Oh, but it does make sense, because of the current situation. If Apple were to partner with another major manufacturer like Dell or HP, it would step on tiny little companies like Psystar, which can't compete with that. And people really overstate how OSX is tied to Apple computers- it runs really, really well on some very common hardware. Hardly any work would be involved there, and the "experience" doesn't suffer a bit.
Now, I don't think that is likely, but I do think it is a possibility. You can't simply dismiss anything these days.
Developing an OS is very expensive. MS pays for it by selling a huge number of copies, and even then look at how high the prices are for retail copies. Since Apples sells far, far fewer copies (both pre-installed and retail) than MS, they rely on the profits of the hardware sales to subsidize the R&D for the OS. MS can license to PC makers at a discount because they have volume on their side.
In order to maintain the revenue stream to support OS X R&D, Apple would need charge OEMs a high enough price to make up for any cannabolization of Mac hardware sales. That alone would make it an unattractive option for most PC makers. Your budget Mac clone is all of a sudden much more expensive than the exact same hardware with Windows (because the OEM price for Vista is going to be a lot lower than the OEM price for OS X). So in effect, you've solved nothing...Macs are still viewed as more expensive than Windows...except now you have concrete proof of it!
It's a MacTablet, obviously. A merging of a full Mac and the iPhone in terms of functionality and UI.
It's the last remaining "poorly defined" market to be conquered before Steve-o retires.
it's got to be a mac tablet. I love the "idea" of this but i have several concerns.
Do we really need a computer that small? many times we see this kind of product with so many apps. it's trying to be a full computer in a hand-held. do we really need everything a computer has in such a small size. Buy a friggin' MBA then. All it really needs is everything the iphone has less the phone. and maybe more advanced inputing like a sylus or something to draw with. other than that just a large format (say 12"-15") screen sized and all the functionality of the iphone would be perfect. (oh, and a files storage system like "finder") Let's call is the iPAD (my "Trek" side shows through).
Transition will be Mac-related. Apple cannot lock out competitors in the entire PC market, but they could in certain segments. All-in-one, ultra portables, tablets, etc.
I expect all laptops and possibly iMacs to go with solid-state drives. It is the future. Magnetic hard drives and optical disc drives are the only computer components that still have moving parts. They need to go. Magnetic hard drives will be first.
Touch will be standard on many new products. Apple invested a lot in this technology. They will use it for more than just phones and music players.
Will the long-rumored tablet arrive? Perhaps, but it probably won't be what everybody is imagining.
PS Having recently watched all 16 episodes of "Foyle's War'" on DVD (he's a Detective Chief Superintendent BTW) I agree it is a superb series, and it takes a bit to excite my TV jaded palate these days. My only question is 'how the hell did ITV produce something that good?'
Different kind of show, but what about Keen Eddie?
It is going to be a Macbook running on the iPhone/Touch OS and wirelessly via Apple's MobileMe cloud syncing technology. Most important, it would be protected by more than 200+ patents registered and buried in the iPhone and the iPod Touch.
As we know, the iPhone/Touch OS is an extension of the Mac OS X Leopard which is now undergoing transition under the code name of Snow Leopard.
However, there is one other type of Leopard that is still roaming our planet and hasn't yet been mentioned, and that is the Clouded Leopard. Yes there is such an animal: http://www.cap.nsw.edu.au/bb_site_in...e/leopards.htm
Thus, the Macbook Cloud.
Such a product addresses the 'transition' issue and "The new, unnamed product will continue to have "technologies and features that others can't match," statement. In addition, a strategically positioned pricing model could be developed to satisfy the proclaimed decrease in margins.
This is a wild guess: How about a transition of the iPod line to in-dash automotive systems? Last year, there was some buzz on Apple working with Volkswagen, even making an appearance on the VW Up! Concept car.
Microsoft has been working to get in this market for years, with the Auto PC project, evolved into Sync and sold on Fords. Many other car stereos are including hard-drive MP3 capability and nav.
