I hate to agree with him, but my small company uses a self-created, half-baked solution based on Excel and Word.
That's not to say you couldn't half bake a solution with something else like Filemaker and there's plenty of alternatives, or fully bake a solution in MYOB, MoneyWorks or the open source alternatives.
OT, but OO.o is meant to compete with/directly replace the business app, MS Office. Thus it looks and behaves like Office.
Linux UI's as a whole are very customizable, perhaps to a flaw, but look at art.gnome.org for a variety of themes which best Windows XP's fugliness.
A lot of linux desktops have looked like windos, and the KDE moreso, I think, anyway. But the linux world is getting the idea, especially from Apple's Mac OS, that there can be beauty, and so like you say, the UI is customisable, and even the K folk are changing. The Cairo and Arthur efforts will give them better graphic engines, and the Enlightenment(the former Gnome)r17 desktop is proceeding along well. They are not trying to look like windos, thankfully.
I think it's just because Apple demand more of a partner than your average Dell's, HP's and Microsofts. That's a good thing most of the time.
I suppose that's one way to look at it.
Apple would certainly do themselves a favor by aligning with more quality business partners that support their long term goals. I'm pretty sure the Intel partnership is a step in the right direction.
They cannot remain a one-man-band. Remember where Apple was before Jobs came back, and where it could end up again if something happens to Jobs (god forbid). Don't forget, he had a rare form of cancer recently. Cancer has a way of coming back unexpectedly. They need a back-up person in the wings with Jobs' fire in the belly. Who would that be?
Apple would sink without Steve. THAT is not good for future business.
But Apple would certainly do themselves a favor by aligning with other quality business partners that support their long term goals. I'm pretty sure the Intel partnership is a step in the right direction.
They cannot remain a one-man-band forever. Remember where the company was before Jobs came back, and where it could go again if something happened to Jobs (god forbid). Don't forget, he had a rare form of cancer. Cancer has a way of coming back unexpectedly.
Apple would sink without Steve. THAT is not good for future business.
Just my 2 quid.
The step towards Intel is a HUGE step. Think about it Apple is having Intel design their PM MBs. Now that is something. Try and do that with IBM or MOTO and you will see Apple back to the $6,000 PM, that could lay claim to being maybe 10% faster than a $3,000 Dell. Intel is a great partner, and hopefully they will work great with Apple.
Also something else came up that we should take notice of, Steve supposedly wanted to go to Intel 4 or 5 years ago but Apple did not, which means that Steve is not solely running the show. The executive team appears to be running the show, which is good for investors. I like to see that Apple is being ran like a real company, not like "whatever Steve says that is what we do". I might also add that a telling rumor is that PIXAR could be up for sale by Jobs. If that is the case it is clear that he expects big things at Apple, or that he is tired of wearing two hats. If it is the former, which I'm more inclined to believe since Apple is making big moves says watch out during '06 and '07. Steve may feel that he is in a position to do what others never could do and wants to clear his schedule so he can better focus. I hope it is that.
A lot of linux desktops have looked like windos, and the KDE moreso, I think, anyway. But the linux world is getting the idea, especially from Apple's Mac OS, that there can be beauty, and so like you say, the UI is customisable, and even the K folk are changing. The Cairo and Arthur efforts will give them better graphic engines, and the Enlightenment(the former Gnome)r17 desktop is proceeding along well. They are not trying to look like windos, thankfully.
I remember using the Enlightenment 'skin' on Irix OS back in the v5.x - v6.x days...
And commenting to our IT guy about how they needed to make things more transparent, add drop shadows, etc. ...
At the time he said, "I could do it. but it would take to much CPU cycles..."
So I would antagonize and ask for a way to pipe the input from the Indy camera to the desktop, so I could always see what was happening behind me...
He was a 'mad-skillz' OpenGL programmer...
Now, he cannot get enough of OS X & Quartz...!
Still won't do the live-action desktop for me though...
I remember using the Enlightenment 'skin' on Irix OS back in the v5.x - v6.x days...
