I hope it's real. The cost of Microsoft is skyrocketing (they have to maintain their growth right?) So giving people a nice juicy carrot to trease them away from MS would be fantastic. Jobs said yesterday they wanted to double market share and they'll do that if they can get businesses to buy their solution.
As for the camera. I pray it's real. This sounds like whatI've been waiting for!! As for the price, I can see it around $999, so $1499 CDN.. I was going to do that for the Sony MicroMV.. but that format does not work with Firewire.
crossing my fingers, and transfering more $$ to my ING account to get ready..
People Unlimited Licenses are Licenses to access the Server and do not necessarily denote an entire OS. Think about it this way sure you could purchase and XServe with Unlimited CL's but that doesn't mean your legion of Beige G3's have OSX running on them. This is very significant and I applaud Apple for not following MicroSiths moneygrubbing ways!
How does this 'glove' license differ from the MacOS of old? Traditionally the OS was free after purchasing a new machine. You could go to a local computer store with a floppy and get a new copy.
If this is the same basic idea of the 'glove' license then 1) Jobs has done it before and 2) it was ultimately revoked in favor of paid upgrades and could easily be revoked again.
Is there some understanding about this license I'm missing?
Glove is an EXCELLENT idea given the recent backlash against MS and the BSA's extortion practices.
Scenario: You have 1000 computers in your company. You have 760 copies of Office XP, 785 copies of XP, 120 copies of NT, 15 copies of Win95, 124 copies of Office98, etc, etc, etc. Machines get moved around, reinstalled (no kidding, really?), parts swapped out, etc, etc.
BSA/MS calls you up and says "We're auditing you. If you have even *ONE* unauthorized copy of our software on *ANY* machine, we're pressing charges, at $200,000 per violation."
You freak. You don't have the paper trail and proof at the level of detail they're looking for. You can't *prove* you have licenses for every piece of software - manuals are missing, serial numbers are moved between machines, etc. Estimated costs run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars to do a complete survey and analysis.
"That's okay," the BSA/MS says, "to make it easy on you, you can just pay us $100 per machine, per year, and we won't audit you."
This is for software you already own, remember.
Extortion. There's no difference between this and mob protection.
They've tried it against several NW school districts around Portland in particular, and the result? The districts are moving to Linux ASAP. (See <a href="http://www.slashdot.org"; target="_blank">www.slashdot.org</a> for details... search for BSA for various stories along these lines.)
Eliminating the need for license tracking is a *HUGE* win for small to medium businesses. Large corporations often have robust asset management in place, but medium ones don't, and have more to track than small ones. As evidenced above, this is also a huge win for school districts.
'Glove' would kick MS directly in the groin. Apple loses a minimal amount of OS revenue at this point in time, really (most purchases are still consumer, single-user), and potentially sells a *LOT* more machines... which is where the money is. Beautiful.
Yup, if Allen's telling the truth (and even if not) Glove is nothing short of genius.
Most Apple revenue is in hardware. Bleating about TCO becomes easier ... it smells of Linuxy open-ness, it smells like the xServe licensing ploy...
Some serious differentiation between MS emerges (always been there, but now more obvious): MS may rip off the OS, but they *cannot* rip off this pricing policy: licensing is their lifeblood.
MS concentrate on network per-usage of apps in the future ... Apple do EXACTLY the opposite.
MS concentrate on "it's all about the network" and Apple say it's all about the device. Sod "activation," just go for it.
Oh and btw, we'll integrate with your existing infrastructure.
There's some serious strategy here. This fits with emphasis on iPod as a data / home shuttle too. iPod is going to be VERY important.
I buy this. I buy it buy it buy it, as a good idea even if the poor sap in Cupertino who has to read this **** is laughing his bollocks off.
Actually, that scenario was beautifully done. Good job. And you're right, this would definitely serve Microsoft their balls on a plate with a side of fries.