An aftermarket iPod-branded car stereo/nav system could quickly dominate over other brands. But Apple doesn't really do aftermarket.
Also, the concept as shown was an integrated multi-function system, including climate controls and warning lights, on the large touch-screen display. This level of function would need to be an an OEM design. Would this be enough to swing enough car-buyers to a different brand to "shut out" the rivals? Unless they were working with many different automakers... And would this dramatically hurt their bottom line? Probably not.
Then again, September is time to roll out the new model year cars. My wife just placed an order for a new VW Tiguan, to arrive in Oct-Nov. If this is true, I think there might be time to "adjust" the order...
Did you read my previous posts? It's just not going to happen. Get over it.
I apologise, I did not realise that I wasn't permitted to disagree with people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paprochy
Not only does it not make any sense in the current situation. But Apple has had really bad experiences with licensing osx in the 90s, I don't think they want to go back there.
And I see your point. Blu-ray is certainly more modern and Apple supported the format by being a member of its consortium, but that was mainly in opposition of Microsoft's backing of HD-DVD, which featured more DRM developed by MS that...wait for it...tied the user to Windows.
MS did not develop HD DVD's DRM, but they did develop an implementation of HDi. Windows is not required, Toshiba's earlier machines ran on Linux, I think maybe they had their own HDi implementation.
Quote:
Aren't there already Blu-ray drives sold by third parties that come with BD writing software for Macs?
IIRC, they can't be played on a Mac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by poke
The only consumer electronics device you sell below cost is a console.
You heard it here first: Apple console.
They talked about reducing their margin, not wiping them out. MS spent maybe six years and billions of dollars before they started making anything that looks like a net profit on the venture.
I want a new mac mini that does everything you can think of, from run a display ,cable tv in , rca plug in and out, 500 gig , too big and too ugly is ok cause i'm gonna hide it anyway. Noisy is not ok . $200 sounds unbeatable My remote on my iphone will run it just fine .
Developing an OS is very expensive. MS pays for it by selling a huge number of copies, and even then look at how high the prices are for retail copies. Since Apples sells far, far fewer copies (both pre-installed and retail) than MS, they rely on the profits of the hardware sales to subsidize the R&D for the OS. MS can license to PC makers at a discount because they have volume on their side.
In order to maintain the revenue stream to support OS X R&D, Apple would need charge OEMs a high enough price to make up for any cannabolization of Mac hardware sales. That alone would make it an unattractive option for most PC makers. Your budget Mac clone is all of a sudden much more expensive than the exact same hardware with Windows (because the OEM price for Vista is going to be a lot lower than the OEM price for OS X). So in effect, you've solved nothing...Macs are still viewed as more expensive than Windows...except now you have concrete proof of it!
Speaking of overstatement, the high price of retail copies of Windows is irrelevant, because almost no one buys it that way. Microsoft charges major manufacturers (that buy in bulk, as you say) about $40 a license, depending on version. Apple could easily match that price.
I don't want to go off-topic talking about Windows OEM licensing, so my point is that if Apple were to license OSX, their sale of the license -whether it's $20 or $100 per machine- is mostly profit and is tantamount to the profit Apple makes off a hardware sale. Especially if done in bulk.
Again, I don't think this is likely. I'd give it about a 5% chance of happening, but dismissing it because of what happened 15 years ago is silly.
I'm thinking a display update. An HDTV display with Apple TV integrated. There is so much content on the web, everyone is coming up with a box to stream it. Why not just take advantage of the digital switch (lots of new TV to be bought), and offer a display, that doubles as a TV, with the box technology built in?
Okay, so my strategy might not be what Apple is thinking, but this is the only area I'm see a hard push in competition. Especially with Xbox streaming 360. I think Apple has to make a move.
A transition from computer display to HDTV/computer display.
Developing an OS is very expensive. MS pays for it by selling a huge number of copies, and even then look at how high the prices are for retail copies. Since Apples sells far, far fewer copies (both pre-installed and retail) than MS, they rely on the profits of the hardware sales to subsidize the R&D for the OS. MS can license to PC makers at a discount because they have volume on their side.
