ABC will broadcast tonight, Wednesday, January 7, 2009, a Barbara Walters interview with actor Patrick Swayze who is battling a pancreas cancer just like Steve Jobs. Watch the interview if you want to know what Steve Jobs is going through and why Steve was too sick to give the MacWorld keynote.
While both Jobs and Swayze have/had Pancreatic cancer and both have undergone some form of corrective surgery, the similarities end there... Jobs has a rare form which is a lot less aggressive, he didn't have any metastasis that we know of, and didn't require chemotherapy, radiation, etc. Swayze's pancreatic cancer is aggressive and it was reported/rumored that it had already metastasized to his liver and stomach, requiring removal of the lesions and partial removal of his stomach in addition to whatever they did with his pancreas and G.I. tract. He has undergone chemotherapy, gamma radiation, and other treatments. And apparently he is doing incredibly well for the circumstances although in a lot of pain.
Anyways, I feel for both of them.. I recently lost an Uncle (an incredible man) to colon cancer. Cancer can be such a mean, brutal disease...
I have to second analysts who qualify the last MacWorld keynote presentation as "underwhelming", especially as there were no new iMacs and MacMinis announced.
As I view Apple, there are no business desktop computers and, since Apple switched to Intel and decided to use mobile chips for iMacs as a cost saving measure, there are no consumer desktop computers.
It is important to understand that Apple is competing with other computer makers for consumer and business dollars. Apple computers must be competitive when buyers compare features, CPUs and prices.
Intel has been producing quad-core Penryn desktop processors since November 2007, but Apple stayed with lower powered, mobile, dual-core processors throughout 2008 for its iMacs (despite the fact that iMacs should be considered to be desktop computers).
The Core 2 Quad Q6600 65 nm CPU has been available for $266 since November 2007, and $224 since April 20, 2008. See:
The new quad-core Core i7 desktop processor is 20% more powerful than a quad-core Penryn desktop processor. It is already available on Windows desktops which sell for as little as $1250.
My question to Apple: How long will you wait before you build a competitively priced business and consumer desktop computer with a Core i7 processor?
Your sentiments echoed many of my own (and I always enjoy the inclusion of relevant links that provide easy access to additional information).
I thought you summed it up best in your "question to Apple: How long will you wait before you build a competitively priced business and consumer desktop computer with a Core i7 processor?"
I called Apple during the latter part of last year and politely asked them when the "Late 2008" Mac Pro was going to be released. When their guy asked me what led me to believe such a product is supposed to even exist, I promptly responded by saying that their current model was named BY THEM both on the web and in their literature as the "Mac Pro Early 2008" (I still have the PDF file to back me up on that one = Mac_Pro_Early_2008.PDF) and then I briefly (though sarcastically) expounded upon how their selection of the adjective "early" by it's very nature logically implies that there's gonna be a "later" one (or else why didn't they just call it the "Mac_Pro_2008"?).
Think about it. It's 2009 and the Mac Pro they are selling right now is still the "Mac Pro Early 2008" model!
Am going to convert my PC gaming rig to a new iMac once Apple FINALLY comes to market with a desktop machine that at heart, it a desktop machine! I don't want to have a laptop grade CPU sitting inside my shiny new iMac, I want a desktop grade CPU. And to be honest, this isn't brain surgery for the engineering teams at Apple - so it must be a cost saving measure. But I suspect Apple will be running into more people like me who just aren't willing to spend money on underpowered systems.
BTW I am very hopeful on the 28 inch iMac rumor... That is the system I will lay out for.
Now that MacWorld fell on it's face ? maybe it was on purpose?
Now WHEN Apple / Steve has an announcement about something NEW and EXCITING (within the next 3 weeks) - it WILL be the way Apple / Steve does it from now on, and it WILL have Apple folks jumping for joy - and folks will forget all about MacWorld and how BAD it was.
I've said it before, we Mac folks WANT to much, to often (and Apple has been doing a great "Job" of providing so far), but the well is getting a bit low.
Apple / Steve will make an announcement very soon, if for no other reason then to just re-bound from MacWorld. They've said at one time or another - that they had soe great exciting stuff they were working on, and would announce in the coming months ? so hold on folks.
Apple computers have never been competitive from this point of view. And if Apple would target that, they would be facing severe problems... if they would build comparable machines they would have to match prices and businesses needing Windows would still not buy. All they would have is lower margins not being fully compensated for by additional sales. A recipe for disaster.
Businesses that do not need Windows (mine for example) do buy Macs. For most business tasks the Mini is more than powerful enough and the iMac is already having more power than needed. When buying these machines in numbers, project prices are not at all bad and the support and maintenance cost of Macs is highly favorable. Bottom line the premium is rather small.
Why should they upgrade the iMac just for the sake of upgrading it? There are no relevant new CPUs or chipsets available and Nehalem may not be here before July. Putting desktop CPUs into an AIO would likely only make them noisier... not needed. The Mini is already too noisy with a laptop CPU.