There is one thing I don't believe though, and that is this: if this person who started the idea was REALLY legit, he would have at LEAST come up with a cool nickname, like 'zee Mole' or 'Worker Bee 2' or something interesting.
Glove sounds like a very good idea for now, though if Apple does implement this, it would only be temporary until they reach critical mass in market share. Software sales are pure profit once they go GM. This revenue is too significant to give up indefinitely.
Job's is quoted all over the place as trying to have Apple "innovate" their way through the recession. I get the feeling that we have yet to see their next, big innovative thing. Is it this so called Lucida? Dunno, but the Lucida is NOT a technological challenge. They sell disposable underwater cameras now for christ sake!
Imagine an iPod-size camera (not unlike the device in that commercial with the midget jumping out at people). Now imagine that it came with a clear plastic shell that was waterproof but still allowed you access to the record and stop buttons.
If Apple has a camcorder/camera in the works I hope they don't make it too small. Ever try taking a decent picture with one of those pocket cams?.... not very easy. iPod size is much too small.
<strong>Glove sounds like a very good idea for now, though if Apple does implement this, it would only be temporary until they reach critical mass in market share. Software sales are pure profit once they go GM. This revenue is too significant to give up indefinitely.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yup. This is why antitrust laws exist: When you have a lock on a market, it's really easy to abuse it. However, I don't think we'll have to worry about Apple replacing MS for some time now.
[quote]<strong>Job's is quoted all over the place as trying to have Apple "innovate" their way through the recession. I get the feeling that we have yet to see their next, big innovative thing. Is it this so called Lucida? Dunno, but the Lucida is NOT a technological challenge. They sell disposable underwater cameras now for christ sake!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Innovation doesn't imply engineering challenges. It can, of course, but you can innovate by taking existing technologies and combining them in a way that inspires people, or even by hitting a features/price point that nobody had managed to do before (consider the Palm: I'm spending how much for what?! No wonder sales are sagging).
[quote]<strong>Imagine an iPod-size camera (not unlike the device in that commercial with the midget jumping out at people). Now imagine that it came with a clear plastic shell that was waterproof but still allowed you access to the record and stop buttons.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Then imagine not having to deal with film or cards or sticks or batteries. You recharge a battery that's got enough juice to go for hours, shoot pictures onto a drive that's got enough capacity to store a lot of pictures, and download 'em all over FireWire to a Mac (recharging the battery in the process), where iPhoto catalogs, tweaks, and prints them. Maybe you could even upload pictures to the camera and use it as a sort of visual iPod? Then, take the usual, bewildering array of menus and controls and boil them down to something simple and intuitive, again iPod style.
Optics are not an issue, because there is a 0% chance that Apple will try to do any of that. They'll buy someone else's optics (probably Kodak's, if the QuickTake is any precedent), and distinguish their offering by the little computer wrapped around the camera - which they're in a better position to engineer than any of the camera manufacturers are, with the possible exceptions of Sony and HP.
Like the iPod, it will command a premium price. But it might just be intuitive and hassle-free enough to fly off the shelves like the iPod has.
Oh, and it'll be white, not clear. Clear plastic is so last year.
I agree that software is pure profit once you go golden master, but I don't neccessarily agree that the OS itself would be a huge profit stream for Apple once the transition is complete.
Why would I buy OSX for my macs? When the time comes I buy news macs and get the latest OSX along with them (free!).
I really think that OSX sales have been a lot higher than they will ever be again (as a percentage of total revenue) because this is the transition period. Once the transition period is done the vast majority of people will use the OS that comes with their machine and for the most part see little significant need to upgrade beyond free bug fixes and free minor updates.
Apple can afford to give the OS away for free. M$ cannot. You'll still have to buy FCP, DVD Sudio Pro, cinema tools, QT pro, etc... upgrades and packages for each of you machines. New versions of these should continue to work on versions of OSX that are a few dot.point versions behind the latest and greatest. People upgrade software and not the OS unless they need the new OS for teh new software/features. That situation will largely disappear once OSX is fully implemented. Apple won't give up that much of a revenue stream.
