Nope, I'm saying that 10% of the potential users are a lot less valuable than the other 90%, which is why Apple puts its resources on those other 90%. You might not be aware of this, but Apple is a for-profit corporation. It makes its product choices based on the profitability of making the investment. Clearly you think they should be spending their money to develop RTL language capability. Clearly Apple does not agree. You can start a computer company and make that investment if you wish, but Apple did their research and determined that RTL writers wouldn't be a large enough market for its $1200 computers to make it worthwhile. Sorry!
So what your saying is that a 10% increase in sales for a company that has 3-4% sales world wide is insignificant.
What you said has nothing to do with what the poster I quoted said. They aren't backing up movies to a hard disk. They're running their computer off the hard disk. Big difference! I'm not suggesting that someone get a MacPro just because they're using 1 or 2TB of space. But maybe if they're that into their computer perhaps they bought the wrong one.
Just because it suits your needs doesn't mean it will suit others. Your needs have nothing to do with my quoted post.
But yeah...everyone who disagrees with you is automatically a "fanboy".
I'm doing both, running my OS off an external drive and storing video on external drives because the drive in the Apple just doesn't have enough space.
Look, I'm puzzled by you telling me that if I want a faster hard drive that there is something wrong with buying a mini and using an external Firewire 800 drive for a combined $1,400 Cdn.
Why in the world would I drop more than double that amount on a mac pro if in fact the combination I'm suggesting ? the mini combined with an external drive ? can get the job done.
Clearly you have no concept of having to work within a budget if you think the price difference between the mini and mac pro, even factoring in an external drive for the mini, is of such little consequence that one should just spend the money and not try to work with the mini instead.
Just to put this into perspective, using Canadian prices, I can opt for a mini plus a 1TB external drive, with the 2.23 processor and 4 gigs of RAM. The cost would be $1,417.09. If I opt for the mac pro with comparable storage (120gigs + 1TB), have 4 gigs of RAM, I would have to spend a minimum of $3,208. That's a difference of about $1,791 which is not pocket change in my world.
I can buy two minis for the price of one pro and have $374 left over. Consider that for a second. It means that I can buy a mini now and four years later replace it with a new machine. No worries about spending money on having to replace a worn out HD and on top of that have the latest and greatest OS thrown in as a bonus. Also, we all know that technology marches on. Is it farfetched to imagine that second mini bought in 2013 might rival a base mac pro purchased now? Very possible, I think. On top of which, if right now a very affordable external HD can be had with 1TB, where will storage be in 2013? 4TB, 8TB?
The big question is, can the new mini, combined with an external Firewire 800 drive do well enough to accomplish what I want? I'm thinking yes, in which case, how dumb would it be for me specifically to throw in an extra $1,791 just to ensure I haven't caused a hardware purist to flinch at the prospect of anyone running an OS on an external drive? Quite dumb, I think.
The Mac Pro has a place, certainly. But that place is not really on the desktops of the vast majority of computer users. I'm not going to use my machine to do any pro work. I am going to continue to pursue my photography and get into HD video. The mini should allow that. I could spend money on having a 7200 RPM internal drive put in the mini in place of the stock 5400 RPM unit but the mini is hardly a machine I would be comfortable in upgrading myself. So I have to pay to have it done and then what have I got? Less than the combined 1.12 TB of storage space available via adding the external with only a modest bump in performance. I have been running my current mini with the OS on an external attached via Firewire 400. It has been a decent combination. I imagine that Firewire 800 will bring a significant performance upgrade. Apparently a 7200 RPM external hooked up via Firewire 800 outperforms either of the internal drives offered by Apple.
Seems to me that if all I have to do is pick up an external drive and hook it up myself via Firewire 800, going to the trouble of putting a faster internal drive into the mini just doesn't make any sense. Paying more for less storage doesn't add up in my view if going the external route gets you enough performance to accomplish what you want.
So what your saying is that a 10% increase in sales for a company that has 3-4% sales world wide is insignificant.
I'm not sure why you keep saying "so what you're saying is"... what I'm saying is right there in black and white, and it says my name right at the top of the post. Here's an easy way for you to tell the difference. If the characters only appear on your screen after YOUR fingers moved around on the keys, that is YOU saying it, not me. Got it bucko?
Did you read the other post about the number of Japanese readers vs. the number o RTL readers in the world?
Are you aware of the different levels of income per capital between Japan, one of the largest economies in the world, and the generally backwards countries that use those RTL languages? Apple clearly doesn't think that it's worth the investment to develop whatever feature you apparently think is so important. Maybe they said to themselves - 'all those users already use Textedit, so why bother compete against something that sells for less than we want to sell our product for.'