And commenting to our IT guy about how they needed to make things more transparent, add drop shadows, etc. ...
At the time he said, "I could do it. but it would take to much CPU cycles..."
So I would antagonize and ask for a way to pipe the input from the Indy camera to the desktop, so I could always see what was happening behind me...
He was a 'mad-skillz' OpenGL programmer...
Now, he cannot get enough of OS X & Quartz...!
Still won't do the live-action desktop for me though...
I would love to have an animated desktop picture while I work. Something as subtle as the breeze moving thru the trees or some clouds lazily moving across the sky...very slowly. Nothing too distracting. That would be nice.
That's not to say you couldn't half bake a solution with something else like Filemaker and there's plenty of alternatives, or fully bake a solution in MYOB, MoneyWorks or the open source alternatives.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see Apple come up with something that could work for this purpose. And I've also been suggesting a Filemaker derivitive.
I just don't see a simple way around the ecosystem Office has. The API's have to be reverse engineered. You can see how difficult and time consuming that has been for the WINE project on x86. Otherwise, even if Apple took OpenOffice and reworked it (with all of the problems they would have with the GPL), they still wouldn't have the API's running on OS X. So the programs hooked into Office wouldn't work.
The problem here is that if MS decides to discontinue development of Office for the Mac, whatever Apple could come up with would then be competing with Office for Windows. Not with Office for the Mac. And, that's the problem.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see Apple come up with something that could work for this purpose. And I've also been suggesting a Filemaker derivitive.
I just don't see a simple way around the ecosystem Office has. The API's have to be reverse engineered. You can see how difficult and time consuming that has been for the WINE project on x86. Otherwise, even if Apple took OpenOffice and reworked it (with all of the problems they would have with the GPL), they still wouldn't have the API's running on OS X. So the programs hooked into Office wouldn't work.
The problem here is that if MS decides to discontinue development of Office for the Mac, whatever Apple could come up with would then be competing with Office for Windows. Not with Office for the Mac. And, that's the problem.
The APIs are the key, medium and large businesses use these to build custome solutions for their business needs, without them it is a waste of time. I think Vinney was on this path. As far as reverse engineering, forget that. As groups get close MS will alter and tweek the APIs so that you can never catch up. Better is that MS has embrased the XML file format. Any standard they embrace will make it wasy for others to work around. To be honest those custome solutions usually involve making Excel and Word work together, all though I'm sure that could be other combinations. The bottom line for Apple is that they do make software that integrates very well. If they made an Office suite that could integrate very well that would be a help. It is odd that all of this integration reminds me of one app - AppleWorks. If Apple could get a great spreadsheet, scientific graphing calc, writing, drawing, presentation, application that is highly integrated, it would be of value especially if it is highly scriptable. Oh I almost forgot, the one thing that AppleWorks had that others did not is a light database, integrated in as well, would not want to forget that. Apple has all of the tools it is just putting them together, assuming they actually do have "Cells".
I mucked up and made this addition a reply, sorry.
The APIs are the key, medium and large businesses use these to build custome solutions for their business needs, without them it is a waste of time. I think Vinney was on this path. As far as reverse engineering, forget that. As groups get close MS will alter and tweek the APIs so that you can never catch up. Better is that MS has embrased the XML file format. Any standard they embrace will make it wasy for others to work around. To be honest those custome solutions usually involve making Excel and Word work together, all though I'm sure that could be other combinations. The bottom line for Apple is that they do make software that integrates very well. If they made an Office suite that could integrate very well that would be a help. It is odd that all of this integration reminds me of one app - AppleWorks. If Apple could get a great spreadsheet, scientific graphing calc, writing, drawing, presentation, application that is highly integrated, it would be of value especially if it is highly scriptable. Oh I almost forgot, the one thing that AppleWorks had that others did not is a light database, integrated in as well, would not want to forget that. Apple has all of the tools it is just putting them together, assuming they actually do have "Cells".
That's pretty cool Sunilraman. A quad core PowerBook.