Two things:
1- Apple needs to be competitive in order to grow its world market share beyond 5% (if only to attract and keep software developpers);
2- The Intel Core i7 quad-core desktop processor (code name: Nehalem) is available NOW with Gateway computers that sell for as little as $1250. See:
This Friday, January 9, 2009, Microsoft is offering a free download of a near commercial quality beta copy of its next operating system, Windows 7. Everyone is highly impressed with the speed, connectivity and ease of use of this new release. See:
Windows 7 with a quad-core Intel Core i7 desktop CPU computer is going to be HUGE, as big as Windows 95 was when it burried any hope that Mac OS would ever regain a 30% market share.
My advice to Apple: Give us a Core i7 desktop computer ASAP with Snow Leopard or else, you risk loosing it all, once again (Remember the death spiral that followed the release of Windows 95?)
There are different kinds of pancreatic cancer, and it sounds like the two don't have the same one.
Assuming that you can get an idea of what someone with a disease is going through (much less "why Steve was too sick to give the MacWorld keynote") from a celebrity TV interview is about the most idiotic and insulting thing I can imagine.
I watched the Barbara Walters interview with 56 year old actor Patrick Swayze at 10 PM on the ABC network and I am glad that I did. If you missed the interview, it must be available on the ABC web site or YouTube. Just Google it.
Patrick Swayze could teach Steve Jobs a thing or two about honesty.
Just like Steve Jobs, Patrick Swayze is fiercely determined to beat his cancer, survive long enough for medicine to find a cure for pancreas cancer, and work with more energy than healthy people for as long as possible. Focusing on work and living each day fully seems to help Patrick Swayze, possibly to forget his cancer or go through a distressing chemotherapy with major side effects.
And through it all, Patrick Swayze relies on the love, help and continuing support of his wife with whom he has been married for 33 years.
The parallels with billionnaire legend Steve Jobs are obvious. Both the actor and the CEO could retire and face nothing but the chemotherapy they must go through to survive. But they keep a full schedule to keep their mind busy with something other than cancer and chemotherapy. And they share the same fierce determination to beat their cancer.
It is too bad that I respect my fellow man to say that you are a frigg'n asshole.
You would benefit from some education or learning to disagree without being disagreeable. And if you state the specific reasons why you think that your opinion is better than mine, you could actually help the readers of AppleInsider who are kind enough to read your comment.
AppleInsider is not a trash column. Try to keep that in mind.
Dude, why can you not get it through your thick head that their cancers are extremely, extremely, different, and involved vastly different treatment and survival rates. Odds are high that Swayze is dead a year or two, and odds are Jobs will not see his form of pancreatic cancer return.
Jobs no longer has cancer. Swayze most certainly does.
1- Apple needs to be competitive in order to grow its world market share beyond 5% (if only to attract and keep software developpers);
2- The Intel Core i7 quad-core desktop processor (code name: Nehalem) is available NOW with Gateway computers that sell for as little as $1250.
Marketshare is not Apple's primary goal (margins are). Apple only needs to sell a fraction of the number of computers when compared to e.g. Dell or HP to make more money. In the US Apple sells the lion share of notebooks costing more than 1k - other manufacturers would kill for that. There is almost nothing Apple could learn from the competition (Ok, maybe how to make good laptop keyboards from Lenovo, I have to admit). Desktop computers are a market without any significant growth and in the current climate a lot of people and businesses do keep their machines even longer... there is no merit here. Actually most laptop manufacturers (not including Apple) are begging Intel to delay the Nehamlem laptop CPUs from July into autumn/winter '09 because they cannot get rid of their stock - and you want to tell Apple what to do? They can barely keep up with the orders. Apple's "world market share" will always be limited - they simply do not offer price points that would stick in developing countries, and nobody will invest in expanding support coverage into these countries at this very point either. OS X developers should be doing fine - actually the amount of software and companies is growing daily, even more big guns like IBM jump on the wagon now (just reviewing the new Symphony beta and Lotus client)... so, this point does not stick either. OS X users do pay for software, most Windows users are busy enough fighting the crap that came pre-installed on their machines and Linux users do not want to pay for anything (Ok, this was a gross over-simplification, but the direction is correct).
Sure, the Core i7 DESKTOP CPU is available now. But whoever cares about the OS and design will not buy a Gateway computer ever. Apple currently does not build computers with desktop CPUs at all. The Mac Pro uses server class CPUs and all other machines use laptop class CPUs. There is nothing on the market that would deliver any significant improvement now. The Mac Pro will get the next generation Xeons when they are available (my bet would be around/before NAB) and the iMac may get an intermediate bump, but they could also wait for the Nehalem notebook CPUs in late summer... I have no idea what they will do with the Mini - it never followed regular update patterns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan
This Friday, January 9, 2009, Microsoft is offering for a free download a near commercial quality beta copy of its next operating system, Windows 7. Everyone is highly impressed with the speed, connectivity and ease of use of this new release.