Why don't you come out and explain to us, without all the deflected implications, what exactly you're saying. Are you saying Apple is racist? Stupid? What's your point brother? You've poo-pooed all of the reasonable explanations for why a rational, profit maximizing company would make a decision, so you clearly think Apple is doing something else. What is it?
Are you aware of the different levels of income per capital between Japan, one of the largest economies in the world, and the generally backwards countries that use those RTL languages? Apple clearly doesn't think that it's worth the investment to develop whatever feature you apparently think is so important. Maybe they said to themselves - 'all those users already use Textedit, so why bother compete against something that sells for less than we want to sell our product for.'
Why don't you come out and explain to us, without all the deflected implications, what exactly you're saying. Are you saying Apple is racist? Stupid? What's your point brother? You've poo-pooed all of the reasonable explanations for why a rational, profit maximizing company would make a decision, so you clearly think Apple is doing something else. What is it?
Write enough to be clear—I'm told elsewhere it's too much. Keep it short—another imparts all kinds of nasty sh!t I didn't say. Ya can't please everyone.
This will be a little lengthy because, heaven forbid, I'd hate to leave room for "deflected implications." You asked, here it is:
-------------------------------
Point 1:
-------------------------------
First you complain that I put words in your mouth, than you apply "Racist" to mine, even though I implied no such thing. What's your problem, brother?
For the sake of accuracy, I should not have used the exact phrasing, "So what you're saying is." I should have said something along the lines of, "What you said implies" or, "If what you said is true, than wouldn't "x" also be true?" or "Are you also saying "x" ?"
I didn't attempt to alter your meaning or assign one that can't be reasonably be inferred from your words. If my understanding of your intended meaning was incorrect as you seem to be complaining, feel free to clarify them and show me how I got it wrong.
Nothing I said, or the way I worded it, could reasonably be construed an accusation of racism. That was YOUR word. There were no "deflected implications." If that's what you got from it, than that's what you read into it. In fact, your argument (especially using words like "backwards") does no less to imply, that YOU think Apple is "racist" than what I said. So YOU might want to be a little more careful about the words you choose. Given how Apple comes down on social issues, I am pretty sure there is nothing racist about Apple's corporate philosophy and I made no such implication, and I'm sure you didn't either. However, "racist" was the word that appeared on the screen when you moved your fingers around on your keyboard.
-------------------------------
Point 2:
-------------------------------
Here is how I can have a rational opinion that differs from yours:
Of course I'm aware the world is made of different income groups. I assume Apple's view on the topic at hand is probably the argument you are offering. I'm arguing that there is an alternative way to look at the same information. Neither, has anything to do with "racism" or "stupidity." Data is data. However, there is rarely a single way to interpret any set of numbers—especially if the information is incomplete, nonexistent, old, or needs to be assessed as projected future trends over time.
One reason I can come to a different conclusion than you (without accusing anyone with a different opinion of implying racism on the part of someone else) is because, I (as do you ) have know idea if anyone in the world has actually done a census comparing the number of Japanese speakers at a certain income level vs. RTL speakers at an income level.
Another reason is, aside the fact that I recognize this information may or many not exist, I know that Apple will have to make inferences about what information (if any) that does. No matter what data exists, or how accurate it is, Apple will have to make certain assumptions (guesses) about any data, even if it's been researched extensively because it won't be static.
Therefore, I don't think evaluating risks about whether or not to enter a particular market is as clear cut as it seems you are suggesting. I doubt it's a simple or cheap calculation to make. We're talking about gathering historical data about population and income levels for large numbers of people in far flung groups, assuming that every country tracks this data with accuracy. When you're done spending the substantial wad of dough required to gather that info, it will reflect the past not the present. You will be using those numbers to predict the future. A prediction is just an educated guess, not a certainty. Maybe Apple has spent the money to do this, maybe not. I wouldn't be surprised to find that they probably developed an overview based on a generalized theory (again, they guess). They may barely have thought about it all.
If Apple, or any company, was in possession of a magical, super advanced formula for predicting the future with complete accuracy, they would rule the world (metaphorically, please don't accuse me of implying that Steve Jobs has an underground villain's lair and a Dr. Evil costume he likes to wear in private).
Choosing to hold a different rational opinion than your rational opinion is not the same as "poo-pooing" it.