Apple have already made OS X - It's paid for already. The only question is, how should they now make money from it?
If Apple licensed OS X to Sony - and charged Sony $100 per OEM copy - that's $100 additional revenue. And another $100 if the customer buys iLife.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin
In order to maintain the revenue stream to support OS X R&D, Apple would need charge OEMs a high enough price to make up for any cannabolization of Mac hardware sales.
Please explain cannibalization. Why should Apple automatically lose hardware sales if this happened? Are you saying that Mac hardware isn't good enough? Are you saying people wouldn't buy Mac hardware if they could buy a Vaio? I happen to believe that Mac hardware can stand on its own feet.
Now turn your question around. How much money does Apple lose by only being able to sell iWork, MobileMe and all its SOFTWARE products only to Mac hardware. If OS X had 30% market share. How much more software could Apple sell? And how many more developers would be attracted to the platform?
If it's like a foldable dual 13inch (think macbook air but with LED LCD screen on both inner sides, full multi-touch), this would be THE EBOOK THAT WILL DEFINE THE 21ST CENTURY when publishing took a step out of the gutterberg(sic, get it?) into the light.
Maybe the big thing is that colleges across the USA will have these as an option - full MacEbook for all your courses, never worry about leaving your books back in the dorm or at your friends' place or losing it.
THE E-LEARNING REVOLUTION THAT WAS PROMISED TO US.
A US $99 version for all developing countries. !! Wow. My mind just blew.
Not gonna happen. The smaller screen is fine for watching video, but it's way too small for touchscreen, particularly running apps.
.
I completely disagree. Can someone make a mockup of the "iPod nano touch." Remove the click wheel on the bottom half and make the screen cover the entire front side.. I believe this is very plausible.
As a product transition (and not an altogether new product), I'm fairly certain we're looking at a multi-touch Cinema Display. The Cinema Display line hasn't seen a refresh in a while and it would be timely prior to a Snow Leopard release to have the hardware present for the software features to work.
The posts of Solsun and others arguing that Apple's touch technology is going to be built into multiple devices seems the strongest candidate in this horse race (although some of the dark horse candidates have things going for them as well). In particular, this would differentiate them from clone makers.
One additional consideration in favor of a move in this direction is that Microsoft's Surface Computer has been getting good reviews, and that one MS executive stated that there was a $10 billion market for the device. (E.g., as ordering devices in restaurants, as gaming devices in retail spaces and airlines, as informational kiosks everywhere, etc.) Apple mightn't want to let MS establish too great a lead in buyers' mindspace in such a rich market.
OTOH, if Apple did come out with built-in touch in its iMac line, the only way this would lock out competitors would be if independent developers were encouraged to rely on the touch interface. But why would they do that, if it would lock out 90% of the Mac user base? Another OTOH is that it seems unlikely that a rumor of such a wide-ranging hardware transition hadn't appeared earlier.
Anyway, if touch is the new transition, then I hope Apple will avoid a safe, beige, "left-brained" name like "Surface Computer." I suggest TapTop. It's more memorable, being "anchored" in laptop. It's almost unforgettable. And it has good overtones, suggesting things like "tiptop." ("Surface" has bad overtones, suggesting "shallow," "brittle," etc.)
==============
Transition candidates would be more plausible if they involved an innovation that could be kept a secret until just before release. One such innovation would be a chip that would give a Mac built-in, hardware-based "software metering," so that a user would be able to run software on a rental basis. This would give users inexpensive access to expensive software they would only rarely use--but that would be quite rewarding to them anyway. They'd have access to much more software than on any competing platform. It would be a tremendous selling point--and only a company that controlled the hardware could offer this in a way that was secure enough to reassure software vendors. (E.g., perhaps there would be online monitoring by Apple of metered computers to ensure that the security of the metering hadn't been compromised.)