Windows 7 with a quad-core Intel Core i7 desktop CPU computer is going to be HUGE, as big as Windows 95 was when it burried any hope that Mac OS would ever regain a 30% market share.
Normally Windows never reaches "commercial quality" before service pack 2 or 3... so Apple has about 2-3 years to react. From all comments I have seen, Windows 7 does not deliver anything special. They have finally copied the OS X Dock (must have been hard) and removed some Vista annoyances. It is more a Vista service Pack - and an attempt to bury the fated Vista name as soon as possible. Windows 7 will not match Snow Leopard or even Leopard in multi-core support and GPU acceleration. MS always depends on CPU makers to make up for their performance problems. Nothing new to see here. OS X does not need 30% market share, and we will likely/hopefully never see that. If the economy recovers and they keep up innovating, 20% may be feasible. Having 20% marketshare at these margins... would be like printing money.
You would benefit from some education or learning to disagree without being disagreeable. And if you state the specific reasons why you think that your opinion is better than mine, you could actually help the readers of AppleInsider who are kind enough to read your comment.
AppleInsider is not a trash column. Try to keep that in mind.
Perhaps you can explain why you virtually trash everything from Apple.
Apple watchers on Wall Street are weighing in on Tuesday's Phil Schiller-led keynote address at Macworld, which they found disappointing but somewhat reassuring when it comes to the continued role of Steve Jobs as the company's primary spokesperson.
Kaufman Brothers' Shaw Wu and PiperJaffray's Gene Munster both termed the event "underwhelming" in their reports, although they still maintain Buy ratings on the Cupertino-based company.
"Even though expectations weren't that high (especially with Steve Jobs not giving the keynote), we still found the announcements somewhat underwhelming," Wu wrote.* "This was arguably among the weakest product introductions we can remember over the last 10 [Macworlds].
Wu praised iPhoto as the most impressive announcement, writing "[Apple] continues to innovate on software, further differentiating its hardware."
Over at Barclays Capital, Ben Reitzes titled his report "Macworld: Evolutionary Not Revolutionary" and wrote that while Macworld "was not very eventful, we believe Apple continues to be the leading innovator in its space...building a loyal community across a range of devices."
Reitzes sees new iPhones appearing in mid-2009, stressing the importance of an improved camera with video capability.
As for Macs, Wu cited supply chain checks and asserted that "new Macs are at a late stage of development and ready for production, so we are somewhat surprised they were not announced."
But, according to Munster, that is proof Steve Jobs remains the spokesman and "active leader" of the company.
"We believe that Steve Jobs relinquished the Macworld keynote to Phil Schiller primarily because there were no significant announcements.* If Phil Schiller had made a significant announcement, we would have seen that as a sign of a changing-of-the-guard, but that was not the case," Munster wrote.
"Steve Jobs remains the primary spokesperson for the company and we expect him to continue to appear at special events for all major product announcements."
All three maintain their estimates.* Reitzes lists $113 as his price target while Wu is slightly more bullish at $120.* Munster's 12-month target is $235.
Today, 3 big announcements. First, availability of Windows Live Essentials: Windows Live Messenger, Mail, and Photo Gallery. Final, free, and works on Windows XP, Vista, and new Windows 7 beta
This is the kind of technology transformation that happens once every 10-15 years
Think about it. It's 2009 and the Mac Pro they are selling right now is still the "Mac Pro Early 2008" model!
Well, it is Apple. What's a year between updates? Sure, several latest gen' gpus have been updated...but that's not an excuse for Apple to offer them.
Quote:
Perhaps you can explain why you virtually trash everything from Apple.
Does he?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan
I have to second analysts who qualify the last MacWorld keynote presentation as "underwhelming", especially as there were no new iMacs and MacMinis announced.
As I view Apple, there are no business desktop computers and, since Apple switched to Intel and decided to use mobile chips for iMacs as a cost saving measure, there are no consumer desktop computers.
It is important to understand that Apple is competing with other computer makers for consumer and business dollars. Apple computers must be competitive when buyers compare features, CPUs and prices.
Intel has been producing quad-core Penryn desktop processors since November 2007, but Apple stayed with lower powered, mobile, dual-core processors throughout 2008 for its iMacs (despite the fact that iMacs should be considered to be desktop computers).
The Core 2 Quad Q6600 65 nm CPU has been available for $266 since November 2007, and $224 since April 20, 2008. See:
The new quad-core Core i7 desktop processor is 20% more powerful than a quad-core Penryn desktop processor. It is already available on Windows desktops which sell for as little as $1250.
My question to Apple: How long will you wait before you build a competitively priced business and consumer desktop computer with a Core i7 processor?