-------------------------------
Point 3:
-------------------------------
Here is what that opinion is:
I would hardly call Israel and all the people in other countries that correspond with them backwards. Nor would I say that everyone in the middle east is poor. There is also a large number of Arabic speakers living in affluent countries in Europe, not to mention the US, that correspond to any number of people in other countries. The income level is striated, but it doesn't mean there isn't a large enough number of RTL speakers in the world with enough money to make marketing to them profitable. More importantly, it also doesn't mean there won't be in the future. Even if that number is a small percentage, the total number is so huge compared to the number of Japanese speakers, that even a small percentage of RTL speakers with enough income to buy electronics could rival or even surpass the number of Japanese speakers. Again, the exact number is something that neither you, nor I know with any certainty. We are both guessing.
However, an international company that doesn't seek to break into new markets is a company that is missing opportunities. Apple seems to think (as do you) the current numbers don't warrant the risk. I'm saying the value is more about the future than the present, although it still could be valid market to approach now. IMO, a wealthy company with capital in reserve but a relatively low market share would be making a good investment by entering an evolving economy at the ground level. The "first world" is becoming a saturated market, especially concerning electronics. We are to the point of inventing invisible theoretical products (like exotic, mortgage backed derivatives) to sell to each other because the sale of physical goods to a saturated culture is increasingly difficult. Developing economies represent a huge potential market (key word: potential) that any international company who wants to secure it's future should be looking at because that's where the majority of human beings live. Not necessarily because there are enough customers there that need your products now, but so you are already there before anyone else when the day comes that they need what you have. The differences we're talking about in part, is short term, vs. long term.
I could wish that Pages was Nisus Writer. Instead I bought Nisus Writer.
I could wish that Apple was less US centric, but they aren't. So in the mean time, why not support the developers who write Nisus Writer and Mellel?
In the mean time, feel free to put a bug in Apple's ear about RTL support. I have no problem with the argument that they should support RTL languages in their applications, but they clearly need to know that there's a constituency out there asking for it.
I've never read so many words that ended up saying nothing.
My question was, and is, why you think Apple is not targeting the market that you clearly think they should target.
My answer is clear - that they did the research and decided it wasn't worth the investment.
See if you can answer in less than 5000 words. I did it in less than 20.
Sigh. One of you says I wrote too much, one of you made false accusations because I wrote too little. You made simplistic statements with little support. If you want to brag about that, knock yourself out. Either way, I don't give a ratz a$$, no one one made you read what I wrote.
You however, just regurgitated what you've already said. I'll do the same for you since you asked me to:
My answer was clear if not concise. No one on this board, including you and I, know squat about any research Apple has or hasn't done to determine income levels of RTL speakers world wide.
I'm saying Apple should consider it for the reasons I gave. Since you seem not to have understood what I said, here it is again with yet more words for you to read (or not).
The population of Japan is tiny compared to the number of RTL speakers spread all over the world, and those numbers are increasing at a huge rate. That much we know. Those numbers mean that even a small percentage of a very huge number is still a big number.
Japan went from being a tiny country digging itself out of radioactive ashes to a global powerhouse because for one (like China) they develop very long term financial goals. It's no secret Western business tend to focus on immediate short-term profits—hence our current mess. Any company risks short-changing itself by not look into developing markets as a long-term investment.
If you still don't understand what I'm saying (not saying you have to agree with it) then you're own your own. I'm not saying it again. By the way, this is a tech site that discusses more complicated things than videos of people falling down on youtube. (this was 306 words by the way).
Guess what? Apple has considered it. They have people who are paid to consider it. They rejected it. Why? You offer absolutely no alternative explanation except that a $100 billion multinational company didn't manage to consider the possibility of making an investment to serve a few hundred million people.
Your only explanation is totally impossible. My explanation is by definition correct (since we know that you're not the first hyper genius to realize there are a few hundred million RTL writers out there, and we know that Apple didn't make a product for them). I'm done with you, you're a waste. And since you said you're done, I'm sure you'll let me get the last word (yeah right).
Guess what? Apple has considered it. They have people who are paid to consider it. They rejected it. Why? You offer absolutely no alternative explanation except that a $100 billion multinational company didn't manage to consider the possibility of making an investment to serve a few hundred million people.
Your only explanation is totally impossible. My explanation is by definition correct (since we know that you're not the first hyper genius to realize there are a few hundred million RTL writers out there, and we know that Apple didn't make a product for them). I'm done with you, you're a waste. And since you said you're done, I'm sure you'll let me get the last word (yeah right).
Guess what? The tag line in your signature says it all.
Yeah, I thought so. No answer to the only question that you yourself brought up.
Pity the people who think that they are more important in the world than they are. So a poor minority with a niche need doesn't get catered-to by a profit motivated company. Go move to Cuba and you can have your needs met.
Yeah, I thought so. No answer to the only question that you yourself brought up.