<strong>Glove is a code name given to a Apple (new) strategy that started the day after Microsoft announced their software as a service model. Glove means "one size fits all". This strategy is designed for the heart of MS's strategy. I know the general specs. After July, only "1" OSX license is required to install OSX on any Mac. Every corporation, printshop, creative house, school, college or anybody is ONLY required to purchase "1" license of OSX.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OK. Take this rumor, Darwin x86, and x86 OS X nVidia drivers, mix in a little Jaguar, and add a dash of "we want marketshare."
I've always believed that OS X x86 existed, but I always thought it was "just in case." This makes it seem possible that Apple might release an x86 OS X!
Oh, one more thing...VirtualPC for Windows. Runs other/multiple Windows environments within Windows, and run them at hardware speed, since it is hardware, after all.
If Apple cut a deal with Connectix, and allowed x86 users to install their favorite Windows alongside Mac OS X to run legacy software, Apple could snatch a substantial portion of the x86 OS marketshare.
I'll start with the camera. Yes/No/Maybe, but if true, it would be unlikely to use any type of 'tape'. The entire body would be sealed. Video/Audio/Still Picture transfer to and from the camera would be entirely electronic. The only real issue would be the lens. It is far easier to design and manufacture a permanent (non-removable) zoom lens. No expandability like a Canon or Nikon 35mm camera system.
I see 'glove' three ways.
1) A rumor that will go nowhere.
2) Deliberate disinformation*. Unlikely, but if true, it begs the question, what's the follow up?
3) A valid idea given serious thought at Apple computer.
1) A rumor will fade away (well, at least outside the Mac industry).
2) Besides the shaking and quaking at Microsoft, what purpose would disinformation serve? Only FUD. It could give Microsoft an incentive to delay, or change some of their licensing plans. However, it's more likely to reverse Microsoft's attention (competition efforts) from 90% against Linux, to 90% against Apple. I know you've all heard "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction". Is this what they (Apple) want (disinformation/FUD)? If so, we now enter the realm of politics, Legal warfare (DOJ vs. MS is only the most obvious), and public attacks disguised as mind share and marketing games. Historically, this is definitely not one of Apple's (or Steve Job's) strengths.
3) If this is truly under discussion at Apple, then this info leak will/has cause(d) a great deal of harm. It could even shelve the plan. Leaks on Strategic plans cause FAR more harm than "Will the next Mac have 133 or 266 DDR...".
While it's very clear that Apple wishes to keep plans secret, This type of leak MUST STOP.
I understand that everyone will do as they wish, but I (no, I'm not an Apple employee, or stock holder) ask that we all be a little more responsible for what we say (write).
Personally, I think it's an excellent idea, but a horrible leak.
* 'Allen', no disrespect was intended toward you. If this was made up, then we've given this far more credibility than it deserves. If this is true, and you've leaked something you shouldn't, then, in my opinion, this was very poor judgment.
<strong>Glove sounds like a very good idea for now, though if Apple does implement this, it would only be temporary until they reach critical mass in market share. Software sales are pure profit once they go GM. This revenue is too significant to give up indefinitely.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, OS sales aren't that big a peice of Apple's pie, relative to hardware sales. Giving up a few million dollars in OS sales, would make sense long term if it could help generate hardware sales enough to at least balance the lost OS revenue. Getting people/corporations to buy and install the hardware is Apple's biggest challenge and their final goal. So, even if Glove only results in enough of an increase in hardware sales to make up for the lost OS sales, it is worth it to get the hardware in the door. Once a beachhead is established, it can be advanced. Personnaly, I think it would result in hardware sales increases that would more than make up for lost OS revenue, would would be a benefit all on it's own.
Apple has no excuse not to do Glove, at least for now.
Do people think Lucida will have a hard drive if Apple makes it?