Apple will need to have such features and performance to compete at its current price points, profit margins, and reputation.
thanks mate. yeah. it struck me as i was on my flight of CoreDuo fancy... i honestly really wish they will unveil one in a week's time, for all you professionals that need a powerful and valuable mobile mac. something like a quad core, slick form factor, and strong battery life powerBook would drive sales of apple's premiere laptop line all through the year. the pent-up demand for something like that would be massive, and price premiums would be quite justified...
The step towards Intel is a HUGE step. Think about it Apple is having Intel design their PM MBs. Now that is something. Try and do that with IBM or MOTO and you will see Apple back to the $6,000 PM, that could lay claim to being maybe 10% faster than a $3,000 Dell. Intel is a great partner, and hopefully they will work great with Apple.
Except last time Moto and IBM produced motherboards back in the CHRP days, they were cheaper and faster than Apples.
thanks mate. yeah. it struck me as i was on my flight of CoreDuo fancy... i honestly really wish they will unveil one in a week's time, for all you professionals that need a powerful and valuable mobile mac. something like a quad core, slick form factor, and strong battery life powerBook would drive sales of apple's premiere laptop line all through the year. the pent-up demand for something like that would be massive, and price premiums would be quite justified...
While I would sell a kidney for a quad core intel PB, I doubt it'll come with Yonah, unless Apple wanted to make considerably larger PBs. If I recall, the top end Yonahs are what, 25-30W a chip? 50-60W of heat output seems a bit high for an ~ 0.75-1.1 inch thick laptop to me.
Comments
Originally posted by fahlman
I hate to agree with him, but my small company uses a self-created, half-baked solution based on Excel and Word.
That's not to say you couldn't half bake a solution with something else like Filemaker and there's plenty of alternatives, or fully bake a solution in MYOB, MoneyWorks or the open source alternatives.
Originally posted by cubist
Apple Core Duo and Apple Core Solo?
Whew, now we're really coming close to the Apple Corps Quartet...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4569912.stm
He's now Jonathan Ive CBE
That's one below 'Sir Jonathan Ive'. Nice to see someone other than the usual TV celebs and sportsmen getting awards this year from the Queen.
Originally posted by melgross
I seem to disagree with you often, but in this case we were in agreement.
Originally posted by 1337_5L4Xx0R
OT, but OO.o is meant to compete with/directly replace the business app, MS Office. Thus it looks and behaves like Office.
Linux UI's as a whole are very customizable, perhaps to a flaw, but look at art.gnome.org for a variety of themes which best Windows XP's fugliness.
A lot of linux desktops have looked like windos, and the KDE moreso, I think, anyway. But the linux world is getting the idea, especially from Apple's Mac OS, that there can be beauty, and so like you say, the UI is customisable, and even the K folk are changing. The Cairo and Arthur efforts will give them better graphic engines, and the Enlightenment(the former Gnome)r17 desktop is proceeding along well. They are not trying to look like windos, thankfully.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
I think it's just because Apple demand more of a partner than your average Dell's, HP's and Microsofts. That's a good thing most of the time.
I suppose that's one way to look at it.
Apple would certainly do themselves a favor by aligning with more quality business partners that support their long term goals. I'm pretty sure the Intel partnership is a step in the right direction.
They cannot remain a one-man-band. Remember where Apple was before Jobs came back, and where it could end up again if something happens to Jobs (god forbid). Don't forget, he had a rare form of cancer recently. Cancer has a way of coming back unexpectedly. They need a back-up person in the wings with Jobs' fire in the belly. Who would that be?
Apple would sink without Steve. THAT is not good for future business.
Just my 2 quid.
Originally posted by SpamSandwich
I suppose that's one way to look at it.
But Apple would certainly do themselves a favor by aligning with other quality business partners that support their long term goals. I'm pretty sure the Intel partnership is a step in the right direction.
They cannot remain a one-man-band forever. Remember where the company was before Jobs came back, and where it could go again if something happened to Jobs (god forbid). Don't forget, he had a rare form of cancer. Cancer has a way of coming back unexpectedly.