Pity the people who think that they are more important in the world than they are. So a poor minority with a niche need doesn't get catered-to by a profit motivated company. Go move to Cuba and you can have your needs met.
???????????
Cuba????????? WTF? Cuba? Really? Cuba? WOW! You thought what? It's hard to tell. I said zero about my needs, as did you. I only speak English, not Hebrew, nor Arabic, nor Japanese. Wild guess on my part, but I doubt you do either. This, I assume, has been a philosophical debate. You have yet to address or refute anything I've said with a logical alternative. Again, what you seem to imply is, for all your bluster, that because you say it, it is true. Not good enough. I invite you to step up. Your opinion is no more, or no less valid than mine. If you wish to ad validity to your opinion (which stands on it's own merit as such by the way), then please do so. I answered your questions (more than once). After insulting me (comments about, "racist"—say that to my face and earn the back of my hand—I doubt you'd have the guts to do so—assumption, yes, I stand buy it—puss) I even offered clarification (twice). Presenting the same rebuttal, again and again, as if repetition is a substitute for new insight, is a piss poor debating tactic.
Once again, had I read the quote at the bottom of every post you make earlier, I would have discerned more quickly the crux of the philosophy behind all your arguments and refrained from wasting my time writing to such a narcissist. Now I'm just curious:
"The solipsist sees himself or herself as the only individual in existence...."
That leaves no room for the considerations of another's point of view. It also offers the downfall of that philosophy embedded in it's structure. Because no one can know everything, no one can know anything, except self—because that's all anyone can truly experience. By extension, that implies, all that exists is based on what one can know with certainty—self. The fault with that logic is, If no one can know everything, no one can know self. Therefore, a dependance on existence built upon knowing self, means nothing exists, because know one can know everything, then no one can know anything, including self. Stupid, narcissistic crap. Intellectual masturbation? You bet. That's what you put on everything you post. You're welcome to it. Yeah. I went to college. I learned the same shite from a dude with patches on his elbow who couldn't do, so he taught—crap—sooo smart? Soooo? useless.
Now, if you want to have a logical debate. Stop spewing the same old crap and expand further on what you've already said. Don't complain that I was vague, and then complain when I offered clarification. I'm open to hear what you have to say, just say something new. I'd love to hear why you think what I've said said is wrong. Convince me. Here's your chance. Add more depth to what you've already said. That would be fun. Otherwise, I'm finding it harder, and harder to take anything you say seriously. Ok, go.
In 5000 words or more, or less, you choose, with no insult or comments about me personally, say something new and meaningful. I'm listening.
Not to mention you can easily (once you pop the danged case) replace it with a 500GB 7200RPM drive...and anyone that needs 3TB of storage should have a RAID 10 array (in a NAS or attached directly) or should get used to re-ripping terrabytes worth of data when inevitably one of their HDDs crash. It'll be nice when ZFS is fully part of OSX and we can simply use a JBOD case and z-raid.
Apple could have gotten rid of FW800 by including a combo USB/eSATA port. Or better yet had both. Nobody will run FW800 for external drives if they have access to eSATA. Especially with 3TB worth of RAID array.
The population of Japan is tiny compared to the number of RTL speakers spread all over the world, and those numbers are increasing at a huge rate. That much we know. Those numbers mean that even a small percentage of a very huge number is still a big number.
And the number of RTL language (script) speakers in the world was dwarfed by the number of vertical script users in the world. Guess what? All those users are doing LTR horizontal text today (including Japan).
The change was largely voluntary. There's no need for Apple to do RTL support in order to penetrate those markets. Those users will get used to it or fall behind. Their choice given that the US, China and India all do LTR.
Urdu, Arabic, Hebrew script users will just have to cope with poor RTL support.
Arab World: 320M with a average growth rate of 2.3%
Pakistan: 173M pop, 1.99% growth rate
Iran: 65M pop, 0.79% growth rate
India: 1.1B pop, 1.58% growth rate
China: 1.3B pop, 0.62% growth rate
US: 300M pop, 0.88% growth rate
The growth rates may be higher but dwarfed by the huge head start of China and India and their largest pop base is not much larger than the US.
Let's not even talk about the relative economic power of those six countries/groups.
Comments
Nope, I'm saying that 10% of the potential users are a lot less valuable than the other 90%, which is why Apple puts its resources on those other 90%. You might not be aware of this, but Apple is a for-profit corporation. It makes its product choices based on the profitability of making the investment. Clearly you think they should be spending their money to develop RTL language capability. Clearly Apple does not agree. You can start a computer company and make that investment if you wish, but Apple did their research and determined that RTL writers wouldn't be a large enough market for its $1200 computers to make it worthwhile. Sorry!