It'll be the iPod of video. Shoot, store, and watch anytime. With a hard drive it can store files, no stupid media to deal with, and fast, plus you can store other stuff on it. You just need cash. I really have to get good job this summer!
[quote] MS-SQL has (or is going to) processor based licensing (what the f*&$? <hr></blockquote>
You think thats bad? Check out oracle pricing some time ... They charge based on:
1) Number of servers running oracle (duh)
2) Amt. of processors in each server
3) Speed of the processors (!)
Which means, you pay a hell of a lot more for oracle, on higher end hardware. Sure it'll run faster, but it won't be oracle's doing, it'll be the hardware! We run our oracle database on an old 360Mhz UltraSparcII chip ... very cheap! (and performance is not bad for the limited amount of use it gets).
3) If this is truly under discussion at Apple, then this info leak will/has cause(d) a great deal of harm. It could even shelve the plan.</strong><hr></blockquote>
How very interesting -- you fret about Allen's possible Glove disinformation and the negative repercussions of FUD (quite legitimately, I might add), and then you go spread some FUD of your own: "There was a dream that was Glove. You could only whisper it. Anything more than a whisper, and it would vanish. And I fear it will not survive... (not your exact quote, but the same idea, plus a little dramatic flair)
[quote]<strong>Leaks on Strategic plans cause FAR more harm than "Will the next Mac have 133 or 266 DDR...".[ /qb]<hr></blockquote>
Yes, yes, yes. Wrong. Here we are again with something everybody knows, but that, regrettably, has no basis. How is a strategy leak so much more damaging? I fail to see how a leak on a strategic plan is any better or worse for Apple than Dorsal posting impressions of prototype hardware. We all know that Intel?s strategy is to jack up clockspeed and trick consumers into believing the MHz Myth. Does that make their strategy any less effective?
Fact is, Allen?s ?leak? won?t shelve the project, and it won?t change anything for Apple. If Glove exists, then Apple will make a decision on whether the strategy makes good business sense in the current business climate. The only way a leak at this point would be damaging is if the ELEMENT OF SURPRISE were somehow key to Glove working. Given Apple?s licensing approach with OSX Server, I think its safe to assume that the ?Surprise!? factor is pretty much gone. If Apple decides that Glove is a good strategy, it?ll still be a good strategy even if word gets out early. Knowing the specs of the new PowerBook two weeks in advance doesn?t make them any slower once they finally arrive.
[quote][qb]* 'Allen', no disrespect was intended toward you. If this was made up, then we've given this far more credibility than it deserves. If this is true, and you've leaked something you shouldn't, then, in my opinion, this was very poor judgment.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmm? you spend half of your post basically calling him an irresponsible snitch who has sabotaged Apple?s fragile, last, best hope for market domination, and then you insist that no disrespect was intended. I guess you were merely trying to make an example of him for the good of all AI. What??
I guess my real problem, Me, is that you presume to know Allen?s business better than Allen does. Allen can post what he wants, and trumpeting the tune of FUD doesn?t make your calls for censorship any more compelling. Allen?s ideas are good ones, and AI would be worse off if he hadn?t posted them.
[quote]<strong>
I understand that everyone will do as they wish, but I (no, I'm not an Apple employee, or stock holder) ask that we all be a little more responsible for what we say (write). </strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>Apple has no excuse not to do Glove, at least for now.
Do people think Lucida will have a hard drive if Apple makes it?
It'll be the iPod of video. Shoot, store, and watch anytime. With a hard drive it can store files, no stupid media to deal with, and fast, plus you can store other stuff on it. You just need cash. I really have to get good job this summer!</strong><hr></blockquote>
It just hit me. QT6 is just about due. With the MPEG4 technology in it, you could pack a tremendous amount of quality video onto a 10GB drive. Mmm...the coincedences are coalescing into something with definate drool factor. *slurp!*
Glove = [i]internal codename for Xserve unlimited client policy[/I
Lucida= internal codename for Quartz Extreme.
