<strong>As I said before, Apple needs to push Cocoa and push it hard. They need to bring back the development environment for x86. Develop once and run anywhere, only using Apple's development tools.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I totally agree.
If this were the case, and developers could write once, run anywhere, but the apps were native OS X and native x86 at the same time, things would be great! The whole idea about emulation is not a good one, but this stratagy is. It would definatly bring about more OS X apps (as long as developers adopted Cocoa for Windows).
Then Apple could one day decide to no longer support yellow box on windows, and there would be no worries. Since people wouldn't need to buy new apps to switch (assuming that the CDs shipped as fat binaries), they could buy Macs to run their existing apps. And they woudl want to. They would have invested in all these applications that would no longer work on future windows versions (or however Apple worked it), but would work on OS X.
No, I'm not suggesting that "all the windows users in the world want to give up their machines to run OS X" that would be silly indeed. But even if 10% did... !!!!!
It may seem that I'm arguing. I'm not, if we where face to face you would see I'm merely playing.
[quote]Originally posted by kupan787:
<strong>My whole point (and a few others on this board) is that if this whole emulation thing happened, why as a developer, would you make a natvie mac version, if the native x86 verison worked just fine?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because, if you didn't/won't make an OS X version of it, somebody else will and I will get his instead of yours. Besides, what app do you need that isn't already developed for the consumer that the Mac does not have? Well, besides games... The problem is that PC users think they actually need the software they now have because there isn't an equivalent on the Mac. They will never know how wrong they are until they actually use a Mac. Once they use a Mac they will never want to touch Windows. Hence they will only want to buy software for OS X and will only support the developers that do.
You disagree, and that's fine. But I do believe that if the Mac could Emulate Windows natively, it would be the deadliest virus windows ever saw.
[quote]
<strong>Try again. Why would suddenly more people be running macs just because we have native x86 emulation? Does the price of a mac suddenly drop?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Most of my Window user friends would switch to the Mac without any hesitation if they where guaranteed that their existing software would still run. This goes back to my earlier statement, the majority (consumers) don't actually need this said software, but they "think" they do and therefore IS what is STOPPING them from switching.
But, if all this isn't technically possible in the first place, then this scenario will never happen anyway. Unfortunately.
The PS2 does not emulate the PS1 in software. The PS2 actually has a dedicated psone-on-a-chip to do the work. The ps1 hardware was so cheap that the (partial)system on a chip did the trick, and provided a safer, virtually perfect compatibility solution.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Completely off topic (but the entire thread is)
Won't it be funny when the PS3 has a PS2-on-a-chip?
-- What's all this talk about emulation when we (may) be looking at some absolutely kick-ass new machines from Apple coming down the pike?
-- Apple is serious about expanding their user base; many of the things they are doing are all meant to do that (all of the homebrewed apps, puling out of certain expos and putting their resources to non-Mac users, and so on). It remains to be seen if it'll work, but I think you'll see a rather serious push in the coming years
-- I have to use a Windows machine at home and work now and again, and I'll tell ya, I'm always wanting to slash my wrists using it. I don't think this is bias -- though part of it may be lack of familiarity -- but it just is so much harder to do anything I want to do than on my OS X boxes. The potential for converts is there
-- Back to Apple and the speculation on their new machines... all I have to say is that you're gonna have to fight me for a place in line to buy 'em.
-- What's all this talk about emulation when we (may) be looking at some absolutely kick-ass new machines from Apple coming down the pike?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Touché.
[quote]<strong>-- Apple is serious about expanding their user base; many of the things they are doing are all meant to do that (all of the homebrewed apps, puling out of certain expos and putting their resources to non-Mac users, and so on). It remains to be seen if it'll work, but I think you'll see a rather serious push in the coming years</strong><hr></blockquote>
Also, don't forget services and iPod (David's stone indeed!). If Apple can make more iPod like things that are desirable on their own terms but significantly enhanced when coupled with a Mac, then people get a taste of Apple quality and an incentive to switch.
[quote]<strong>-- I have to use a Windows machine at home and work now and again, and I'll tell ya, I'm always wanting to slash my wrists using it. I don't think this is bias -- though part of it may be lack of familiarity -- but it just is so much harder to do anything I want to do than on my OS X boxes. The potential for converts is there</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's not bias. I've used Windows every day since 3.1 was new. I can see why people who don't ask much of it can think it's OK when they first run across it, but I've lost count of the number of times I've wanted to pick my Dell up and throw it out the window - and I have a looooooong fuse. I think the only thing that's kept me from doing it is the possibility that I'd hit a coed on the sidewalk below.
[quote]<strong>-- Back to Apple and the speculation on their new machines... all I have to say is that you're gonna have to fight me for a place in line to buy 'em.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Nah. I'll let the pioneers take the arrows and buy into rev. 2.