Apple would sink without Steve. THAT is not good for future business.
Just my 2 quid.
The step towards Intel is a HUGE step. Think about it Apple is having Intel design their PM MBs. Now that is something. Try and do that with IBM or MOTO and you will see Apple back to the $6,000 PM, that could lay claim to being maybe 10% faster than a $3,000 Dell. Intel is a great partner, and hopefully they will work great with Apple.
Also something else came up that we should take notice of, Steve supposedly wanted to go to Intel 4 or 5 years ago but Apple did not, which means that Steve is not solely running the show. The executive team appears to be running the show, which is good for investors. I like to see that Apple is being ran like a real company, not like "whatever Steve says that is what we do". I might also add that a telling rumor is that PIXAR could be up for sale by Jobs. If that is the case it is clear that he expects big things at Apple, or that he is tired of wearing two hats. If it is the former, which I'm more inclined to believe since Apple is making big moves says watch out during '06 and '07. Steve may feel that he is in a position to do what others never could do and wants to clear his schedule so he can better focus. I hope it is that.
Apple will need to have such features and performance to compete at its current price points, profit margins, and reputation.
Originally posted by NordicMan
A lot of linux desktops have looked like windos, and the KDE moreso, I think, anyway. But the linux world is getting the idea, especially from Apple's Mac OS, that there can be beauty, and so like you say, the UI is customisable, and even the K folk are changing. The Cairo and Arthur efforts will give them better graphic engines, and the Enlightenment(the former Gnome)r17 desktop is proceeding along well. They are not trying to look like windos, thankfully.
I remember using the Enlightenment 'skin' on Irix OS back in the v5.x - v6.x days...
And commenting to our IT guy about how they needed to make things more transparent, add drop shadows, etc. ...
At the time he said, "I could do it. but it would take to much CPU cycles..."
So I would antagonize and ask for a way to pipe the input from the Indy camera to the desktop, so I could always see what was happening behind me...
He was a 'mad-skillz' OpenGL programmer...
Now, he cannot get enough of OS X & Quartz...!
Still won't do the live-action desktop for me though...
Originally posted by MacRonin
I remember using the Enlightenment 'skin' on Irix OS back in the v5.x - v6.x days...
And commenting to our IT guy about how they needed to make things more transparent, add drop shadows, etc. ...
At the time he said, "I could do it. but it would take to much CPU cycles..."
So I would antagonize and ask for a way to pipe the input from the Indy camera to the desktop, so I could always see what was happening behind me...
He was a 'mad-skillz' OpenGL programmer...
Now, he cannot get enough of OS X & Quartz...!
Still won't do the live-action desktop for me though...
I would love to have an animated desktop picture while I work. Something as subtle as the breeze moving thru the trees or some clouds lazily moving across the sky...very slowly. Nothing too distracting. That would be nice.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
That's not to say you couldn't half bake a solution with something else like Filemaker and there's plenty of alternatives, or fully bake a solution in MYOB, MoneyWorks or the open source alternatives.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see Apple come up with something that could work for this purpose. And I've also been suggesting a Filemaker derivitive.
I just don't see a simple way around the ecosystem Office has. The API's have to be reverse engineered. You can see how difficult and time consuming that has been for the WINE project on x86. Otherwise, even if Apple took OpenOffice and reworked it (with all of the problems they would have with the GPL), they still wouldn't have the API's running on OS X. So the programs hooked into Office wouldn't work.
The problem here is that if MS decides to discontinue development of Office for the Mac, whatever Apple could come up with would then be competing with Office for Windows. Not with Office for the Mac. And, that's the problem.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
So compete with it, not become some lame copy of it. Apple didn't get where it is now by copying Windows.
Originally posted by melgross
Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see Apple come up with something that could work for this purpose. And I've also been suggesting a Filemaker derivitive.