Underwater camera? Can't i just stick my PalmPix in a zip lock baggy?
As for the poster's claim regarding the free OS license, after much thought, I think this will be the quickest way to double-digit marketshare. Apple could keep prices higher for hardware and level the playing field.
Wouldn't it be great if in 10 years Microsoft's core business was Mac apps?
Comments
I hope it's real. The cost of Microsoft is skyrocketing (they have to maintain their growth right?) So giving people a nice juicy carrot to trease them away from MS would be fantastic. Jobs said yesterday they wanted to double market share and they'll do that if they can get businesses to buy their solution.
As for the camera. I pray it's real. This sounds like whatI've been waiting for!! As for the price, I can see it around $999, so $1499 CDN.. I was going to do that for the Sony MicroMV.. but that format does not work with Firewire.
crossing my fingers, and transfering more $$ to my ING account to get ready..
[ 05-24-2002: Message edited by: JasonPP ]</p>
If this is the same basic idea of the 'glove' license then 1) Jobs has done it before and 2) it was ultimately revoked in favor of paid upgrades and could easily be revoked again.
Is there some understanding about this license I'm missing?
Scenario: You have 1000 computers in your company. You have 760 copies of Office XP, 785 copies of XP, 120 copies of NT, 15 copies of Win95, 124 copies of Office98, etc, etc, etc. Machines get moved around, reinstalled (no kidding, really?), parts swapped out, etc, etc.
BSA/MS calls you up and says "We're auditing you. If you have even *ONE* unauthorized copy of our software on *ANY* machine, we're pressing charges, at $200,000 per violation."
You freak. You don't have the paper trail and proof at the level of detail they're looking for. You can't *prove* you have licenses for every piece of software - manuals are missing, serial numbers are moved between machines, etc. Estimated costs run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars to do a complete survey and analysis.
"That's okay," the BSA/MS says, "to make it easy on you, you can just pay us $100 per machine, per year, and we won't audit you."
This is for software you already own, remember.
Extortion. There's no difference between this and mob protection.
They've tried it against several NW school districts around Portland in particular, and the result? The districts are moving to Linux ASAP. (See <a href="http://www.slashdot.org"; target="_blank">www.slashdot.org</a> for details... search for BSA for various stories along these lines.)
Eliminating the need for license tracking is a *HUGE* win for small to medium businesses. Large corporations often have robust asset management in place, but medium ones don't, and have more to track than small ones. As evidenced above, this is also a huge win for school districts.
'Glove' would kick MS directly in the groin. Apple loses a minimal amount of OS revenue at this point in time, really (most purchases are still consumer, single-user), and potentially sells a *LOT* more machines... which is where the money is. Beautiful.
Most Apple revenue is in hardware. Bleating about TCO becomes easier ... it smells of Linuxy open-ness, it smells like the xServe licensing ploy...
Some serious differentiation between MS emerges (always been there, but now more obvious): MS may rip off the OS, but they *cannot* rip off this pricing policy: licensing is their lifeblood.
MS concentrate on network per-usage of apps in the future ... Apple do EXACTLY the opposite.
MS concentrate on "it's all about the network" and Apple say it's all about the device. Sod "activation," just go for it.
Oh and btw, we'll integrate with your existing infrastructure.
There's some serious strategy here. This fits with emphasis on iPod as a data / home shuttle too. iPod is going to be VERY important.
I buy this. I buy it buy it buy it, as a good idea even if the poor sap in Cupertino who has to read this **** is laughing his bollocks off.
<strong>Glove is an EXCELLENT idea given the recent backlash against MS and the BSA's extortion practices.
Scenario: ..... Beautiful.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, that scenario was beautifully done. Good job. And you're right, this would definitely serve Microsoft their balls on a plate with a side of fries.
There is one thing I don't believe though, and that is this: if this person who started the idea was REALLY legit, he would have at LEAST come up with a cool nickname, like 'zee Mole' or 'Worker Bee 2' or something interesting.