-- What's all this talk about emulation when we (may) be looking at some absolutely kick-ass new machines from Apple coming down the pike?
-- Apple is serious about expanding their user base; many of the things they are doing are all meant to do that (all of the homebrewed apps, puling out of certain expos and putting their resources to non-Mac users, and so on). It remains to be seen if it'll work, but I think you'll see a rather serious push in the coming years
-- I have to use a Windows machine at home and work now and again, and I'll tell ya, I'm always wanting to slash my wrists using it. I don't think this is bias -- though part of it may be lack of familiarity -- but it just is so much harder to do anything I want to do than on my OS X boxes. The potential for converts is there
-- Back to Apple and the speculation on their new machines... all I have to say is that you're gonna have to fight me for a place in line to buy 'em.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I, too, don't quite understand it and unlike most people apparently, hope they don't do any kind of emulation or dual-boot scenario. It has never worked in the past for any company. Look at BeOS as a clear example of why it won't. Wonderful little OS but no one wants to dual boot or run another OS inside an OS to get what they want. Look at Classic - while I still marvel that Apple accomplished that goal, working in an emulated OS just plain sucks!
They have given people the best OS on the planet and once true horsepower is behind it, it will be scary how productive people can become. And how quickly people will convert.
I still say, conversion of masses lies in the corporate world and a lean machine is needed, plus a business push the likes of which Apple has never done. They were the first ones in the niche markets they still dominate in and the first in education. If it weren't for them, they wouldn't be here today. Focus on what businesses want - lean, generic use machines, and a business push. I see the start of something wonderful here as far as that philosophy is concerned.
Licensing is a hands down winner for Apple already. Microsoft is alienating people left and right with their thievery!
Just enjoy the ride. It will prove bumpy for the Wintel crowd, I guarantee it!
As for using Windows - I cannot begin to explain the pain Windows users have using XP! It is a horrible, horrible incarnation and showing the two side by side is a true test of how much better OS X is...honestly, I bought a G4 Powermac for work, just to show users how easy and elegant it is to work in. Well, that and I needed a true *nix station for development and support.
If this were the case, and developers could write once, run anywhere, but the apps were native OS X and native x86 at the same time, things would be great! The whole idea about emulation is not a good one, but this stratagy is. It would definatly bring about more OS X apps (as long as developers adopted Cocoa for Windows).
Then Apple could one day decide to no longer support yellow box on windows, and there would be no worries. Since people wouldn't need to buy new apps to switch (assuming that the CDs shipped as fat binaries), they could buy Macs to run their existing apps. And they woudl want to. They would have invested in all these applications that would no longer work on future windows versions (or however Apple worked it), but would work on OS X.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Won't happen (well, very unlikely):
1 - Apple's already killed it once, no developer's going to bet 95% of his profits on a system that could easily get killed again. Especially when some still require Preparation H from the OpenDoc fiasco ...
2 - Apple's would have to get Yellow Box to conform to some sort of Windows API ... so all Uncle Bill's gotta do is make an *innocent* change, and oops ... "Apple didn't follow the guidelines again! Why would you want to code in THEIR buggy environment?". Bill will NEVER give away control of Win32 or let any other company set the standard. Abuse of monopoly powers, you bet, is anything going to be done about it? Not in this America ...
3 - Yellow Box on Windows is yet another moving target for Apple to code for, except now, they have to do a least-common-denominator between it and OSX.
Apple's just gotta make their OS the best, and make anybody who codes in it so bloody powerful compared to those who code in Win32, that Mom & Pop shops can whip up software in the Garage that would take a team ten times as large in Win32 ... Obj-C and CORE Foundation does this. [see "The Mythical Man Month" for the explanation as to why]
If Mom & Pop shops can pull of good code, imagine what Apple can do? Safari is probably just the tip of the Iceburg.
Give it a few years guys, pretty soon Apple will be known as THE platform on which all the BEST software runs ... they'll be setting the standard, as those who watch salivate and those behind eat digital dust.
Provide that 970 comes out as planned, minor point I know, but I just thought, well, somebody should mention it ...
Also, don't forget services and iPod (David's stone indeed!). If Apple can make more iPod like things that are desirable on their own terms but significantly enhanced when coupled with a Mac, then people get a taste of Apple quality and an incentive to switch. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeppers. I got a client of mine to switch to mac and he loves it. He had to keep his pc so his wife could do the finances on quickbooks (which doesn;t read mac files!?!?)
Then today he asked about MYOB because there's a pc version that reads mac files. He said his wife wanted to switch to mac so they were switching over from quickbooks to MYOB (QB lost a customer because of the mac/pc file crap) and because his wife wanted an iPod.
So a small white mp3 player which many flamed for being plain and expensive, got another switcher. She's willing to learn a new OS and a completely new fianance program for the iPod. Now that's a switch story there.