I just don't see a simple way around the ecosystem Office has. The API's have to be reverse engineered. You can see how difficult and time consuming that has been for the WINE project on x86. Otherwise, even if Apple took OpenOffice and reworked it (with all of the problems they would have with the GPL), they still wouldn't have the API's running on OS X. So the programs hooked into Office wouldn't work.
The problem here is that if MS decides to discontinue development of Office for the Mac, whatever Apple could come up with would then be competing with Office for Windows. Not with Office for the Mac. And, that's the problem.
The APIs are the key, medium and large businesses use these to build custome solutions for their business needs, without them it is a waste of time. I think Vinney was on this path. As far as reverse engineering, forget that. As groups get close MS will alter and tweek the APIs so that you can never catch up. Better is that MS has embrased the XML file format. Any standard they embrace will make it wasy for others to work around. To be honest those custome solutions usually involve making Excel and Word work together, all though I'm sure that could be other combinations. The bottom line for Apple is that they do make software that integrates very well. If they made an Office suite that could integrate very well that would be a help. It is odd that all of this integration reminds me of one app - AppleWorks. If Apple could get a great spreadsheet, scientific graphing calc, writing, drawing, presentation, application that is highly integrated, it would be of value especially if it is highly scriptable. Oh I almost forgot, the one thing that AppleWorks had that others did not is a light database, integrated in as well, would not want to forget that. Apple has all of the tools it is just putting them together, assuming they actually do have "Cells".
I mucked up and made this addition a reply, sorry.
Originally posted by Brendon
The APIs are the key, medium and large businesses use these to build custome solutions for their business needs, without them it is a waste of time. I think Vinney was on this path. As far as reverse engineering, forget that. As groups get close MS will alter and tweek the APIs so that you can never catch up. Better is that MS has embrased the XML file format. Any standard they embrace will make it wasy for others to work around. To be honest those custome solutions usually involve making Excel and Word work together, all though I'm sure that could be other combinations. The bottom line for Apple is that they do make software that integrates very well. If they made an Office suite that could integrate very well that would be a help. It is odd that all of this integration reminds me of one app - AppleWorks. If Apple could get a great spreadsheet, scientific graphing calc, writing, drawing, presentation, application that is highly integrated, it would be of value especially if it is highly scriptable. Oh I almost forgot, the one thing that AppleWorks had that others did not is a light database, integrated in as well, would not want to forget that. Apple has all of the tools it is just putting them together, assuming they actually do have "Cells".
Originally posted by SpamSandwich
I agree. Apple has a way of poisoning business relationships. I can't figure out if that's all Steve's fault, or what.
Yes, and that's another good reason to not go crazy outsourcing things.
That's pretty cool Sunilraman. A quad core PowerBook.
Apple will need to have such features and performance to compete at its current price points, profit margins, and reputation.
thanks mate. yeah. it struck me as i was on my flight of CoreDuo fancy...
Originally posted by Brendon
The step towards Intel is a HUGE step. Think about it Apple is having Intel design their PM MBs. Now that is something. Try and do that with IBM or MOTO and you will see Apple back to the $6,000 PM, that could lay claim to being maybe 10% faster than a $3,000 Dell. Intel is a great partner, and hopefully they will work great with Apple.
Except last time Moto and IBM produced motherboards back in the CHRP days, they were cheaper and faster than Apples.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Except last time Moto and IBM produced motherboards back in the CHRP days, they were cheaper and faster than Apples.
Different times, way different. Currently the price difference for similar kit is nil, going from the Barefeets performance comparison.
Originally posted by sunilraman
i honestly really wish they will unveil one in a week's time...
This is just a fantasy??? Correct? Did I miss something besides the picture you posted? I have been out of the AI loop for a few months...
Originally posted by sunilraman
thanks mate. yeah. it struck me as i was on my flight of CoreDuo fancy...
While I would sell a kidney for a quad core intel PB, I doubt it'll come with Yonah, unless Apple wanted to make considerably larger PBs. If I recall, the top end Yonahs are what, 25-30W a chip? 50-60W of heat output seems a bit high for an ~ 0.75-1.1 inch thick laptop to me.