Eugene
You don't get it, do you?
Chicken Little, your the one who doesn't get it.
Originally posted by Kirkland
People who need to use Internet Explorer on the Mac still can, and can use the updated version, if they pay for MSN. Microsoft didn't kill Mac IE just to kill it -- they killed it as means of pushing people towards their revenue enhancing streams. Office is still a solid revenue stream.
Eugene is being absurdly paranoid. Microsoft does not have a psychopathic need to own the entire computer market.
Time to brush up on your history there, buddy.
The cancellation of MS Office v. X is a juicy playing card for the intimidation of Apple... should MS choose to use it. Right now Apple is a very, very small fish. If Apple ever poses a significant threat to MS (which I don't think is going to happen any time soon, if ever) the status of Office v. X -- and Exchange support, and Remote Desktop Connection, and so on -- would change very quickly. MS cares much more about its dominant position in the OS market than a piddling 400m. (Only for MS would 400m be piddling, but it is.)
I actually don't think that people would abandon the Mac in droves if Office v. X was extinguished, though, *if* Apple stepped in quickly with their own Office-compatible suite.
My guess is that Apple will introduce very soon (possibly even this Apple Expo?) a new iWorks suite that, being Cocoa, could be rapidly expanded to fully take Office's place... should the need occur.
Originally posted by Hobbes
Time to brush up on your history there, buddy.
The cancellation of MS Office v. X is a juicy playing card for the intimidation of Apple...
Actually, it is M$ which will be screwed either way. If Apple releases it's own Office suit, it will be M$ office on the mac which will be abandoned in droves ... look at the humiliation IE suffered at the hands of Safari. Don't think for a second that they were trying to "punish" Apple for releasing Safari, they knew that they would get their asses kicked out of the ball park ala adobe premiere.
Apple is by FAR a superior software company than Microsoft, and they know this.
Originally posted by the cool gut
look at the humiliation IE suffered at the hands of Safari.
And what of PowerPoint and Keynote? I have yet to see an article or any numbers showing that people are abandoning PowerPoint "in droves" for Keynote.
You're forgetting that Microsoft Internet Explorer was already facing a lot of competition. Safari was just the final nail by a big name that sealed IE's coffin for a lot of users. Oodles of Mac users had already been abandoning IE for the past two years. We've had OmniWeb, Netscape/Mozilla, Chimera/Camino, Opera, and even little old iCab chipping away at Internet Explorer's user base. There was already a *lot* of public dissatisfaction with Internet Explorer.
People using Office, on the other hand, seem to be satisfied enough despite its quirks. Otherwise, some other products would have cropped up to meet the demand. Open Office has floundered. Why? Not enough people interested to devote time to developing it. Alternatives like Mariner look half-baked. Why? Not enough consumer interest to warrant devoting resources for major improvements.
Software titles like Premiere didn't have alternatives because they're so specialized and targeted at a much smaller market.
I'd love to see an Apple-branded office suite just as much as most people here, but I don't see it alone being a Microsoft Office-killer.
Originally posted by the cool gut
Apple is by FAR a superior software company than Microsoft, and they know this.
Perhaps they are in a way, but I would venture to guess the company that distributes 100+ million copies of Windows, and nearly as many copies of Office is superior in some ways.
Originally posted by Kirkland
People who need to use Internet Explorer on the Mac still can, and can use the updated version, if they pay for MSN. Microsoft didn't kill Mac IE just to kill it -- they killed it as means of pushing people towards their revenue enhancing streams. Office is still a solid revenue stream.
Where were you when Kevin Browne from the Mac BU accused Apple of not being more successful in getting its existing userbase to switch to OS X, citing poor sales of Office v.X? Microsoft is itching for the one big excuse.
Eugene is being absurdly paranoid. Microsoft does not have a psychopathic need to own the entire computer market. They're not interested in Apple's niche -- graphics, design, upscale consumer -- because their products are and remain a poor fit there.
Of course I'm looking paranoid. I'm using scare tactics to try to convince you of the possibilities. Microsoft doesn't effin' care if its products are a poor fit in Apple's existing niche. There's no other viable replacement, so it doesn't even matter. Without Apple to fill the niche, Microsoft will fill it, and they won't need to care about how nicely everything fits.