Problem ... you're a corporate IT whipping boy, your manager spent years in the trenches just like you and has the scars to show it ... between you, your manager, and your department of fellow punch bags, you've learned - after years on the job - every flavor of Windows there is, enough so that, you only get flogged by some anti-tech shrew with a bad case of intellectual insecurity about once every other day or so ... no problem, the meds handle most suicidal tendencies, so you've got things under control ...
And now, some guy wants to drop a fricken' Unix box on your plate?!?!?!?
Yeppers. I got a client of mine to switch to mac and he loves it. He had to keep his pc so his wife could do the finances on quickbooks (which doesn;t read mac files!?!?)
Then today he asked about MYOB because there's a pc version that reads mac files. He said his wife wanted to switch to mac so they were switching over from quickbooks to MYOB (QB lost a customer because of the mac/pc file crap) and because his wife wanted an iPod.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Precisely what I was talking about and why I believe, if it where possible at all, that a native x86 emulation would work to the Mac's advantage and not vice versa. It would be a stepping stone, nothing more with developers joining the party as the Mac gains users.
What is missing from a Mac:
1) A Mac that competes with a "Dell" PC in price and speed.
2) Apps that make Microsoft's apps look and feel outdated and expensive.
3) Convincing corp. heads that the Mac is a better $$$ solution.
4) Apps that work seamlessly with what they now use.
That is the challenge and has always been the challenge. The Mac needs to be able to replace a PC without creating any hiccup once so ever in the production lines of the establishment and work side by side with a PC.
No matter how much faster the Mac is then a PC, if it can't seamlessly work side by side with a PC, it will take a LOT of innovation to increase it's market share and it will never be of any significant value to the consumers. Apple needs to get inside the machine called Windows and gut it once and for all.
One thing's for sure, Apple needs to change their modus operandi and take charge. I do believe we are in for a ride. Microsoft can't do more, there's only so much development a word processor or spread sheet needs and I believe it has reached it's goal. More importantly, Microsoft's fat belly needs a lot of food to keep it going and it's running out of resources to keep it alive. Microsoft has no where to go but down.
<strong>I've used Windows every day since 3.1 was new. I can see why people who don't ask much of it can think it's OK when they first run across it, but I've lost count of the number of times I've wanted to pick my Dell up and throw it out the window - and I have a looooooong fuse. I think the only thing that's kept me from doing it is the possibility that I'd hit a coed on the sidewalk below.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Difficult to say it better. It is one of the best incentives to switch.
Yet there's no wild rush of switchers, which, I'm afraid, is insufficiently good marketing. It's easy to place ads in Mac-specific magazines, but their readers, like me, just don't need a switch campaign. I'm also afraid that when a PPC970 comes to Macs to outperform dual Pentiums, nobody in the Wintel world will hear about it.
Maybe, we should start another aggressive 'Apple's marketing sucks' thread.
2 - Apple's would have to get Yellow Box to conform to some sort of Windows API ... so all Uncle Bill's gotta do is make an *innocent* change, and oops ... "Apple didn't follow the guidelines again! Why would you want to code in THEIR buggy environment?". Bill will NEVER give away control of Win32 or let any other company set the standard. Abuse of monopoly powers, you bet, is anything going to be done about it? Not in this America ...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know, just because the Win32API is there doesn't mean Apple has to use all of it. They could use the parts that MS can't change without breaking every other app out there, and roll their own for the rest. It wouldn't be the easiest thing in the world to do, but it is possible.
I question the wisdom of either this or the emulator strategy, but it seems obvious to me that reviving YellowBox is by far the better of the two ideas. It gives both platforms a good, solid API and provides a "write once, run (almost) anywhere" solution that runs at native speeds. I'm just not sure Apple can risk pissing off MS this much right now, or if they can justify paying for it.
The whole wintel in a Mac thing is old news here and I am amazed it still gets brought up. Go dust off some of the old yellow box/red box/blue box (I forgot which color was x86 emulation) threads from here a few years ago. Apple branded wintel emulation would kill native OS X development. Plan and Simple. It would be ideologically unsound and an admission of defeat by Apple. It will not happen as long as the leadership of Apple has functional brain cells.
I'll break it down for the clueless:
1) Apple continues to improve and innovate OS X and its own suite of software (this is happening).
2) Apple improves its hardware price/performace ratio (this is happening slowly).
Number 1 is happening and when number 2 (i.e. the 970) speeds up then Apple will increase marketshare, 3rd party development will increase, and we will find something else to whine about like how Apple doesn't make car stereos or home theater stuff.