All facts. And he's asking a fair question. APPLE, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO PULL YOUR FINGER OUT AND UPDATE YOUR LANGUISHING DESKTOP LINE?
This Friday, January 9, 2009, Microsoft is offering a free download of a near commercial quality beta copy of its next operating system, Windows 7. Everyone is highly impressed with the speed, connectivity and ease of use of this new release. See:
Windows 7 with a quad-core Intel Core i7 desktop CPU computer is going to be HUGE, as big as Windows 95 was when it burried any hope that Mac OS would ever regain a 30% market share.
My advice to Apple: Give us a Core i7 desktop computer ASAP with Snow Leopard or else, you risk loosing it all, once again (Remember the death spiral that followed the release of Windows 95?)
Also legitimate. While this isn't the Apple of 1995...there is no room for complacency. One thing the launch of Mobile Me showed me was that maybe Apple needs to hire some workers? Are they battling on too many fronts with too small a work force?
Quad cores have been out ages and Apple don't have a consumer desktop line that offers them. And i7 is nowhere to be seen, even on a Mac Pro. And if they're waiting on server class i7s? Then why not offer the i7 on the 'consumer' Macs? Oh. One is laptop on a stand. And the other is a portable hard drive. ie we don't have a consumer desktop line.
Well, yes, Abster2Core has a point here, though he didn't need to resort to one of the recent outbursts.
I don't remember a single positive thing that ouragan has said about Apple, even ragging on Apple and Jobs about settled issues, no less, though maybe not as much lately. Looking at the previous twenty five posts, all of them are at least somewhat critical, most of them are very or totally critical.
This is yet another way for Steve Jobs to dismiss his responsabilities. Given that he appropriated more than $1 billion for himself in illegal, backdated stock options, and another $1 billion to reward his hand picked Vice-Presidents, one would think that Steve Jobs could feel a duty to obey the law and show some respect to the shareholders who made the dreams of a high school graduate possible.
But, apparently not.
Steve Jobs is the same man who was so deluded that he truly believed that a special diet could be the cure for pancreatic cancer. Would you trust such a man to tell you the truth?
Apple is run by a tyrannical, irrational CEO who doesn't have what it takes to study beyond high school.
What else did you expect with overpriced products, outdated parts, a demented obsession for thinness in iMacs, MacBook Airs and iPods, and a looming recession?
But he continues to berate Jobs, Apple and its products, but he uses a PC
Also legitimate. While this isn't the Apple of 1995...there is no room for complacency. One thing the launch of Mobile Me showed me was that maybe Apple needs to hire some workers? Are they battling on too many fronts with too small a work force?
Quad cores have been out ages and Apple don't have a consumer desktop line that offers them. And i7 is nowhere to be seen, even on a Mac Pro. And if they're waiting on server class i7s? Then why not offer the i7 on the 'consumer' Macs? Oh. One is laptop on a stand. And the other is a portable hard drive. ie we don't have a consumer desktop line.
Call it as I see it.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Apple's simply not going to go Nehalem in their consumer lineup before the Mac Pro. I know that AI forum dwellers are enthusiasts but the reality is consumers are generally replacing computers that are 4 years old likely on the average. They read the buzz words but they don't understand. Core i7 means nothing to most of them. If Apple offers a Quad Core iMac model it won't matter if it's Core i7 or not it's going to be so much faster than the incumbent computer.
I see the iMac as going QC but not Core i7 with a Feb 09 update. The Mac Pro goes Nehalem Xeon and the next iMac refresh goes Core i7 with either desktop or mobile product.
There really is no rush. The economy should be healthier by summer going into the fall and Nehalem mobile product should be warming up nicely in the oven.
Apple has already taken the steps they need to prepare. Snow Leopard..getting rid of PPC support and standardizing on Cocoa.
I'm not singling out your post, just using it as a proxy for all the others like yours as well. I just have one question:
Don't you think Apple did the very nice but no mind-blowing Keynote on purpose, just to underscore the fact they want to be on their own release and announce schedule, not MacWorld's?
I think if Apple had not cut the cord there would have been several announcements for hardware shipping as late as early Mar. But now we will get those with "shipping this afternoon" or something like that when they are actually announced at a press event.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
In a word, NO.
At least you're consistent, but I think you are quite incorrect. Both that it was a sucky keynote and that it wasn't intentionally non-Earthshattering.
It merely wasn't Earth-shattering, but was overall good to very good from a business perspective. No reason to get all riled up about that.
Comments
ABC will broadcast tonight, Wednesday, January 7, 2009, a Barbara Walters interview with actor Patrick Swayze who is battling a pancreas cancer just like Steve Jobs. Watch the interview if you want to know what Steve Jobs is going through and why Steve was too sick to give the MacWorld keynote.