Most Mac users do not buy Office. Most Macs do not have Office installed. The only Apple market where Office is key is its few remaining connections to big business, which aren't even secondary markets for Apple, they're tertiary ones. Adobe canceling Photoshop for Mac would kill the platform. The end of Office would not.
This is of course complete FUD. More Mac users buy/use Office than Photoshop. Adobe canceling Photoshop for Mac would be another huge loss, but it's still not as big a loss as Microsoft dropping Office.
But there's still no reason, paranoid delusions aside, to think Microsoft would walk away from a product that's almost entirely profit. Microsoft has more important battles to fight -- mainly with Linux, which is taking Microsoft's bread and butter away by swiping government contracts throughout the non-American world. That's where Microsoft's attention is focused. Microsoft would almost certainly prefer to face Apple, who will never break out again into the big leagues, than a burgeoning Linux market. Having Apple around helps stave off Linux, some, too.
If Office v.X was so profitable, why are they now bundling a free copy of Virtual PC and Windows XP Home with it? They're laying the cornerstone for something...
OMG, you said Linux!!
Originally posted by Eugene
If Office v.X was so profitable, why are they now bundling a free copy of Virtual PC and Windows XP Home with it?
OMG, you said Linux!!
Maybe it's because there have been no new features added for a good 4-5 years now. So it's either drop the price or add new features. VPC was pretty much all they could do to "spice it up"
Originally posted by the cool gut
Maybe it's because there have been no new features added for a good 4-5 years now. So it's either drop the price or add new features. VPC was pretty much all they could do to "spice it up"
Ah, like Entourage, OS X compatibility, more templates and the project gallery, multi-selection, transparency, Excel and PowerPoint 2000/XP feature parity, auto-recover, just to name a few.
Originally posted by Eugene
Where were you when Kevin Browne from the Mac BU accused Apple of not being more successful in getting its existing userbase to switch to OS X, citing poor sales of Office v.X? Microsoft is itching for the one big excuse.
Browne complained because Microsoft was itching, as you say, for more money. Due to low adoption rates for OS X until last year, sales of Office v.X did not track to expectations. After Browne's comments, Apple pushed Office bundles and that, on top of improved OS X adoption rates due to Jaguar, seemed to placate Microsoft and put sales numbers around where they should be.
If Microsoft wants to drop Office for the Mac, they don't need a reason. They would just do it. They wouldn't have complained. They would have just dropped it. They certainly wouldn't have gone to the trouble and expense of tripling the number of Office versions available, with unique packaging and skew tracking numbers for each, if they were as down on the Mac market as you want -- and I stress want -- to think they are.
Of course I'm looking paranoid. I'm using scare tactics to try to convince you of the possibilities.
A cheap tactic that betrays either a lack of creativity or a weak position.
Microsoft doesn't effin' care if its products are a poor fit in Apple's existing niche. There's no other viable replacement, so it doesn't even matter. Without Apple to fill the niche, Microsoft will fill it, and they won't need to care about how nicely everything fits.
Says you. Strange, others don't see it your way, Chicken Little.
This is of course complete FUD. More Mac users buy/use Office than Photoshop. Adobe canceling Photoshop for Mac would be another huge loss, but it's still not as big a loss as Microsoft dropping Office.
I disagree. I work for a pre-press publishing company -- press and graphics, the paramount, core Apple industry. We have 35 Macs. 35 of them run Microsoft Office. Fifteen of them run Adobe's Design Collection. More copies of Office than PHotoshop.
However, if Office were to go away tomorrow, we wouldn't really blink. We'd hold onto our old versions -- the program isn't that important to us, so we don't need "new" features -- or move to software that can read .rtf files and require all submissions be in that format. Wouldn't miss a beat.
If Photoshop were cancelled, we would immediately begin organizing a transition to a Windows platform.
Why? Because Photoshop is a key application. Office is just part of the supporting material.
I know probably a dozen people who run their companies on their Macs. Many don't have Office. None would switch were Office cancelled. But all of them would go if Photoshop did.