The whole wintel in a Mac thing is old news here and I am amazed it still gets brought up. Go dust off some of the old yellow box/red box/blue box (I forgot which color was x86 emulation) threads from here a few years ago. Apple branded wintel emulation would kill native OS X development. Plan and Simple. It would be ideologically unsound and an admission of defeat by Apple. It will not happen as long as the leadership of Apple has functional brain cells.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[quote]If it runs Windows at a very acceptable rate I believe that many developers would stop producing Mac apps.<hr></blockquote>
Except that developing specifically for Apple Hard/Software would give you an advantage in niches where Macs are used almost exclusively. Some opportunities would really pop up for Unix developers to write specifically for Mac OS X.x. Lazy programmers leave rich and fertile ground for small developers to become large developers (who in turn become lazy and inspire more small developers).
Does anyone have accurate numbers about Apple's marketshare and whether it is advancing or declining at the moment?
[quote]Battling Windows head on in corporations will never work until you can emulate their success. Inexpensive hardware and the ability to use Office.<hr></blockquote>
Why would Apple WANT the corporate user? I think a Mac is a brilliant counterpoint to the corporate PC. Think about it...at work you use the frustrating beige box with the 'Crayon' Windows eXtra Pain that crashes and interferes with your every attempt at productivity.
Then you come home to your oasis, and in the center of it is your Mac. It's completely compatible with everything you use at work, but it's a whole lot easier to use and it allows you to be creative, manage your photos, create home movies, manage your music, and post your important opinions in Mac forums. No spyware, no reporting to the home base, no DLL files, no registry, no hardware/software integration problems, no viruses, no worms.
Okay, so you can't play the latest version of 'Make Believe War is Merely a Contact Sport', but then again, that leaves you with more time for f***ing your girlfriend.
Difficult to say it better. It is one of the best incentives to switch.
Yet there's no wild rush of switchers, which, I'm afraid, is insufficiently good marketing. It's easy to place ads in Mac-specific magazines, but their readers, like me, just don't need a switch campaign. I'm also afraid that when a PPC970 comes to Macs to outperform dual Pentiums, nobody in the Wintel world will hear about it.
Maybe, we should start another aggressive 'Apple's marketing sucks' thread. </strong><hr></blockquote>
I often read news.admin.net-abuse.email since the whole spamming thing was pissing me off a couple of years ago and I wanted to do something about it in my own small way.
I see quite a few admins, who admittedly are strongly anti-M$ due to the problems their buggy, insecure software causes, switch from laptops running some flavour of *nix to PowerBooks running X because this is where you get the most elegant, commercial OS which is a *nix to boot in a kick-ass, high quality package.
What holds a lot of people back from switching is also the perception that Apples and X is a toy-like OS meant for doing silly things in a consumer environment. Many Windoze lusers who have never had the X experience prefer the geekiness of installing drivers, debugging fscked up systems and getting things to generally work just a little bit so they can show off to their friends how l33t they are at h4x0r1ng and how savvy they are.
That can all go away with X. It just works. Apple needs to market that.
For enterprise users the cost of buying the hardware is also a perceived headache. Then you have all the NT admins buying into all the M$ hype of integration, ease of setting up services and cheap hardware (which all comes back to haunt them when the el-cheapo server breaks down and the default open Exchange relay is raped by spammers for a week-end). The hard-core *nix admins perceive X and X Server as being unprofessional and not entirely secure - which is partially true. Apple needs to change some things in the way passwords are generally handled and entered, but I digress.
Apple would do good to market the power of the 970, when it comes along, along with the POWER of X (not just the elegance and ease-of-use). Blast the IBM Power4 heritage and the *nix core to gain the respect of the l33t along with the ease of use, iLife, integration etc.
Enterprises should be made aware of the powerful integration of X and X Server (and the hardware it comes with - mmmmh dual 2.5 GHz 970 XServe Raid), the ease and cost effectiveness of maintenance and initialization and the reliability and security of an X based deployment. That's what it is all about these days anyway. Why not sell it and get some big bunches of switchers?
The 970 is the missing key-stone in the bridge and it's coming coming to a Mac near you.
Apple, why don't you make toaster?! Curse you! Apple! Curse you! </strong><hr></blockquote>
Awww... Just saw the link you have to your Denmark trip... I live in Helsinore and go to school in Copenhagen.. You have been about 500 meters from where I live... And I just didnt know..
Regarding the thread, its nice to see a thread right on topic after 10 pages, no swearing at all, and Lemon Bon Bon happy for once.. Thats something!
Comments
<strong>As I said before, Apple needs to push Cocoa and push it hard. They need to bring back the development environment for x86. Develop once and run anywhere, only using Apple's development tools.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I totally agree.
If this were the case, and developers could write once, run anywhere, but the apps were native OS X and native x86 at the same time, things would be great! The whole idea about emulation is not a good one, but this stratagy is. It would definatly bring about more OS X apps (as long as developers adopted Cocoa for Windows).