While both Jobs and Swayze have/had Pancreatic cancer and both have undergone some form of corrective surgery, the similarities end there... Jobs has a rare form which is a lot less aggressive, he didn't have any metastasis that we know of, and didn't require chemotherapy, radiation, etc. Swayze's pancreatic cancer is aggressive and it was reported/rumored that it had already metastasized to his liver and stomach, requiring removal of the lesions and partial removal of his stomach in addition to whatever they did with his pancreas and G.I. tract. He has undergone chemotherapy, gamma radiation, and other treatments. And apparently he is doing incredibly well for the circumstances although in a lot of pain.
Anyways, I feel for both of them.. I recently lost an Uncle (an incredible man) to colon cancer. Cancer can be such a mean, brutal disease...
I have to second analysts who qualify the last MacWorld keynote presentation as "underwhelming", especially as there were no new iMacs and MacMinis announced.
As I view Apple, there are no business desktop computers and, since Apple switched to Intel and decided to use mobile chips for iMacs as a cost saving measure, there are no consumer desktop computers.
It is important to understand that Apple is competing with other computer makers for consumer and business dollars. Apple computers must be competitive when buyers compare features, CPUs and prices.
Intel has been producing quad-core Penryn desktop processors since November 2007, but Apple stayed with lower powered, mobile, dual-core processors throughout 2008 for its iMacs (despite the fact that iMacs should be considered to be desktop computers).
The Core 2 Quad Q6600 65 nm CPU has been available for $266 since November 2007, and $224 since April 20, 2008. See:
- Intel to cut 65 nm quad-core processor prices for 45 nm @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36136/139/
- Intel drops second quad-core CPU into the mainstream @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/37038/135/
- Have quad-core processors arrived in the mainstream? @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36548/135/
- Intel adds cheap dual-core, quad-core @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39135/135/
The Intel Core i7 desktop microprocessor was officially introduced on November 17, 2008. See:
Intel unleashes Core i7, beats itself @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40213/135/
Core i7 PCs launch with prices from $1250 to $13,000 @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40227/135/
The new quad-core Core i7 desktop processor is 20% more powerful than a quad-core Penryn desktop processor. It is already available on Windows desktops which sell for as little as $1250.
My question to Apple: How long will you wait before you build a competitively priced business and consumer desktop computer with a Core i7 processor?
Your sentiments echoed many of my own (and I always enjoy the inclusion of relevant links that provide easy access to additional information).
I thought you summed it up best in your "question to Apple: How long will you wait before you build a competitively priced business and consumer desktop computer with a Core i7 processor?"
I called Apple during the latter part of last year and politely asked them when the "Late 2008" Mac Pro was going to be released. When their guy asked me what led me to believe such a product is supposed to even exist, I promptly responded by saying that their current model was named BY THEM both on the web and in their literature as the "Mac Pro Early 2008" (I still have the PDF file to back me up on that one = Mac_Pro_Early_2008.PDF) and then I briefly (though sarcastically) expounded upon how their selection of the adjective "early" by it's very nature logically implies that there's gonna be a "later" one (or else why didn't they just call it the "Mac_Pro_2008"?).
Think about it. It's 2009 and the Mac Pro they are selling right now is still the "Mac Pro Early 2008" model!
BTW I am very hopeful on the 28 inch iMac rumor... That is the system I will lay out for.
You can't announce what doesn't exist.
Well, you said you had a big willy.
Now WHEN Apple / Steve has an announcement about something NEW and EXCITING (within the next 3 weeks) - it WILL be the way Apple / Steve does it from now on, and it WILL have Apple folks jumping for joy - and folks will forget all about MacWorld and how BAD it was.
I've said it before, we Mac folks WANT to much, to often (and Apple has been doing a great "Job" of providing so far), but the well is getting a bit low.
Apple / Steve will make an announcement very soon, if for no other reason then to just re-bound from MacWorld. They've said at one time or another - that they had soe great exciting stuff they were working on, and would announce in the coming months ? so hold on folks.
Skip
Apple computers have never been competitive from this point of view. And if Apple would target that, they would be facing severe problems... if they would build comparable machines they would have to match prices and businesses needing Windows would still not buy. All they would have is lower margins not being fully compensated for by additional sales. A recipe for disaster.
Businesses that do not need Windows (mine for example) do buy Macs. For most business tasks the Mini is more than powerful enough and the iMac is already having more power than needed. When buying these machines in numbers, project prices are not at all bad and the support and maintenance cost of Macs is highly favorable. Bottom line the premium is rather small.
Why should they upgrade the iMac just for the sake of upgrading it? There are no relevant new CPUs or chipsets available and Nehalem may not be here before July. Putting desktop CPUs into an AIO would likely only make them noisier... not needed. The Mini is already too noisy with a laptop CPU.