So what your saying is that a 10% increase in sales for a company that has 3-4% sales world wide is insignificant.
Easy there Cowboy. 8% US share does not make 10% share of world market. Apple have more like a 2-3% worldwide marketshare.
Acer sold more netbooks last quarter than all Apple computers combined.
So what your saying is that a 10% increase in sales for a company that has 3-4% sales world wide is insignificant.
Depends on what Apple has to do to gain that 10%.
Did you read the other post about the number of Japanese readers vs. the number o RTL readers in the world?
What you said has nothing to do with what the poster I quoted said. They aren't backing up movies to a hard disk. They're running their computer off the hard disk. Big difference! I'm not suggesting that someone get a MacPro just because they're using 1 or 2TB of space. But maybe if they're that into their computer perhaps they bought the wrong one.
Just because it suits your needs doesn't mean it will suit others. Your needs have nothing to do with my quoted post.
But yeah...everyone who disagrees with you is automatically a "fanboy".
I'm doing both, running my OS off an external drive and storing video on external drives because the drive in the Apple just doesn't have enough space.
Look, I'm puzzled by you telling me that if I want a faster hard drive that there is something wrong with buying a mini and using an external Firewire 800 drive for a combined $1,400 Cdn.
Why in the world would I drop more than double that amount on a mac pro if in fact the combination I'm suggesting ? the mini combined with an external drive ? can get the job done.
Clearly you have no concept of having to work within a budget if you think the price difference between the mini and mac pro, even factoring in an external drive for the mini, is of such little consequence that one should just spend the money and not try to work with the mini instead.
Just to put this into perspective, using Canadian prices, I can opt for a mini plus a 1TB external drive, with the 2.23 processor and 4 gigs of RAM. The cost would be $1,417.09. If I opt for the mac pro with comparable storage (120gigs + 1TB), have 4 gigs of RAM, I would have to spend a minimum of $3,208. That's a difference of about $1,791 which is not pocket change in my world.
I can buy two minis for the price of one pro and have $374 left over. Consider that for a second. It means that I can buy a mini now and four years later replace it with a new machine. No worries about spending money on having to replace a worn out HD and on top of that have the latest and greatest OS thrown in as a bonus. Also, we all know that technology marches on. Is it farfetched to imagine that second mini bought in 2013 might rival a base mac pro purchased now? Very possible, I think. On top of which, if right now a very affordable external HD can be had with 1TB, where will storage be in 2013? 4TB, 8TB?
The big question is, can the new mini, combined with an external Firewire 800 drive do well enough to accomplish what I want? I'm thinking yes, in which case, how dumb would it be for me specifically to throw in an extra $1,791 just to ensure I haven't caused a hardware purist to flinch at the prospect of anyone running an OS on an external drive? Quite dumb, I think.
The Mac Pro has a place, certainly. But that place is not really on the desktops of the vast majority of computer users. I'm not going to use my machine to do any pro work. I am going to continue to pursue my photography and get into HD video. The mini should allow that. I could spend money on having a 7200 RPM internal drive put in the mini in place of the stock 5400 RPM unit but the mini is hardly a machine I would be comfortable in upgrading myself. So I have to pay to have it done and then what have I got? Less than the combined 1.12 TB of storage space available via adding the external with only a modest bump in performance. I have been running my current mini with the OS on an external attached via Firewire 400. It has been a decent combination. I imagine that Firewire 800 will bring a significant performance upgrade. Apparently a 7200 RPM external hooked up via Firewire 800 outperforms either of the internal drives offered by Apple.
Seems to me that if all I have to do is pick up an external drive and hook it up myself via Firewire 800, going to the trouble of putting a faster internal drive into the mini just doesn't make any sense. Paying more for less storage doesn't add up in my view if going the external route gets you enough performance to accomplish what you want.
So what your saying is that a 10% increase in sales for a company that has 3-4% sales world wide is insignificant.
I'm not sure why you keep saying "so what you're saying is"... what I'm saying is right there in black and white, and it says my name right at the top of the post. Here's an easy way for you to tell the difference. If the characters only appear on your screen after YOUR fingers moved around on the keys, that is YOU saying it, not me. Got it bucko?
Did you read the other post about the number of Japanese readers vs. the number o RTL readers in the world?
Are you aware of the different levels of income per capital between Japan, one of the largest economies in the world, and the generally backwards countries that use those RTL languages? Apple clearly doesn't think that it's worth the investment to develop whatever feature you apparently think is so important. Maybe they said to themselves - 'all those users already use Textedit, so why bother compete against something that sells for less than we want to sell our product for.'