Then Apple could one day decide to no longer support yellow box on windows, and there would be no worries. Since people wouldn't need to buy new apps to switch (assuming that the CDs shipped as fat binaries), they could buy Macs to run their existing apps. And they woudl want to. They would have invested in all these applications that would no longer work on future windows versions (or however Apple worked it), but would work on OS X.
It may seem that I'm arguing. I'm not, if we where face to face you would see I'm merely playing.
[quote]Originally posted by kupan787:
<strong>My whole point (and a few others on this board) is that if this whole emulation thing happened, why as a developer, would you make a natvie mac version, if the native x86 verison worked just fine?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because, if you didn't/won't make an OS X version of it, somebody else will and I will get his instead of yours. Besides, what app do you need that isn't already developed for the consumer that the Mac does not have? Well, besides games... The problem is that PC users think they actually need the software they now have because there isn't an equivalent on the Mac. They will never know how wrong they are until they actually use a Mac. Once they use a Mac they will never want to touch Windows. Hence they will only want to buy software for OS X and will only support the developers that do.
You disagree, and that's fine. But I do believe that if the Mac could Emulate Windows natively, it would be the deadliest virus windows ever saw.
[quote]
<strong>Try again. Why would suddenly more people be running macs just because we have native x86 emulation? Does the price of a mac suddenly drop?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Most of my Window user friends would switch to the Mac without any hesitation if they where guaranteed that their existing software would still run. This goes back to my earlier statement, the majority (consumers) don't actually need this said software, but they "think" they do and therefore IS what is STOPPING them from switching.
But, if all this isn't technically possible in the first place, then this scenario will never happen anyway. Unfortunately.
[ 03-04-2003: Message edited by: PooPooDoctor ]</p>
<strong>On the playstation analogue:
The PS2 does not emulate the PS1 in software. The PS2 actually has a dedicated psone-on-a-chip to do the work. The ps1 hardware was so cheap that the (partial)system on a chip did the trick, and provided a safer, virtually perfect compatibility solution.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Completely off topic (but the entire thread is)
Won't it be funny when the PS3 has a PS2-on-a-chip?
-- What's all this talk about emulation when we (may) be looking at some absolutely kick-ass new machines from Apple coming down the pike?
-- Apple is serious about expanding their user base; many of the things they are doing are all meant to do that (all of the homebrewed apps, puling out of certain expos and putting their resources to non-Mac users, and so on). It remains to be seen if it'll work, but I think you'll see a rather serious push in the coming years
-- I have to use a Windows machine at home and work now and again, and I'll tell ya, I'm always wanting to slash my wrists using it. I don't think this is bias -- though part of it may be lack of familiarity -- but it just is so much harder to do anything I want to do than on my OS X boxes. The potential for converts is there
-- Back to Apple and the speculation on their new machines... all I have to say is that you're gonna have to fight me for a place in line to buy 'em.
<strong>A coupla things here
-- What's all this talk about emulation when we (may) be looking at some absolutely kick-ass new machines from Apple coming down the pike?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Touché.
[quote]<strong>-- Apple is serious about expanding their user base; many of the things they are doing are all meant to do that (all of the homebrewed apps, puling out of certain expos and putting their resources to non-Mac users, and so on). It remains to be seen if it'll work, but I think you'll see a rather serious push in the coming years</strong><hr></blockquote>
Also, don't forget services and iPod (David's stone indeed!). If Apple can make more iPod like things that are desirable on their own terms but significantly enhanced when coupled with a Mac, then people get a taste of Apple quality and an incentive to switch.
[quote]<strong>-- I have to use a Windows machine at home and work now and again, and I'll tell ya, I'm always wanting to slash my wrists using it. I don't think this is bias -- though part of it may be lack of familiarity -- but it just is so much harder to do anything I want to do than on my OS X boxes. The potential for converts is there</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's not bias. I've used Windows every day since 3.1 was new. I can see why people who don't ask much of it can think it's OK when they first run across it, but I've lost count of the number of times I've wanted to pick my Dell up and throw it out the window - and I have a looooooong fuse. I think the only thing that's kept me from doing it is the possibility that I'd hit a coed on the sidewalk below.
[quote]<strong>-- Back to Apple and the speculation on their new machines... all I have to say is that you're gonna have to fight me for a place in line to buy 'em.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Nah. I'll let the pioneers take the arrows and buy into rev. 2.
<strong>A coupla things here
-- What's all this talk about emulation when we (may) be looking at some absolutely kick-ass new machines from Apple coming down the pike?
