The Time Is Right For Apple to...
PCs have become a major head-ache for corporate IT. It won't be long until corporations are looking to lobotomize their computers to reduce the nightmare. The big buzz in industry will likely be a full 180 back to the thin client. Suns failed java-box will suddenly look nice, but what happened to it? Timing is everything.
Welcome Motorola, your turn has come as the high volume low cost G4 provider... Time to look through the parts bin for some stripped down hardware thats capable of running a lobotomized version of the OSX. Make the G5 the server of choice and tout it as the new thin client solution. Give it an ambiguous, under achieving name like "the corporate platform" and watch sales soar.
Welcome Motorola, your turn has come as the high volume low cost G4 provider... Time to look through the parts bin for some stripped down hardware thats capable of running a lobotomized version of the OSX. Make the G5 the server of choice and tout it as the new thin client solution. Give it an ambiguous, under achieving name like "the corporate platform" and watch sales soar.
Comments
Originally posted by Not Unlike Myself
See, the market went a different way. Instead of a lobotomized OS, they lobotomized the USERS. Windoze has placated the population into a complatency where they don't WANT to change because they don't know HOW to change. The 'thin' clients aren't the answer. Slow and painful reverse brainwashing of the end user is what is needed. IMO.
The users we're already lobotomized. But theres still somebody ramming platforms down people's throats.. why not make those platforms mac platforms?
Earlier this week Microsoft partnered with Hewlett Packard to capitalize on the business opportunity created by the viruses. They released two new thin client machines that use Windows CE and transmeta processors:
http://h18004.www1.hp.com/products/t...dex_t5000.html
The ironic thing is that Microsoft's failure is what created the business opportunity... Yet they are the first to capitalize on it. Folks, Apple needs to start thinking in the business domain if they want to grow market share!! This market should be Apples... No reason Apple cant stagger its hardware and make a server/thin client environment.
Originally posted by Not Unlike Myself
I don't see it happening. Since AAPL isn't at risk from this virus maddness, they don't have the demand driven need for fewer 'risk ports' (read individual independant computers). The market is also too small for such a niche product. This isn't to say there is NO market, but just to say that since AAPL is already in such a 'tight space' they really need to stick to what they know works and keep innovating. This means leading, and not following copetition. When the need for a brilliant new thin client world shows up, expect AAPL to be there to meet that need. For the time being though... don't stress it. Let M$ break the waters and drown. Wait for AAPL to invent the hovercraft who flies OVER the waters...
So let me get this straight, you're saying theres no need for a better business solution? Microsoft Windows 2000/XP have met the needs of its business users?
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
So let me get this straight, you're saying theres no need for a better business solution? Microsoft Windows 2000/XP have met the needs of its business users?
Well we have different opinions about what is a 'better business solution'.
Think about it. Buy a tried and 'true' cheaper system which is in 90% of other business or buy Apple's first ever thin client system with limited support and zero compatibility. It's not a tough decision. Some times even revolutions need to be 'driven' rather then be the driver.
I personally am very unhappy with 2000/XP and wouldn't buy any thin clients from MS or HP. However even if AAPL came ouit with one that was same price/same spec I doubt I could justify the risk to my business. They want windows. If it's CE, well they will grit and bear it but they won't even look at page two of a proposal asking for an Apple.
I'm not trying to argue Mac v. PC. I'm arguing that thin isn't the Apple niche *yet* and until the market asks for a 'walk on water' answer from Apple, they won't make one.
Originally posted by Not Unlike Myself
Well we have different opinions about what is a 'better business solution'.
Think about it. Buy a tried and 'true' cheaper system which is in 90% of other business or buy Apple's first ever thin client system with limited support and zero compatibility. It's not a tough decision. Some times even revolutions need to be 'driven' rather then be the driver.
I personally am very unhappy with 2000/XP and wouldn't buy any thin clients from MS or HP. However even if AAPL came ouit with one that was same price/same spec I doubt I could justify the risk to my business. They want windows. If it's CE, well they will grit and bear it but they won't even look at page two of a proposal asking for an Apple.
I'm not trying to argue Mac v. PC. I'm arguing that thin isn't the Apple niche *yet* and until the market asks for a 'walk on water' answer from Apple, they won't make one.
All a thin client would have to be is an X Terminal. It just pipes the graphics to and from whatever server (read Microsoft) sits on the back end. Call the thing XWindows and your boss wont know that its not microsoft. (and no, they wouldn't get sued for that, XWindows is an entire class of software that existed long before Windows)
eMac - Hard drive = thin client
Originally posted by Bancho
Isn't this what Netboot is all about?
eMac - Hard drive = thin client
Sounds like Apple already has what it needs to be competitive. They just need to put a few guys in suits and send them off to big companies to show off how well it integrates... Boom, you have IBM #2!
Perhaps the question is... do we as users and stock holders WANT Apple to become like IBM? (large, and encumbered by their own size....)
There are a lot of issues to consider here...
Originally posted by Not Unlike Myself
To risk being flamed.... Hum...
Perhaps the question is... do we as users and stock holders WANT Apple to become like IBM? (large, and encumbered by their own size....)
There are a lot of issues to consider here...