Why don't you come out and explain to us, without all the deflected implications, what exactly you're saying. Are you saying Apple is racist? Stupid? What's your point brother? You've poo-pooed all of the reasonable explanations for why a rational, profit maximizing company would make a decision, so you clearly think Apple is doing something else. What is it?
Are you aware of the different levels of income per capital between Japan, one of the largest economies in the world, and the generally backwards countries that use those RTL languages? Apple clearly doesn't think that it's worth the investment to develop whatever feature you apparently think is so important. Maybe they said to themselves - 'all those users already use Textedit, so why bother compete against something that sells for less than we want to sell our product for.'
Why don't you come out and explain to us, without all the deflected implications, what exactly you're saying. Are you saying Apple is racist? Stupid? What's your point brother? You've poo-pooed all of the reasonable explanations for why a rational, profit maximizing company would make a decision, so you clearly think Apple is doing something else. What is it?
Write enough to be clear—I'm told elsewhere it's too much. Keep it short—another imparts all kinds of nasty sh!t I didn't say. Ya can't please everyone.
This will be a little lengthy because, heaven forbid, I'd hate to leave room for "deflected implications." You asked, here it is:
-------------------------------
Point 1:
-------------------------------
First you complain that I put words in your mouth, than you apply "Racist" to mine, even though I implied no such thing. What's your problem, brother?
For the sake of accuracy, I should not have used the exact phrasing, "So what you're saying is." I should have said something along the lines of, "What you said implies" or, "If what you said is true, than wouldn't "x" also be true?" or "Are you also saying "x" ?"
I didn't attempt to alter your meaning or assign one that can't be reasonably be inferred from your words. If my understanding of your intended meaning was incorrect as you seem to be complaining, feel free to clarify them and show me how I got it wrong.
Nothing I said, or the way I worded it, could reasonably be construed an accusation of racism. That was YOUR word. There were no "deflected implications." If that's what you got from it, than that's what you read into it. In fact, your argument (especially using words like "backwards") does no less to imply, that YOU think Apple is "racist" than what I said. So YOU might want to be a little more careful about the words you choose. Given how Apple comes down on social issues, I am pretty sure there is nothing racist about Apple's corporate philosophy and I made no such implication, and I'm sure you didn't either. However, "racist" was the word that appeared on the screen when you moved your fingers around on your keyboard.
-------------------------------
Point 2:
-------------------------------
Here is how I can have a rational opinion that differs from yours:
Of course I'm aware the world is made of different income groups. I assume Apple's view on the topic at hand is probably the argument you are offering. I'm arguing that there is an alternative way to look at the same information. Neither, has anything to do with "racism" or "stupidity." Data is data. However, there is rarely a single way to interpret any set of numbers—especially if the information is incomplete, nonexistent, old, or needs to be assessed as projected future trends over time.
One reason I can come to a different conclusion than you (without accusing anyone with a different opinion of implying racism on the part of someone else) is because, I (as do you ) have know idea if anyone in the world has actually done a census comparing the number of Japanese speakers at a certain income level vs. RTL speakers at an income level.
Another reason is, aside the fact that I recognize this information may or many not exist, I know that Apple will have to make inferences about what information (if any) that does. No matter what data exists, or how accurate it is, Apple will have to make certain assumptions (guesses) about any data, even if it's been researched extensively because it won't be static.
Therefore, I don't think evaluating risks about whether or not to enter a particular market is as clear cut as it seems you are suggesting. I doubt it's a simple or cheap calculation to make. We're talking about gathering historical data about population and income levels for large numbers of people in far flung groups, assuming that every country tracks this data with accuracy. When you're done spending the substantial wad of dough required to gather that info, it will reflect the past not the present. You will be using those numbers to predict the future. A prediction is just an educated guess, not a certainty. Maybe Apple has spent the money to do this, maybe not. I wouldn't be surprised to find that they probably developed an overview based on a generalized theory (again, they guess). They may barely have thought about it all.
If Apple, or any company, was in possession of a magical, super advanced formula for predicting the future with complete accuracy, they would rule the world (metaphorically, please don't accuse me of implying that Steve Jobs has an underground villain's lair and a Dr. Evil costume he likes to wear in private).
Choosing to hold a different rational opinion than your rational opinion is not the same as "poo-pooing" it.