This is Apple's core market, where Office is used because it's convenient, but it is not a killer app. And the loss of it would not kill the Mac. The Mac would still be a better tool for what it's purchased for -- color management, graphic design, font flowing, etc.
We do have a few computers that primarily are used to run Office. They are already PCs.
If Office v.X was so profitable, why are they now bundling a free copy of Virtual PC and Windows XP Home with it? They're laying the cornerstone for something...
God, I hate conspiracy nuts.
Virtual PC is being bundled with Office because, frankly, they had to do something with it. Microsoft bought the Virtual PC line to get the OS hosting technology for their next version of Windows Server. They also got the Mac product, because it all comes part and parcel. So long as they have it, why not use it to push more sales of their almost-all-profit Office suite?
Not everything Microsoft does is about killing Apple. In fact, I'd wager that none of it is. Would Microsoft be upset if Apple went under? Not extremely. But at present, Microsoft doesn't have the tools in its software to suitably service Apple's key print and graphics demographic, and seems to have no interest in providing them.
If Microsoft really wanted to kill Apple, they wouldn't cancel Office. They'd create a color management system that tops ColorSync, and fix their font text flow issues. Then Apple would die.
OMG, you said Linux!! [/B]
So?
Grow up, Chicken Little.
Kirk
Originally posted by Kirkland
If Microsoft wants to drop Office for the Mac, they don't need a reason. They would just do it. They wouldn't have complained. They would have just dropped it. They certainly wouldn't have gone to the trouble and expense of tripling the number of Office versions available, with unique packaging and skew tracking numbers for each, if they were as down on the Mac market as you want -- and I stress want -- to think they are.
Of course they need a reason. They may in fact have to answer to the government if their excuse isn't good enough.
A cheap tactic that betrays either a lack of creativity or a weak position.
Says the guy repeating the term "Chicken Little." So what are *you* afraid of? Accept the possibility and move on. I hope you don't get blindsided.
Says you. Strange, others don't see it your way, Chicken Little.
Others may not have as much prior experience with Microsoft as I. As I've had friends and siblings who have worked there, all of them know what it feels like to have a project unscrupulously axed for no reason at all, even when nearly completed.
I disagree. I work for a pre-press publishing company -- press and graphics, the paramount, core Apple industry. We have 35 Macs. 35 of them run Microsoft Office. Fifteen of them run Adobe's Design Collection. More copies of Office than PHotoshop.
Bingo.
However, if Office were to go away tomorrow, we wouldn't really blink. We'd hold onto our old versions -- the program isn't that important to us, so we don't need "new" features -- or move to software that can read .rtf files and require all submissions be in that format. Wouldn't miss a beat.
Output to RTF all you want, but Microsoft has the trump card in the DOC format. All they have to do introduce an extension on the DOC format and force both PC and Mac users to upgrade. Of course Adobe could do the same, but as you said, your workplace has 35 copies of Office and 15 copies of Photoshop
If Photoshop were cancelled, we would immediately begin organizing a transition to a Windows platform.
Correct, Photoshop is a key application. So is Office.
Why? Because Photoshop is a key application. Office is just part of the supporting material.
I just don't see the millions of Mac users out there being satisfied with OpenOffice (AbiWord) or AppleWorks, do you?
I know probably a dozen people who run their companies on their Macs. Many don't have Office. None would switch were Office cancelled. But all of them would go if Photoshop did.
Riiiiight. Office for Mac OS is expendable, but it nets Microsoft $400M in profits a year. Make up your mind, which is it?
This is Apple's core market, where Office is used because it's convenient, but it is not a killer app. And the loss of it would not kill the Mac. The Mac would still be a better tool for what it's purchased for -- color management, graphic design, font flowing, etc.
Apple's core market has shifted to the consumer. Under 200K Power Macs sold consistently over the past few quarters.
God, I hate conspiracy nuts.
Me, a conspiracy nut? That's a good one. You may want to read some historic posts of mine.
Virtual PC is being bundled with Office because, frankly, they had to do something with it. Microsoft bought the Virtual PC line to get the OS hosting technology for their next version of Windows Server. They also got the Mac product, because it all comes part and parcel. So long as they have it, why not use it to push more sales of their almost-all-profit Office suite?