It would appeal to software developers because it would lower their marketing expense--and probably reduce piracy considerably as well. Small software companies challenging established giants would particularly like this, because they wouldn't have to get customers to shell out big bucks to displace their competitors.
Even if this isn't what Apple has in mind, it ought to be. (Maybe next year.)
===================
Alternatively, maybe it's a built-in chip that performs speedy encryption, or that monitors the computer for malware. (Again, if it isn't, it should be--eventually.)
Comments
Oh, but it does make sense, because of the current situation. If Apple were to partner with another major manufacturer like Dell or HP, it would step on tiny little companies like Psystar, which can't compete with that. And people really overstate how OSX is tied to Apple computers- it runs really, really well on some very common hardware. Hardly any work would be involved there, and the "experience" doesn't suffer a bit.
Now, I don't think that is likely, but I do think it is a possibility. You can't simply dismiss anything these days.
Developing an OS is very expensive. MS pays for it by selling a huge number of copies, and even then look at how high the prices are for retail copies. Since Apples sells far, far fewer copies (both pre-installed and retail) than MS, they rely on the profits of the hardware sales to subsidize the R&D for the OS. MS can license to PC makers at a discount because they have volume on their side.
In order to maintain the revenue stream to support OS X R&D, Apple would need charge OEMs a high enough price to make up for any cannabolization of Mac hardware sales. That alone would make it an unattractive option for most PC makers. Your budget Mac clone is all of a sudden much more expensive than the exact same hardware with Windows (because the OEM price for Vista is going to be a lot lower than the OEM price for OS X). So in effect, you've solved nothing...Macs are still viewed as more expensive than Windows...except now you have concrete proof of it!
It's a MacTablet, obviously. A merging of a full Mac and the iPhone in terms of functionality and UI.
It's the last remaining "poorly defined" market to be conquered before Steve-o retires.
it's got to be a mac tablet. I love the "idea" of this but i have several concerns.
Do we really need a computer that small? many times we see this kind of product with so many apps. it's trying to be a full computer in a hand-held. do we really need everything a computer has in such a small size. Buy a friggin' MBA then. All it really needs is everything the iphone has less the phone. and maybe more advanced inputing like a sylus or something to draw with. other than that just a large format (say 12"-15") screen sized and all the functionality of the iphone would be perfect. (oh, and a files storage system like "finder") Let's call is the iPAD (my "Trek" side shows through).
I expect all laptops and possibly iMacs to go with solid-state drives. It is the future. Magnetic hard drives and optical disc drives are the only computer components that still have moving parts. They need to go. Magnetic hard drives will be first.
Touch will be standard on many new products. Apple invested a lot in this technology. They will use it for more than just phones and music players.
Will the long-rumored tablet arrive? Perhaps, but it probably won't be what everybody is imagining.
PS Having recently watched all 16 episodes of "Foyle's War'" on DVD (he's a Detective Chief Superintendent BTW) I agree it is a superb series, and it takes a bit to excite my TV jaded palate these days. My only question is 'how the hell did ITV produce something that good?'
Different kind of show, but what about Keen Eddie?
As we know, the iPhone/Touch OS is an extension of the Mac OS X Leopard which is now undergoing transition under the code name of Snow Leopard.
However, there is one other type of Leopard that is still roaming our planet and hasn't yet been mentioned, and that is the Clouded Leopard. Yes there is such an animal: http://www.cap.nsw.edu.au/bb_site_in...e/leopards.htm
Thus, the Macbook Cloud.
Such a product addresses the 'transition' issue and "The new, unnamed product will continue to have "technologies and features that others can't match," statement. In addition, a strategically positioned pricing model could be developed to satisfy the proclaimed decrease in margins.
Microsoft has been working to get in this market for years, with the Auto PC project, evolved into Sync and sold on Fords. Many other car stereos are including hard-drive MP3 capability and nav.
An aftermarket iPod-branded car stereo/nav system could quickly dominate over other brands. But Apple doesn't really do aftermarket.