Two things:
1- Apple needs to be competitive in order to grow its world market share beyond 5% (if only to attract and keep software developpers);
2- The Intel Core i7 quad-core desktop processor (code name: Nehalem) is available NOW with Gateway computers that sell for as little as $1250. See:
Intel unleashes Core i7, beats itself @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40213/135/
Core i7 PCs launch with prices from $1250 to $13,000 @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40227/135/
This Friday, January 9, 2009, Microsoft is offering a free download of a near commercial quality beta copy of its next operating system, Windows 7. Everyone is highly impressed with the speed, connectivity and ease of use of this new release. See:
CES 2009: Microsoft releases Windows 7 beta @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40901/140/
Windows 7 with a quad-core Intel Core i7 desktop CPU computer is going to be HUGE, as big as Windows 95 was when it burried any hope that Mac OS would ever regain a 30% market share.
My advice to Apple: Give us a Core i7 desktop computer ASAP with Snow Leopard or else, you risk loosing it all, once again (Remember the death spiral that followed the release of Windows 95?)
There are different kinds of pancreatic cancer, and it sounds like the two don't have the same one.
Assuming that you can get an idea of what someone with a disease is going through (much less "why Steve was too sick to give the MacWorld keynote") from a celebrity TV interview is about the most idiotic and insulting thing I can imagine.
I watched the Barbara Walters interview with 56 year old actor Patrick Swayze at 10 PM on the ABC network and I am glad that I did. If you missed the interview, it must be available on the ABC web site or YouTube. Just Google it.
Patrick Swayze could teach Steve Jobs a thing or two about honesty.
Just like Steve Jobs, Patrick Swayze is fiercely determined to beat his cancer, survive long enough for medicine to find a cure for pancreas cancer, and work with more energy than healthy people for as long as possible. Focusing on work and living each day fully seems to help Patrick Swayze, possibly to forget his cancer or go through a distressing chemotherapy with major side effects.
And through it all, Patrick Swayze relies on the love, help and continuing support of his wife with whom he has been married for 33 years.
The parallels with billionnaire legend Steve Jobs are obvious. Both the actor and the CEO could retire and face nothing but the chemotherapy they must go through to survive. But they keep a full schedule to keep their mind busy with something other than cancer and chemotherapy. And they share the same fierce determination to beat their cancer.
It is too bad that I respect my fellow man to say that you are a frigg'n asshole.
You would benefit from some education or learning to disagree without being disagreeable. And if you state the specific reasons why you think that your opinion is better than mine, you could actually help the readers of AppleInsider who are kind enough to read your comment.
AppleInsider is not a trash column. Try to keep that in mind.
Jobs no longer has cancer. Swayze most certainly does.
Two things:
1- Apple needs to be competitive in order to grow its world market share beyond 5% (if only to attract and keep software developpers);
2- The Intel Core i7 quad-core desktop processor (code name: Nehalem) is available NOW with Gateway computers that sell for as little as $1250.
Marketshare is not Apple's primary goal (margins are). Apple only needs to sell a fraction of the number of computers when compared to e.g. Dell or HP to make more money. In the US Apple sells the lion share of notebooks costing more than 1k - other manufacturers would kill for that. There is almost nothing Apple could learn from the competition (Ok, maybe how to make good laptop keyboards from Lenovo, I have to admit). Desktop computers are a market without any significant growth and in the current climate a lot of people and businesses do keep their machines even longer... there is no merit here. Actually most laptop manufacturers (not including Apple) are begging Intel to delay the Nehamlem laptop CPUs from July into autumn/winter '09 because they cannot get rid of their stock - and you want to tell Apple what to do? They can barely keep up with the orders. Apple's "world market share" will always be limited - they simply do not offer price points that would stick in developing countries, and nobody will invest in expanding support coverage into these countries at this very point either. OS X developers should be doing fine - actually the amount of software and companies is growing daily, even more big guns like IBM jump on the wagon now (just reviewing the new Symphony beta and Lotus client)... so, this point does not stick either. OS X users do pay for software, most Windows users are busy enough fighting the crap that came pre-installed on their machines and Linux users do not want to pay for anything (Ok, this was a gross over-simplification, but the direction is correct).
Sure, the Core i7 DESKTOP CPU is available now. But whoever cares about the OS and design will not buy a Gateway computer ever. Apple currently does not build computers with desktop CPUs at all. The Mac Pro uses server class CPUs and all other machines use laptop class CPUs. There is nothing on the market that would deliver any significant improvement now. The Mac Pro will get the next generation Xeons when they are available (my bet would be around/before NAB) and the iMac may get an intermediate bump, but they could also wait for the Nehalem notebook CPUs in late summer... I have no idea what they will do with the Mini - it never followed regular update patterns.
This Friday, January 9, 2009, Microsoft is offering for a free download a near commercial quality beta copy of its next operating system, Windows 7. Everyone is highly impressed with the speed, connectivity and ease of use of this new release.
Windows 7 with a quad-core Intel Core i7 desktop CPU computer is going to be HUGE, as big as Windows 95 was when it burried any hope that Mac OS would ever regain a 30% market share.