Microsoft would have gone ahead an purchased VMWare if that's the case.
Not everything Microsoft does is about killing Apple. In fact, I'd wager that none of it is. Would Microsoft be upset if Apple went under? Not extremely. But at present, Microsoft doesn't have the tools in its software to suitably service Apple's key print and graphics demographic, and seems to have no interest in providing them.
You seem to think Microsoft gives a hoot about Apple's would be displaced professionals.und for now, and they think they can get away with using
If Microsoft really wanted to kill Apple, they wouldn't cancel Office. They'd create a color management system that tops ColorSync, and fix their font text flow issues. Then Apple would die.
Microsoft already has an acceptable ICC profile management system.
Grow up, Chicken Little.
I KNOW YOU ARE, BUT WHAT AM I??
Originally posted by Eugene
Ah, like Entourage, OS X compatibility, more templates and the project gallery, multi-selection, transparency, Excel and PowerPoint 2000/XP feature parity, auto-recover, just to name a few.
Yes, please name more, because none of those justify the price of an upgrade.
Originally posted by the cool gut
Yes, please name more, because none of those justify the price of an upgrade.
When has that stopped anyone?
I don't remember the list of upgrades for the last version of office:mac being all that impressive. Lots of eye candy, but not much new. And I think a lot of people would like an actual OS X application - although, given that Office hasn't been a native Mac application suite since v4 (in the sense that it's used a runt port of OLE for inter-application communication, and in the sense that it uses no native widgets), that's not likely to happen.
I'd bet people would upgrade for an app that leveraged OS X's text engine (and for that matter, its user interface!), supported long filenames, squashed a bunch of stupid longstanding bugs, had better compatibility with Office for Windows file formats (hello?!) and kept up with their typing.
Eugene has a real point here, folks. Microsoft is tactical and it is ruthless. The antitrust trial removed all doubt of that, but examples abound even beyond that. For exampe, from a Robert X. Cringely article some time ago:
Back in December, 1991, just before the publication date for my book Accidental Empires, Microsoft attempted to keep the book from being published at all. Somehow they heard about the book, then got a copy of the galley proofs. Let's just admit up front that Accidental Empires set new records for criticism of Microsoft at a time when the company generally was adored by the press. Microsoft hated the book.
Marty Taucher, Microsoft's top internal PR guy, called Stewart Alsop, then my boss's boss at InfoWorld. Unless InfoWorld stopped publication of the book, Taucher said, Microsoft would never again cooperate with the magazine on product reviews or news stories. This was the threat, and it was characteristically made by telephone and never in writing. Alsop got off the hook in this case by pointing out that InfoWorld had nothing to do with publication of the book. He couldn't stop it. This conveniently ignored the fact that InfoWorld had already read and approved the manuscript.
Microsoft then turned against Addison-Wesley, the actual publisher of Accidental Empires. Taucher made another phone call, this time to A-W's headquarters in Reading, Massachusetts. The threat was the same: Cancel the book or Microsoft would never again cooperate with Addison-Wesley at any level on any project. Since A-W is a large publisher of computer books, and computer books generally require advance looks at products, this was a very serious threat. I was pulled into several conference calls over the 1991 Christmas holiday as A-W decided whether or not to defy Microsoft. There were already 25,000 bound copies sitting in the warehouse. Should those copies be destroyed?
They very nearly were destroyed. I argued over and over that the book was truthful, that Microsoft had no legal case, and that ultimately, they wouldn't follow through on the threat. Addison-Wesley finally decided to believe me and went ahead with publication. Microsoft never said another word.
Now, fortunately for Cringely he doesn't get bullied easily, and he was both willing and able to get Addison-Wesley's legal department to play chicken with Microsoft. That was in 1991, before the antitrust trial, and before Microsoft was anywhere near as dominant as they are now. Who wants to bet it would play out the same way now? Microsoft just got the Department of Justice to blink in a criminal trial in which they were guilty as hell.
Would they lose money to consolidate power? One word: Xbox.