Job's is quoted all over the place as trying to have Apple "innovate" their way through the recession. I get the feeling that we have yet to see their next, big innovative thing. Is it this so called Lucida? Dunno, but the Lucida is NOT a technological challenge. They sell disposable underwater cameras now for christ sake!
Imagine an iPod-size camera (not unlike the device in that commercial with the midget jumping out at people). Now imagine that it came with a clear plastic shell that was waterproof but still allowed you access to the record and stop buttons.
<strong>Glove sounds like a very good idea for now, though if Apple does implement this, it would only be temporary until they reach critical mass in market share. Software sales are pure profit once they go GM. This revenue is too significant to give up indefinitely.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yup. This is why antitrust laws exist: When you have a lock on a market, it's really easy to abuse it. However, I don't think we'll have to worry about Apple replacing MS for some time now.
[quote]<strong>Job's is quoted all over the place as trying to have Apple "innovate" their way through the recession. I get the feeling that we have yet to see their next, big innovative thing. Is it this so called Lucida? Dunno, but the Lucida is NOT a technological challenge. They sell disposable underwater cameras now for christ sake!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Innovation doesn't imply engineering challenges. It can, of course, but you can innovate by taking existing technologies and combining them in a way that inspires people, or even by hitting a features/price point that nobody had managed to do before (consider the Palm: I'm spending how much for what?! No wonder sales are sagging).
[quote]<strong>Imagine an iPod-size camera (not unlike the device in that commercial with the midget jumping out at people). Now imagine that it came with a clear plastic shell that was waterproof but still allowed you access to the record and stop buttons.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Then imagine not having to deal with film or cards or sticks or batteries. You recharge a battery that's got enough juice to go for hours, shoot pictures onto a drive that's got enough capacity to store a lot of pictures, and download 'em all over FireWire to a Mac (recharging the battery in the process), where iPhoto catalogs, tweaks, and prints them. Maybe you could even upload pictures to the camera and use it as a sort of visual iPod? Then, take the usual, bewildering array of menus and controls and boil them down to something simple and intuitive, again iPod style.
Optics are not an issue, because there is a 0% chance that Apple will try to do any of that. They'll buy someone else's optics (probably Kodak's, if the QuickTake is any precedent), and distinguish their offering by the little computer wrapped around the camera - which they're in a better position to engineer than any of the camera manufacturers are, with the possible exceptions of Sony and HP.
Like the iPod, it will command a premium price. But it might just be intuitive and hassle-free enough to fly off the shelves like the iPod has.
Oh, and it'll be white, not clear. Clear plastic is so last year.
Simple. Yet devastating. 'Glove'...
The 'iCamera'?
Sounds like a perfect foil for iPhoto. Digital Camera sales are skyrocketing. I'd be surprised if Apple didn't want a piece of the 'pie'
Especially considering their broadening of the brand 'digital devices' strategy. If it's anything like the 'iPod'?
I'd consider buying...
Lemon Bon Bon
Why would I buy OSX for my macs? When the time comes I buy news macs and get the latest OSX along with them (free!).
I really think that OSX sales have been a lot higher than they will ever be again (as a percentage of total revenue) because this is the transition period. Once the transition period is done the vast majority of people will use the OS that comes with their machine and for the most part see little significant need to upgrade beyond free bug fixes and free minor updates.
Apple can afford to give the OS away for free. M$ cannot. You'll still have to buy FCP, DVD Sudio Pro, cinema tools, QT pro, etc... upgrades and packages for each of you machines. New versions of these should continue to work on versions of OSX that are a few dot.point versions behind the latest and greatest. People upgrade software and not the OS unless they need the new OS for teh new software/features. That situation will largely disappear once OSX is fully implemented. Apple won't give up that much of a revenue stream.