Also, the concept as shown was an integrated multi-function system, including climate controls and warning lights, on the large touch-screen display. This level of function would need to be an an OEM design. Would this be enough to swing enough car-buyers to a different brand to "shut out" the rivals? Unless they were working with many different automakers... And would this dramatically hurt their bottom line? Probably not.
Then again, September is time to roll out the new model year cars. My wife just placed an order for a new VW Tiguan, to arrive in Oct-Nov. If this is true, I think there might be time to "adjust" the order...
Did you read my previous posts? It's just not going to happen. Get over it.
I apologise, I did not realise that I wasn't permitted to disagree with people.
Not only does it not make any sense in the current situation. But Apple has had really bad experiences with licensing osx in the 90s, I don't think they want to go back there.
Was this OS X version 6 or OS X version 7 ?
C.
Ha, thanks.
And I see your point. Blu-ray is certainly more modern and Apple supported the format by being a member of its consortium, but that was mainly in opposition of Microsoft's backing of HD-DVD, which featured more DRM developed by MS that...wait for it...tied the user to Windows.
MS did not develop HD DVD's DRM, but they did develop an implementation of HDi. Windows is not required, Toshiba's earlier machines ran on Linux, I think maybe they had their own HDi implementation.
Aren't there already Blu-ray drives sold by third parties that come with BD writing software for Macs?
IIRC, they can't be played on a Mac.
The only consumer electronics device you sell below cost is a console.
You heard it here first: Apple console.
They talked about reducing their margin, not wiping them out. MS spent maybe six years and billions of dollars before they started making anything that looks like a net profit on the venture.
Developing an OS is very expensive. MS pays for it by selling a huge number of copies, and even then look at how high the prices are for retail copies. Since Apples sells far, far fewer copies (both pre-installed and retail) than MS, they rely on the profits of the hardware sales to subsidize the R&D for the OS. MS can license to PC makers at a discount because they have volume on their side.
In order to maintain the revenue stream to support OS X R&D, Apple would need charge OEMs a high enough price to make up for any cannabolization of Mac hardware sales. That alone would make it an unattractive option for most PC makers. Your budget Mac clone is all of a sudden much more expensive than the exact same hardware with Windows (because the OEM price for Vista is going to be a lot lower than the OEM price for OS X). So in effect, you've solved nothing...Macs are still viewed as more expensive than Windows...except now you have concrete proof of it!
Speaking of overstatement, the high price of retail copies of Windows is irrelevant, because almost no one buys it that way. Microsoft charges major manufacturers (that buy in bulk, as you say) about $40 a license, depending on version. Apple could easily match that price.
I don't want to go off-topic talking about Windows OEM licensing, so my point is that if Apple were to license OSX, their sale of the license -whether it's $20 or $100 per machine- is mostly profit and is tantamount to the profit Apple makes off a hardware sale. Especially if done in bulk.
Again, I don't think this is likely. I'd give it about a 5% chance of happening, but dismissing it because of what happened 15 years ago is silly.
I'm guessing the whole product line of LCD monitors transition over to the LED back lighting rather than florescent tubes.
Monitors alone don't drive new sales, and there are hundreds of sources for monitors at lower prices already. Think different.
Okay, so my strategy might not be what Apple is thinking, but this is the only area I'm see a hard push in competition. Especially with Xbox streaming 360. I think Apple has to make a move.
A transition from computer display to HDTV/computer display.
Developing an OS is very expensive. MS pays for it by selling a huge number of copies, and even then look at how high the prices are for retail copies. Since Apples sells far, far fewer copies (both pre-installed and retail) than MS, they rely on the profits of the hardware sales to subsidize the R&D for the OS. MS can license to PC makers at a discount because they have volume on their side.
Apple have already made OS X - It's paid for already. The only question is, how should they now make money from it?
If Apple licensed OS X to Sony - and charged Sony $100 per OEM copy - that's $100 additional revenue. And another $100 if the customer buys iLife.
In order to maintain the revenue stream to support OS X R&D, Apple would need charge OEMs a high enough price to make up for any cannabolization of Mac hardware sales.