-- Apple is serious about expanding their user base; many of the things they are doing are all meant to do that (all of the homebrewed apps, puling out of certain expos and putting their resources to non-Mac users, and so on). It remains to be seen if it'll work, but I think you'll see a rather serious push in the coming years
-- I have to use a Windows machine at home and work now and again, and I'll tell ya, I'm always wanting to slash my wrists using it. I don't think this is bias -- though part of it may be lack of familiarity -- but it just is so much harder to do anything I want to do than on my OS X boxes. The potential for converts is there
-- Back to Apple and the speculation on their new machines... all I have to say is that you're gonna have to fight me for a place in line to buy 'em.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I, too, don't quite understand it and unlike most people apparently, hope they don't do any kind of emulation or dual-boot scenario. It has never worked in the past for any company. Look at BeOS as a clear example of why it won't. Wonderful little OS but no one wants to dual boot or run another OS inside an OS to get what they want. Look at Classic - while I still marvel that Apple accomplished that goal, working in an emulated OS just plain sucks!
They have given people the best OS on the planet and once true horsepower is behind it, it will be scary how productive people can become. And how quickly people will convert.
I still say, conversion of masses lies in the corporate world and a lean machine is needed, plus a business push the likes of which Apple has never done. They were the first ones in the niche markets they still dominate in and the first in education. If it weren't for them, they wouldn't be here today. Focus on what businesses want - lean, generic use machines, and a business push. I see the start of something wonderful here as far as that philosophy is concerned.
Licensing is a hands down winner for Apple already. Microsoft is alienating people left and right with their thievery!
Just enjoy the ride. It will prove bumpy for the Wintel crowd, I guarantee it!
As for using Windows - I cannot begin to explain the pain Windows users have using XP! It is a horrible, horrible incarnation and showing the two side by side is a true test of how much better OS X is...honestly, I bought a G4 Powermac for work, just to show users how easy and elegant it is to work in. Well, that and I needed a true *nix station for development and support.
[ 03-05-2003: Message edited by: Rhumgod ]</p>
<strong>
I totally agree.
If this were the case, and developers could write once, run anywhere, but the apps were native OS X and native x86 at the same time, things would be great! The whole idea about emulation is not a good one, but this stratagy is. It would definatly bring about more OS X apps (as long as developers adopted Cocoa for Windows).
Then Apple could one day decide to no longer support yellow box on windows, and there would be no worries. Since people wouldn't need to buy new apps to switch (assuming that the CDs shipped as fat binaries), they could buy Macs to run their existing apps. And they woudl want to. They would have invested in all these applications that would no longer work on future windows versions (or however Apple worked it), but would work on OS X.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Won't happen (well, very unlikely):
1 - Apple's already killed it once, no developer's going to bet 95% of his profits on a system that could easily get killed again. Especially when some still require Preparation H from the OpenDoc fiasco ...
2 - Apple's would have to get Yellow Box to conform to some sort of Windows API ... so all Uncle Bill's gotta do is make an *innocent* change, and oops ... "Apple didn't follow the guidelines again! Why would you want to code in THEIR buggy environment?". Bill will NEVER give away control of Win32 or let any other company set the standard. Abuse of monopoly powers, you bet, is anything going to be done about it? Not in this America ...
3 - Yellow Box on Windows is yet another moving target for Apple to code for, except now, they have to do a least-common-denominator between it and OSX.
Apple's just gotta make their OS the best, and make anybody who codes in it so bloody powerful compared to those who code in Win32, that Mom & Pop shops can whip up software in the Garage that would take a team ten times as large in Win32 ... Obj-C and CORE Foundation does this. [see "The Mythical Man Month" for the explanation as to why]
If Mom & Pop shops can pull of good code, imagine what Apple can do? Safari is probably just the tip of the Iceburg.
Give it a few years guys, pretty soon Apple will be known as THE platform on which all the BEST software runs ... they'll be setting the standard, as those who watch salivate and those behind eat digital dust.
Provide that 970 comes out as planned, minor point I know, but I just thought, well, somebody should mention it ...
<strong>
Also, don't forget services and iPod (David's stone indeed!). If Apple can make more iPod like things that are desirable on their own terms but significantly enhanced when coupled with a Mac, then people get a taste of Apple quality and an incentive to switch. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeppers. I got a client of mine to switch to mac and he loves it. He had to keep his pc so his wife could do the finances on quickbooks (which doesn;t read mac files!?!?)
Then today he asked about MYOB because there's a pc version that reads mac files. He said his wife wanted to switch to mac so they were switching over from quickbooks to MYOB (QB lost a customer because of the mac/pc file crap) and because his wife wanted an iPod.
So a small white mp3 player which many flamed for being plain and expensive, got another switcher. She's willing to learn a new OS and a completely new fianance program for the iPod. Now that's a switch story there.
<strong>Now that's a switch story there.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Should tell Apple about it.....
Could be another Ellen Feis in the making...