<strong>Glove is a code name given to a Apple (new) strategy that started the day after Microsoft announced their software as a service model. Glove means "one size fits all". This strategy is designed for the heart of MS's strategy. I know the general specs. After July, only "1" OSX license is required to install OSX on any Mac. Every corporation, printshop, creative house, school, college or anybody is ONLY required to purchase "1" license of OSX.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OK. Take this rumor, Darwin x86, and x86 OS X nVidia drivers, mix in a little Jaguar, and add a dash of "we want marketshare."
I've always believed that OS X x86 existed, but I always thought it was "just in case." This makes it seem possible that Apple might release an x86 OS X!
Oh, one more thing...VirtualPC for Windows. Runs other/multiple Windows environments within Windows, and run them at hardware speed, since it is hardware, after all.
If Apple cut a deal with Connectix, and allowed x86 users to install their favorite Windows alongside Mac OS X to run legacy software, Apple could snatch a substantial portion of the x86 OS marketshare.
Fascinating!
I see 'glove' three ways.
1) A rumor that will go nowhere.
2) Deliberate disinformation*. Unlikely, but if true, it begs the question, what's the follow up?
3) A valid idea given serious thought at Apple computer.
1) A rumor will fade away (well, at least outside the Mac industry).
2) Besides the shaking and quaking at Microsoft, what purpose would disinformation serve? Only FUD. It could give Microsoft an incentive to delay, or change some of their licensing plans. However, it's more likely to reverse Microsoft's attention (competition efforts) from 90% against Linux, to 90% against Apple. I know you've all heard "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction". Is this what they (Apple) want (disinformation/FUD)? If so, we now enter the realm of politics, Legal warfare (DOJ vs. MS is only the most obvious), and public attacks disguised as mind share and marketing games. Historically, this is definitely not one of Apple's (or Steve Job's) strengths.
3) If this is truly under discussion at Apple, then this info leak will/has cause(d) a great deal of harm. It could even shelve the plan. Leaks on Strategic plans cause FAR more harm than "Will the next Mac have 133 or 266 DDR...".
While it's very clear that Apple wishes to keep plans secret, This type of leak MUST STOP.
I understand that everyone will do as they wish, but I (no, I'm not an Apple employee, or stock holder) ask that we all be a little more responsible for what we say (write).
Personally, I think it's an excellent idea, but a horrible leak.
* 'Allen', no disrespect was intended toward you. If this was made up, then we've given this far more credibility than it deserves. If this is true, and you've leaked something you shouldn't, then, in my opinion, this was very poor judgment.
<strong>Glove sounds like a very good idea for now, though if Apple does implement this, it would only be temporary until they reach critical mass in market share. Software sales are pure profit once they go GM. This revenue is too significant to give up indefinitely.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, OS sales aren't that big a peice of Apple's pie, relative to hardware sales. Giving up a few million dollars in OS sales, would make sense long term if it could help generate hardware sales enough to at least balance the lost OS revenue. Getting people/corporations to buy and install the hardware is Apple's biggest challenge and their final goal. So, even if Glove only results in enough of an increase in hardware sales to make up for the lost OS sales, it is worth it to get the hardware in the door. Once a beachhead is established, it can be advanced. Personnaly, I think it would result in hardware sales increases that would more than make up for lost OS revenue, would would be a benefit all on it's own.
Do people think Lucida will have a hard drive if Apple makes it?
It'll be the iPod of video. Shoot, store, and watch anytime. With a hard drive it can store files, no stupid media to deal with, and fast, plus you can store other stuff on it. You just need cash. I really have to get good job this summer!
[quote] MS-SQL has (or is going to) processor based licensing (what the f*&$? <hr></blockquote>
You think thats bad? Check out oracle pricing some time ... They charge based on:
1) Number of servers running oracle (duh)
2) Amt. of processors in each server
3) Speed of the processors (!)
Which means, you pay a hell of a lot more for oracle, on higher end hardware. Sure it'll run faster, but it won't be oracle's doing, it'll be the hardware! We run our oracle database on an old 360Mhz UltraSparcII chip ... very cheap! (and performance is not bad for the limited amount of use it gets).