-------------------------------
Point 3:
-------------------------------
Here is what that opinion is:
I would hardly call Israel and all the people in other countries that correspond with them backwards. Nor would I say that everyone in the middle east is poor. There is also a large number of Arabic speakers living in affluent countries in Europe, not to mention the US, that correspond to any number of people in other countries. The income level is striated, but it doesn't mean there isn't a large enough number of RTL speakers in the world with enough money to make marketing to them profitable. More importantly, it also doesn't mean there won't be in the future. Even if that number is a small percentage, the total number is so huge compared to the number of Japanese speakers, that even a small percentage of RTL speakers with enough income to buy electronics could rival or even surpass the number of Japanese speakers. Again, the exact number is something that neither you, nor I know with any certainty. We are both guessing.
However, an international company that doesn't seek to break into new markets is a company that is missing opportunities. Apple seems to think (as do you) the current numbers don't warrant the risk. I'm saying the value is more about the future than the present, although it still could be valid market to approach now. IMO, a wealthy company with capital in reserve but a relatively low market share would be making a good investment by entering an evolving economy at the ground level. The "first world" is becoming a saturated market, especially concerning electronics. We are to the point of inventing invisible theoretical products (like exotic, mortgage backed derivatives) to sell to each other because the sale of physical goods to a saturated culture is increasingly difficult. Developing economies represent a huge potential market (key word: potential) that any international company who wants to secure it's future should be looking at because that's where the majority of human beings live. Not necessarily because there are enough customers there that need your products now, but so you are already there before anyone else when the day comes that they need what you have. The differences we're talking about in part, is short term, vs. long term.
That's what I'm saying (you asked).
You can say what you want.
I could wish that Apple was less US centric, but they aren't. So in the mean time, why not support the developers who write Nisus Writer and Mellel?
In the mean time, feel free to put a bug in Apple's ear about RTL support. I have no problem with the argument that they should support RTL languages in their applications, but they clearly need to know that there's a constituency out there asking for it.
[B]Blah blah blah...
I've never read so many words that ended up saying nothing.
My question was, and is, why you think Apple is not targeting the market that you clearly think they should target.
My answer is clear - that they did the research and decided it wasn't worth the investment.
See if you can answer in less than 5000 words. I did it in less than 20.
I've never read so many words that ended up saying nothing.
My question was, and is, why you think Apple is not targeting the market that you clearly think they should target.
My answer is clear - that they did the research and decided it wasn't worth the investment.
See if you can answer in less than 5000 words. I did it in less than 20.
Sigh. One of you says I wrote too much, one of you made false accusations because I wrote too little. You made simplistic statements with little support. If you want to brag about that, knock yourself out. Either way, I don't give a ratz a$$, no one one made you read what I wrote.
You however, just regurgitated what you've already said. I'll do the same for you since you asked me to:
My answer was clear if not concise. No one on this board, including you and I, know squat about any research Apple has or hasn't done to determine income levels of RTL speakers world wide.
I'm saying Apple should consider it for the reasons I gave. Since you seem not to have understood what I said, here it is again with yet more words for you to read (or not).
The population of Japan is tiny compared to the number of RTL speakers spread all over the world, and those numbers are increasing at a huge rate. That much we know. Those numbers mean that even a small percentage of a very huge number is still a big number.
Japan went from being a tiny country digging itself out of radioactive ashes to a global powerhouse because for one (like China) they develop very long term financial goals. It's no secret Western business tend to focus on immediate short-term profits—hence our current mess. Any company risks short-changing itself by not look into developing markets as a long-term investment.
If you still don't understand what I'm saying (not saying you have to agree with it) then you're own your own. I'm not saying it again. By the way, this is a tech site that discusses more complicated things than videos of people falling down on youtube. (this was 306 words by the way).
Your only explanation is totally impossible. My explanation is by definition correct (since we know that you're not the first hyper genius to realize there are a few hundred million RTL writers out there, and we know that Apple didn't make a product for them). I'm done with you, you're a waste. And since you said you're done, I'm sure you'll let me get the last word (yeah right).
Guess what? Apple has considered it. They have people who are paid to consider it. They rejected it. Why? You offer absolutely no alternative explanation except that a $100 billion multinational company didn't manage to consider the possibility of making an investment to serve a few hundred million people.
Your only explanation is totally impossible. My explanation is by definition correct (since we know that you're not the first hyper genius to realize there are a few hundred million RTL writers out there, and we know that Apple didn't make a product for them). I'm done with you, you're a waste. And since you said you're done, I'm sure you'll let me get the last word (yeah right).
Guess what? The tag line in your signature says it all.
Nothing
Yeah, I thought so. No answer to the only question that you yourself brought up.
Pity the people who think that they are more important in the world than they are. So a poor minority with a niche need doesn't get catered-to by a profit motivated company. Go move to Cuba and you can have your needs met.