Please explain cannibalization. Why should Apple automatically lose hardware sales if this happened? Are you saying that Mac hardware isn't good enough? Are you saying people wouldn't buy Mac hardware if they could buy a Vaio? I happen to believe that Mac hardware can stand on its own feet.
Now turn your question around. How much money does Apple lose by only being able to sell iWork, MobileMe and all its SOFTWARE products only to Mac hardware. If OS X had 30% market share. How much more software could Apple sell? And how many more developers would be attracted to the platform?
C.
Apple designed motherboards?
Oh, very interesting. With a "MacOS" chip built in?! Cool idea.
If it's like a foldable dual 13inch (think macbook air but with LED LCD screen on both inner sides, full multi-touch), this would be THE EBOOK THAT WILL DEFINE THE 21ST CENTURY when publishing took a step out of the gutterberg(sic, get it?) into the light.
Maybe the big thing is that colleges across the USA will have these as an option - full MacEbook for all your courses, never worry about leaving your books back in the dorm or at your friends' place or losing it.
THE E-LEARNING REVOLUTION THAT WAS PROMISED TO US.
A US $99 version for all developing countries. !! Wow. My mind just blew.
Hello! MacFolio?!.
2 cents from a newbie:
I figure on an AppleTV DVR
Far out guess:
Fuel cell power for MBP.
I like your fuel cell idea. Welcome.
Not gonna happen. The smaller screen is fine for watching video, but it's way too small for touchscreen, particularly running apps.
.
I completely disagree. Can someone make a mockup of the "iPod nano touch." Remove the click wheel on the bottom half and make the screen cover the entire front side.. I believe this is very plausible.
Just my two cents.
iPod, MacBook & Pro and OS X and other hardware ... wow, product transition means so many things :-)
i personally believe it is Laptop line - MacBook & Pro getting a complete make over and price reduction
iPod - going full touch and lower price is given, but no one knows the time frame.
One additional consideration in favor of a move in this direction is that Microsoft's Surface Computer has been getting good reviews, and that one MS executive stated that there was a $10 billion market for the device. (E.g., as ordering devices in restaurants, as gaming devices in retail spaces and airlines, as informational kiosks everywhere, etc.) Apple mightn't want to let MS establish too great a lead in buyers' mindspace in such a rich market.
OTOH, if Apple did come out with built-in touch in its iMac line, the only way this would lock out competitors would be if independent developers were encouraged to rely on the touch interface. But why would they do that, if it would lock out 90% of the Mac user base? Another OTOH is that it seems unlikely that a rumor of such a wide-ranging hardware transition hadn't appeared earlier.
Anyway, if touch is the new transition, then I hope Apple will avoid a safe, beige, "left-brained" name like "Surface Computer." I suggest TapTop. It's more memorable, being "anchored" in laptop. It's almost unforgettable. And it has good overtones, suggesting things like "tiptop." ("Surface" has bad overtones, suggesting "shallow," "brittle," etc.)
==============
Transition candidates would be more plausible if they involved an innovation that could be kept a secret until just before release. One such innovation would be a chip that would give a Mac built-in, hardware-based "software metering," so that a user would be able to run software on a rental basis. This would give users inexpensive access to expensive software they would only rarely use--but that would be quite rewarding to them anyway. They'd have access to much more software than on any competing platform. It would be a tremendous selling point--and only a company that controlled the hardware could offer this in a way that was secure enough to reassure software vendors. (E.g., perhaps there would be online monitoring by Apple of metered computers to ensure that the security of the metering hadn't been compromised.)
It would appeal to software developers because it would lower their marketing expense--and probably reduce piracy considerably as well. Small software companies challenging established giants would particularly like this, because they wouldn't have to get customers to shell out big bucks to displace their competitors.
Even if this isn't what Apple has in mind, it ought to be. (Maybe next year.)
===================
Alternatively, maybe it's a built-in chip that performs speedy encryption, or that monitors the computer for malware. (Again, if it isn't, it should be--eventually.)