[ 05-24-2002: Message edited by: Mithral ]</p>
Okay, Me, I?ve got some issues with your post.
[quote]Originally posted by Me:
<strong>
3) If this is truly under discussion at Apple, then this info leak will/has cause(d) a great deal of harm. It could even shelve the plan.</strong><hr></blockquote>
How very interesting -- you fret about Allen's possible Glove disinformation and the negative repercussions of FUD (quite legitimately, I might add), and then you go spread some FUD of your own: "There was a dream that was Glove. You could only whisper it. Anything more than a whisper, and it would vanish. And I fear it will not survive... (not your exact quote, but the same idea, plus a little dramatic flair)
[quote]<strong>Leaks on Strategic plans cause FAR more harm than "Will the next Mac have 133 or 266 DDR...".[ /qb]<hr></blockquote>
Yes, yes, yes. Wrong. Here we are again with something everybody knows, but that, regrettably, has no basis. How is a strategy leak so much more damaging? I fail to see how a leak on a strategic plan is any better or worse for Apple than Dorsal posting impressions of prototype hardware. We all know that Intel?s strategy is to jack up clockspeed and trick consumers into believing the MHz Myth. Does that make their strategy any less effective?
Fact is, Allen?s ?leak? won?t shelve the project, and it won?t change anything for Apple. If Glove exists, then Apple will make a decision on whether the strategy makes good business sense in the current business climate. The only way a leak at this point would be damaging is if the ELEMENT OF SURPRISE were somehow key to Glove working. Given Apple?s licensing approach with OSX Server, I think its safe to assume that the ?Surprise!? factor is pretty much gone. If Apple decides that Glove is a good strategy, it?ll still be a good strategy even if word gets out early. Knowing the specs of the new PowerBook two weeks in advance doesn?t make them any slower once they finally arrive.
[quote][qb]* 'Allen', no disrespect was intended toward you. If this was made up, then we've given this far more credibility than it deserves. If this is true, and you've leaked something you shouldn't, then, in my opinion, this was very poor judgment.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmm? you spend half of your post basically calling him an irresponsible snitch who has sabotaged Apple?s fragile, last, best hope for market domination, and then you insist that no disrespect was intended. I guess you were merely trying to make an example of him for the good of all AI. What??
I guess my real problem, Me, is that you presume to know Allen?s business better than Allen does. Allen can post what he wants, and trumpeting the tune of FUD doesn?t make your calls for censorship any more compelling. Allen?s ideas are good ones, and AI would be worse off if he hadn?t posted them.
[quote]<strong>
I understand that everyone will do as they wish, but I (no, I'm not an Apple employee, or stock holder) ask that we all be a little more responsible for what we say (write). </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, let?s.
-mithral
<strong>Apple has no excuse not to do Glove, at least for now.
Do people think Lucida will have a hard drive if Apple makes it?
It'll be the iPod of video. Shoot, store, and watch anytime. With a hard drive it can store files, no stupid media to deal with, and fast, plus you can store other stuff on it. You just need cash. I really have to get good job this summer!</strong><hr></blockquote>
It just hit me. QT6 is just about due. With the MPEG4 technology in it, you could pack a tremendous amount of quality video onto a 10GB drive. Mmm...the coincedences are coalescing into something with definate drool factor. *slurp!*
Glove = [i]internal codename for Xserve unlimited client policy[/I
Lucida= internal codename for Quartz Extreme.
Underwater camera? Can't i just stick my PalmPix in a zip lock baggy?
As for the poster's claim regarding the free OS license, after much thought, I think this will be the quickest way to double-digit marketshare. Apple could keep prices higher for hardware and level the playing field.
Wouldn't it be great if in 10 years Microsoft's core business was Mac apps?
We can dream.
MSKR
[ 05-24-2002: Message edited by: Masker ]</p>