Yeah, I thought so. No answer to the only question that you yourself brought up.
Pity the people who think that they are more important in the world than they are. So a poor minority with a niche need doesn't get catered-to by a profit motivated company. Go move to Cuba and you can have your needs met.
???????????
Cuba????????? WTF? Cuba? Really? Cuba? WOW! You thought what? It's hard to tell. I said zero about my needs, as did you. I only speak English, not Hebrew, nor Arabic, nor Japanese. Wild guess on my part, but I doubt you do either. This, I assume, has been a philosophical debate. You have yet to address or refute anything I've said with a logical alternative. Again, what you seem to imply is, for all your bluster, that because you say it, it is true. Not good enough. I invite you to step up. Your opinion is no more, or no less valid than mine. If you wish to ad validity to your opinion (which stands on it's own merit as such by the way), then please do so. I answered your questions (more than once). After insulting me (comments about, "racist"—say that to my face and earn the back of my hand—I doubt you'd have the guts to do so—assumption, yes, I stand buy it—puss) I even offered clarification (twice). Presenting the same rebuttal, again and again, as if repetition is a substitute for new insight, is a piss poor debating tactic.
Once again, had I read the quote at the bottom of every post you make earlier, I would have discerned more quickly the crux of the philosophy behind all your arguments and refrained from wasting my time writing to such a narcissist. Now I'm just curious:
"The solipsist sees himself or herself as the only individual in existence...."
That leaves no room for the considerations of another's point of view. It also offers the downfall of that philosophy embedded in it's structure. Because no one can know everything, no one can know anything, except self—because that's all anyone can truly experience. By extension, that implies, all that exists is based on what one can know with certainty—self. The fault with that logic is, If no one can know everything, no one can know self. Therefore, a dependance on existence built upon knowing self, means nothing exists, because know one can know everything, then no one can know anything, including self. Stupid, narcissistic crap. Intellectual masturbation? You bet. That's what you put on everything you post. You're welcome to it. Yeah. I went to college. I learned the same shite from a dude with patches on his elbow who couldn't do, so he taught—crap—sooo smart? Soooo? useless.
Now, if you want to have a logical debate. Stop spewing the same old crap and expand further on what you've already said. Don't complain that I was vague, and then complain when I offered clarification. I'm open to hear what you have to say, just say something new. I'd love to hear why you think what I've said said is wrong. Convince me. Here's your chance. Add more depth to what you've already said. That would be fun. Otherwise, I'm finding it harder, and harder to take anything you say seriously. Ok, go.
In 5000 words or more, or less, you choose, with no insult or comments about me personally, say something new and meaningful. I'm listening.
So say we all!
45 year old BSG geek. Sad, I admit.
Interesting thought. Except, an internal 5400 RPM SATA drive is going to be faster than the external FW800 drive.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=663343
Not to mention you can easily (once you pop the danged case) replace it with a 500GB 7200RPM drive...and anyone that needs 3TB of storage should have a RAID 10 array (in a NAS or attached directly) or should get used to re-ripping terrabytes worth of data when inevitably one of their HDDs crash. It'll be nice when ZFS is fully part of OSX and we can simply use a JBOD case and z-raid.
Apple could have gotten rid of FW800 by including a combo USB/eSATA port. Or better yet had both. Nobody will run FW800 for external drives if they have access to eSATA. Especially with 3TB worth of RAID array.
So say we all!
45 year old BSG geek. Sad, I admit.
So Say We All! Nothing frakkin' sad with that. Frak this Gawds-dammned frakkin' thread.
The population of Japan is tiny compared to the number of RTL speakers spread all over the world, and those numbers are increasing at a huge rate. That much we know. Those numbers mean that even a small percentage of a very huge number is still a big number.
And the number of RTL language (script) speakers in the world was dwarfed by the number of vertical script users in the world. Guess what? All those users are doing LTR horizontal text today (including Japan).
The change was largely voluntary. There's no need for Apple to do RTL support in order to penetrate those markets. Those users will get used to it or fall behind. Their choice given that the US, China and India all do LTR.
Urdu, Arabic, Hebrew script users will just have to cope with poor RTL support.
Arab World: 320M with a average growth rate of 2.3%
Pakistan: 173M pop, 1.99% growth rate
Iran: 65M pop, 0.79% growth rate
India: 1.1B pop, 1.58% growth rate
China: 1.3B pop, 0.62% growth rate
US: 300M pop, 0.88% growth rate
The growth rates may be higher but dwarfed by the huge head start of China and India and their largest pop base is not much larger than the US.
Let's not even talk about the relative economic power of those six countries/groups.