Normally Windows never reaches "commercial quality" before service pack 2 or 3... so Apple has about 2-3 years to react. From all comments I have seen, Windows 7 does not deliver anything special. They have finally copied the OS X Dock (must have been hard) and removed some Vista annoyances. It is more a Vista service Pack - and an attempt to bury the fated Vista name as soon as possible. Windows 7 will not match Snow Leopard or even Leopard in multi-core support and GPU acceleration. MS always depends on CPU makers to make up for their performance problems. Nothing new to see here. OS X does not need 30% market share, and we will likely/hopefully never see that. If the economy recovers and they keep up innovating, 20% may be feasible. Having 20% marketshare at these margins... would be like printing money.
You would benefit from some education or learning to disagree without being disagreeable. And if you state the specific reasons why you think that your opinion is better than mine, you could actually help the readers of AppleInsider who are kind enough to read your comment.
AppleInsider is not a trash column. Try to keep that in mind.
Perhaps you can explain why you virtually trash everything from Apple.
Apple watchers on Wall Street are weighing in on Tuesday's Phil Schiller-led keynote address at Macworld, which they found disappointing but somewhat reassuring when it comes to the continued role of Steve Jobs as the company's primary spokesperson.
Kaufman Brothers' Shaw Wu and PiperJaffray's Gene Munster both termed the event "underwhelming" in their reports, although they still maintain Buy ratings on the Cupertino-based company.
"Even though expectations weren't that high (especially with Steve Jobs not giving the keynote), we still found the announcements somewhat underwhelming," Wu wrote.* "This was arguably among the weakest product introductions we can remember over the last 10 [Macworlds].
Wu praised iPhoto as the most impressive announcement, writing "[Apple] continues to innovate on software, further differentiating its hardware."
Over at Barclays Capital, Ben Reitzes titled his report "Macworld: Evolutionary Not Revolutionary" and wrote that while Macworld "was not very eventful, we believe Apple continues to be the leading innovator in its space...building a loyal community across a range of devices."
Reitzes sees new iPhones appearing in mid-2009, stressing the importance of an improved camera with video capability.
As for Macs, Wu cited supply chain checks and asserted that "new Macs are at a late stage of development and ready for production, so we are somewhat surprised they were not announced."
But, according to Munster, that is proof Steve Jobs remains the spokesman and "active leader" of the company.
"We believe that Steve Jobs relinquished the Macworld keynote to Phil Schiller primarily because there were no significant announcements.* If Phil Schiller had made a significant announcement, we would have seen that as a sign of a changing-of-the-guard, but that was not the case," Munster wrote.
"Steve Jobs remains the primary spokesperson for the company and we expect him to continue to appear at special events for all major product announcements."
All three maintain their estimates.* Reitzes lists $113 as his price target while Wu is slightly more bullish at $120.* Munster's 12-month target is $235.
Would love to hear their comment on Balmer's CES 2009 Keynote: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...t-keynote.html
Balmer:
Today, 3 big announcements. First, availability of Windows Live Essentials: Windows Live Messenger, Mail, and Photo Gallery. Final, free, and works on Windows XP, Vista, and new Windows 7 beta
This is the kind of technology transformation that happens once every 10-15 years
Think about it. It's 2009 and the Mac Pro they are selling right now is still the "Mac Pro Early 2008" model!
Well, it is Apple. What's a year between updates? Sure, several latest gen' gpus have been updated...but that's not an excuse for Apple to offer them.
Perhaps you can explain why you virtually trash everything from Apple.
Does he?
Originally Posted by ouragan
I have to second analysts who qualify the last MacWorld keynote presentation as "underwhelming", especially as there were no new iMacs and MacMinis announced.
As I view Apple, there are no business desktop computers and, since Apple switched to Intel and decided to use mobile chips for iMacs as a cost saving measure, there are no consumer desktop computers.
It is important to understand that Apple is competing with other computer makers for consumer and business dollars. Apple computers must be competitive when buyers compare features, CPUs and prices.
Intel has been producing quad-core Penryn desktop processors since November 2007, but Apple stayed with lower powered, mobile, dual-core processors throughout 2008 for its iMacs (despite the fact that iMacs should be considered to be desktop computers).
The Core 2 Quad Q6600 65 nm CPU has been available for $266 since November 2007, and $224 since April 20, 2008. See:
- Intel to cut 65 nm quad-core processor prices for 45 nm @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36136/139/
- Intel drops second quad-core CPU into the mainstream @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/37038/135/
- Have quad-core processors arrived in the mainstream? @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36548/135/
- Intel adds cheap dual-core, quad-core @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39135/135/
The Intel Core i7 desktop microprocessor was officially introduced on November 17, 2008. See:
Intel unleashes Core i7, beats itself @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40213/135/
Core i7 PCs launch with prices from $1250 to $13,000 @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40227/135/
The new quad-core Core i7 desktop processor is 20% more powerful than a quad-core Penryn desktop processor. It is already available on Windows desktops which sell for as little as $1250.