<strong>
I still say, conversion of masses lies in the corporate world and a lean machine is needed,
[ 03-05-2003: Message edited by: Rhumgod ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Problem ... you're a corporate IT whipping boy, your manager spent years in the trenches just like you and has the scars to show it ... between you, your manager, and your department of fellow punch bags, you've learned - after years on the job - every flavor of Windows there is, enough so that, you only get flogged by some anti-tech shrew with a bad case of intellectual insecurity about once every other day or so ... no problem, the meds handle most suicidal tendencies, so you've got things under control ...
And now, some guy wants to drop a fricken' Unix box on your plate?!?!?!?
DWAH!
:eek:
Welcome to the corporate head space.
<strong>
Yeppers. I got a client of mine to switch to mac and he loves it. He had to keep his pc so his wife could do the finances on quickbooks (which doesn;t read mac files!?!?)
Then today he asked about MYOB because there's a pc version that reads mac files. He said his wife wanted to switch to mac so they were switching over from quickbooks to MYOB (QB lost a customer because of the mac/pc file crap) and because his wife wanted an iPod.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Precisely what I was talking about and why I believe, if it where possible at all, that a native x86 emulation would work to the Mac's advantage and not vice versa. It would be a stepping stone, nothing more with developers joining the party as the Mac gains users.
What is missing from a Mac:
1) A Mac that competes with a "Dell" PC in price and speed.
2) Apps that make Microsoft's apps look and feel outdated and expensive.
3) Convincing corp. heads that the Mac is a better $$$ solution.
4) Apps that work seamlessly with what they now use.
That is the challenge and has always been the challenge. The Mac needs to be able to replace a PC without creating any hiccup once so ever in the production lines of the establishment and work side by side with a PC.
No matter how much faster the Mac is then a PC, if it can't seamlessly work side by side with a PC, it will take a LOT of innovation to increase it's market share and it will never be of any significant value to the consumers. Apple needs to get inside the machine called Windows and gut it once and for all.
One thing's for sure, Apple needs to change their modus operandi and take charge. I do believe we are in for a ride. Microsoft can't do more, there's only so much development a word processor or spread sheet needs and I believe it has reached it's goal. More importantly, Microsoft's fat belly needs a lot of food to keep it going and it's running out of resources to keep it alive. Microsoft has no where to go but down.
<strong>I've used Windows every day since 3.1 was new. I can see why people who don't ask much of it can think it's OK when they first run across it, but I've lost count of the number of times I've wanted to pick my Dell up and throw it out the window - and I have a looooooong fuse. I think the only thing that's kept me from doing it is the possibility that I'd hit a coed on the sidewalk below.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Difficult to say it better. It is one of the best incentives to switch.
Yet there's no wild rush of switchers, which, I'm afraid, is insufficiently good marketing. It's easy to place ads in Mac-specific magazines, but their readers, like me, just don't need a switch campaign. I'm also afraid that when a PPC970 comes to Macs to outperform dual Pentiums, nobody in the Wintel world will hear about it.
Maybe, we should start another aggressive 'Apple's marketing sucks' thread.
<strong>
Won't happen (well, very unlikely):
2 - Apple's would have to get Yellow Box to conform to some sort of Windows API ... so all Uncle Bill's gotta do is make an *innocent* change, and oops ... "Apple didn't follow the guidelines again! Why would you want to code in THEIR buggy environment?". Bill will NEVER give away control of Win32 or let any other company set the standard. Abuse of monopoly powers, you bet, is anything going to be done about it? Not in this America ...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know, just because the Win32API is there doesn't mean Apple has to use all of it. They could use the parts that MS can't change without breaking every other app out there, and roll their own for the rest. It wouldn't be the easiest thing in the world to do, but it is possible.
I question the wisdom of either this or the emulator strategy, but it seems obvious to me that reviving YellowBox is by far the better of the two ideas. It gives both platforms a good, solid API and provides a "write once, run (almost) anywhere" solution that runs at native speeds. I'm just not sure Apple can risk pissing off MS this much right now, or if they can justify paying for it.
[ 03-05-2003: Message edited by: Whisper ]</p>
The whole wintel in a Mac thing is old news here and I am amazed it still gets brought up. Go dust off some of the old yellow box/red box/blue box (I forgot which color was x86 emulation) threads from here a few years ago. Apple branded wintel emulation would kill native OS X development. Plan and Simple. It would be ideologically unsound and an admission of defeat by Apple. It will not happen as long as the leadership of Apple has functional brain cells.
I'll break it down for the clueless:
1) Apple continues to improve and innovate OS X and its own suite of software (this is happening).
2) Apple improves its hardware price/performace ratio (this is happening slowly).
Number 1 is happening and when number 2 (i.e. the 970) speeds up then Apple will increase marketshare, 3rd party development will increase, and we will find something else to whine about like how Apple doesn't make car stereos or home theater stuff.