My question to Apple: How long will you wait before you build a competitively priced business and consumer desktop computer with a Core i7 processor?
All facts. And he's asking a fair question. APPLE, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO PULL YOUR FINGER OUT AND UPDATE YOUR LANGUISHING DESKTOP LINE?
PULL YER IPHONE OUTTA YER...(FILL IN BLANK.)
LEMON BON BON.
Two things:
1- Apple needs to be competitive in order to grow its world market share beyond 5% (if only to attract and keep software developpers);
2- The Intel Core i7 quad-core desktop processor (code name: Nehalem) is available NOW with Gateway computers that sell for as little as $1250. See:
Intel unleashes Core i7, beats itself @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40213/135/
Core i7 PCs launch with prices from $1250 to $13,000 @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40227/135/
This Friday, January 9, 2009, Microsoft is offering a free download of a near commercial quality beta copy of its next operating system, Windows 7. Everyone is highly impressed with the speed, connectivity and ease of use of this new release. See:
CES 2009: Microsoft releases Windows 7 beta @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40901/140/
Windows 7 with a quad-core Intel Core i7 desktop CPU computer is going to be HUGE, as big as Windows 95 was when it burried any hope that Mac OS would ever regain a 30% market share.
My advice to Apple: Give us a Core i7 desktop computer ASAP with Snow Leopard or else, you risk loosing it all, once again (Remember the death spiral that followed the release of Windows 95?)
Also legitimate. While this isn't the Apple of 1995...there is no room for complacency. One thing the launch of Mobile Me showed me was that maybe Apple needs to hire some workers? Are they battling on too many fronts with too small a work force?
Quad cores have been out ages and Apple don't have a consumer desktop line that offers them. And i7 is nowhere to be seen, even on a Mac Pro. And if they're waiting on server class i7s? Then why not offer the i7 on the 'consumer' Macs? Oh. One is laptop on a stand. And the other is a portable hard drive. ie we don't have a consumer desktop line.
Call it as I see it.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Does he?
Well, yes, Abster2Core has a point here, though he didn't need to resort to one of the recent outbursts.
I don't remember a single positive thing that ouragan has said about Apple, even ragging on Apple and Jobs about settled issues, no less, though maybe not as much lately. Looking at the previous twenty five posts, all of them are at least somewhat critical, most of them are very or totally critical.
To my surprise, Schiller uses more superlatives by a 2:1 ratio.
Re: Perhaps you can explain why you virtually trash everything from Apple.
Does he?
Yep. Some of his best are: But he continues to berate Jobs, Apple and its products, but he uses a PC He says on the other hand that he is a 20 year veteran of the Mac platform (whatever that means), but than again, he is a lawyer.
Also legitimate. While this isn't the Apple of 1995...there is no room for complacency. One thing the launch of Mobile Me showed me was that maybe Apple needs to hire some workers? Are they battling on too many fronts with too small a work force?
Quad cores have been out ages and Apple don't have a consumer desktop line that offers them. And i7 is nowhere to be seen, even on a Mac Pro. And if they're waiting on server class i7s? Then why not offer the i7 on the 'consumer' Macs? Oh. One is laptop on a stand. And the other is a portable hard drive. ie we don't have a consumer desktop line.
Call it as I see it.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Apple's simply not going to go Nehalem in their consumer lineup before the Mac Pro. I know that AI forum dwellers are enthusiasts but the reality is consumers are generally replacing computers that are 4 years old likely on the average. They read the buzz words but they don't understand. Core i7 means nothing to most of them. If Apple offers a Quad Core iMac model it won't matter if it's Core i7 or not it's going to be so much faster than the incumbent computer.
I see the iMac as going QC but not Core i7 with a Feb 09 update. The Mac Pro goes Nehalem Xeon and the next iMac refresh goes Core i7 with either desktop or mobile product.
There really is no rush. The economy should be healthier by summer going into the fall and Nehalem mobile product should be warming up nicely in the oven.
Apple has already taken the steps they need to prepare. Snow Leopard..getting rid of PPC support and standardizing on Cocoa.
I'm not singling out your post, just using it as a proxy for all the others like yours as well. I just have one question:
Don't you think Apple did the very nice but no mind-blowing Keynote on purpose, just to underscore the fact they want to be on their own release and announce schedule, not MacWorld's?
I think if Apple had not cut the cord there would have been several announcements for hardware shipping as late as early Mar. But now we will get those with "shipping this afternoon" or something like that when they are actually announced at a press event.
In a word, NO.
At least you're consistent, but I think you are quite incorrect. Both that it was a sucky keynote and that it wasn't intentionally non-Earthshattering.
It merely wasn't Earth-shattering, but was overall good to very good from a business perspective. No reason to get all riled up about that.