<strong>....we will find something else to whine about like how Apple doesn't make car stereos or home theater stuff.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple, why don't you make toaster?! Curse you! Apple! Curse you!
<strong>Hmmmmmm.
The whole wintel in a Mac thing is old news here and I am amazed it still gets brought up. Go dust off some of the old yellow box/red box/blue box (I forgot which color was x86 emulation) threads from here a few years ago. Apple branded wintel emulation would kill native OS X development. Plan and Simple. It would be ideologically unsound and an admission of defeat by Apple. It will not happen as long as the leadership of Apple has functional brain cells.</strong><hr></blockquote>
YellowBox = Cocoa on Windows
RedBox = x86/Win32 emulation in OS X
BlueBox = Classic Mode
Except that developing specifically for Apple Hard/Software would give you an advantage in niches where Macs are used almost exclusively. Some opportunities would really pop up for Unix developers to write specifically for Mac OS X.x. Lazy programmers leave rich and fertile ground for small developers to become large developers (who in turn become lazy and inspire more small developers).
Does anyone have accurate numbers about Apple's marketshare and whether it is advancing or declining at the moment?
Why would Apple WANT the corporate user? I think a Mac is a brilliant counterpoint to the corporate PC. Think about it...at work you use the frustrating beige box with the 'Crayon' Windows eXtra Pain that crashes and interferes with your every attempt at productivity.
Then you come home to your oasis, and in the center of it is your Mac. It's completely compatible with everything you use at work, but it's a whole lot easier to use and it allows you to be creative, manage your photos, create home movies, manage your music, and post your important opinions in Mac forums. No spyware, no reporting to the home base, no DLL files, no registry, no hardware/software integration problems, no viruses, no worms.
Okay, so you can't play the latest version of 'Make Believe War is Merely a Contact Sport', but then again, that leaves you with more time for f***ing your girlfriend.
You do have a girlfriend, right?
<strong>
Difficult to say it better. It is one of the best incentives to switch.
Yet there's no wild rush of switchers, which, I'm afraid, is insufficiently good marketing. It's easy to place ads in Mac-specific magazines, but their readers, like me, just don't need a switch campaign. I'm also afraid that when a PPC970 comes to Macs to outperform dual Pentiums, nobody in the Wintel world will hear about it.
Maybe, we should start another aggressive 'Apple's marketing sucks' thread.
I often read news.admin.net-abuse.email since the whole spamming thing was pissing me off a couple of years ago and I wanted to do something about it in my own small way.
I see quite a few admins, who admittedly are strongly anti-M$ due to the problems their buggy, insecure software causes, switch from laptops running some flavour of *nix to PowerBooks running X because this is where you get the most elegant, commercial OS which is a *nix to boot in a kick-ass, high quality package.
What holds a lot of people back from switching is also the perception that Apples and X is a toy-like OS meant for doing silly things in a consumer environment. Many Windoze lusers who have never had the X experience prefer the geekiness of installing drivers, debugging fscked up systems and getting things to generally work just a little bit so they can show off to their friends how l33t they are at h4x0r1ng and how savvy they are.
That can all go away with X. It just works. Apple needs to market that.
For enterprise users the cost of buying the hardware is also a perceived headache. Then you have all the NT admins buying into all the M$ hype of integration, ease of setting up services and cheap hardware (which all comes back to haunt them when the el-cheapo server breaks down and the default open Exchange relay is raped by spammers for a week-end). The hard-core *nix admins perceive X and X Server as being unprofessional and not entirely secure - which is partially true. Apple needs to change some things in the way passwords are generally handled and entered, but I digress.
Apple would do good to market the power of the 970, when it comes along, along with the POWER of X (not just the elegance and ease-of-use). Blast the IBM Power4 heritage and the *nix core to gain the respect of the l33t along with the ease of use, iLife, integration etc.
Enterprises should be made aware of the powerful integration of X and X Server (and the hardware it comes with - mmmmh dual 2.5 GHz 970 XServe Raid), the ease and cost effectiveness of maintenance and initialization and the reliability and security of an X based deployment. That's what it is all about these days anyway. Why not sell it and get some big bunches of switchers?
The 970 is the missing key-stone in the bridge and it's coming coming to a Mac near you.
Kroehl
<strong>
Apple, why don't you make toaster?! Curse you! Apple! Curse you!
Awww... Just saw the link you have to your Denmark trip... I live in Helsinore and go to school in Copenhagen.. You have been about 500 meters from where I live... And I just didnt know..
Regarding the thread, its nice to see a thread right on topic after 10 pages, no swearing at all, and Lemon Bon Bon happy for once.. Thats something!
[Edit:] Make that 11 pages!
[ 03-05-2003: Message edited by: T'hain Esh Kelch ]</p>