Yeah. I agree. I'm not thrilled about IBM. It continues to amaze me that companies buy into their "total solution"... As a programmer and fiddler by nature, I detest the idea of a thin client. But we're talking about growing Apples market share enough to bring them out of the red zone... I think Apple could do this by bringing in a modest amount of buisiness customers.. of course, is this what Steve Jobs even wants? He's making XServe, so I think the answer is yes.
Theres lots of wonderful ideas that fail because they are too idealistic. I can think of one example: A society where everybody takes care of everybody else and everybody shares the money equally. Its called communism and it failed because it was too idealistic to accurately address real life concerns. You can make this perfect desktop, and unless you keep up with real world concerns, its going to be too ideal to be successful...
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Sounds like Apple already has what it needs to be competitive. They just need to put a few guys in suits and send them off to big companies to show off how well it integrates... Boom, you have IBM #2!
Apple had that worked out with the original iMac, actually - there was a diskless, netbooting version way back then, but it never got out of Cupertino because (in Steve's words) the market wasn't ready for such a thing. Whether it will ever be is an open question.
So MS and HP released a "thin client" (which is a rebranding of the "diskless workstation," soon renamed "dickless workstation" by the people who actually used them). It's a great idea in principle, if everything goes right. Sun's had them for a while (as far as I know, it pioneered the dickless workstation), and so has IBM. And they haven't exactly lit the corporate world on fire.
As the tablet should have taught us, just because MS releases something doesn't mean they've hit on the right answer. For one thing, MS has squandered a lot of goodwill at this point; the number of people who trust them on security issues has plummetted. For another, with money tight, a lot of corporations are newly aware of MS' constantly fleecing them, and MS is also more interested in fleecing them. So this could easily backfire even before the merits of the platform are taken into consideration (come to think of it, how well has WinCE done?). Now, Apple could release a thin client tomorrow. They could have released one in 1998, for that matter. But the thin client has been laughed out of enterprise not once, but twice; people are beginning to look askance at Microsoft; and enterprise is not yet taking Apple seriously (or considering Apple at all, for that matter). The market isn't ready.
I expect this latest venture to bomb.
Originally posted by Amorph
Apple had that worked out with the original iMac, actually - there was a diskless, netbooting version way back then, but it never got out of Cupertino because (in Steve's words) the market wasn't ready for such a thing. Whether it will ever be is an open question.
So MS and HP released a "thin client" (which is a rebranding of the "diskless workstation," soon renamed "dickless workstation" by the people who actually used them). It's a great idea in principle, if everything goes right. Sun's had them for a while (as far as I know, it pioneered the dickless workstation), and so has IBM. And they haven't exactly lit the corporate world on fire.
As the tablet should have taught us, just because MS releases something doesn't mean they've hit on the right answer. For one thing, MS has squandered a lot of goodwill at this point; the number of people who trust them on security issues has plummetted. For another, with money tight, a lot of corporations are newly aware of MS' constantly fleecing them, and MS is also more interested in fleecing them. So this could easily backfire even before the merits of the platform are taken into consideration (come to think of it, how well has WinCE done?). Now, Apple could release a thin client tomorrow. They could have released one in 1998, for that matter. But the thin client has been laughed out of enterprise not once, but twice; people are beginning to look askance at Microsoft; and enterprise is not yet taking Apple seriously (or considering Apple at all, for that matter). The market isn't ready.
I expect this latest venture to bomb.
Yeah, thats the thing. Microsoft isn't afraid to release crap into the market. But if it bombs the just keep trying again until they get it... For example, did anybody own a copy of windows v1? how about v2? remember the garbage that was 3.0? 3.1? So which version did they get right? hehe...
But the point is, the corporate world has a fresh new problem. They haven't upgraded in 3 years because of the economy. if they can upgrade themselves out of a problem in their regular cycle of upgrades, they'll do it... And why leave the chance of success to Microsoft? If it does work (and doesnt bomb), then we're all be left saying "oh sh*t!" like usual. Who knows, maybe this Windows server with CE clients on a dickless workstation works flawlessly! (haha.. okay, probably not.)
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Yeah, thats the thing. Microsoft isn't afraid to release crap into the market. But if it bombs the just keep trying again until they get it... For example, did anybody own a copy of windows v1? how about v2? remember the garbage that was 3.0? 3.1? So which version did they get right? hehe...
3.1.
However, Windows piggybacked on IBM hardware and DOS. This is new hardware and a new (and compromised) platform, and these days Microsoft has a far more tarnished image.
But the point is, the corporate world has a fresh new problem. They haven't upgraded in 3 years because of the economy. if they can upgrade themselves out of a problem in their regular cycle of upgrades, they'll do it... And why leave the chance of success to Microsoft? If it does work (and doesnt bomb), then we're all be left saying "oh sh*t!" like usual. Who knows, maybe this Windows server with CE clients on a dickless workstation works flawlessly! (haha.. okay, probably not.)
They can go to all new hardware using a technology that's flopped every time it's been tried for reasons that are still relevant (whoops! the network's down again), and get a new OS to boot, or they can just move to Linux. No, Linux isn't a good general-purpose desktop OS, but it can be made into a capable enterprise desktop, the same way that Windows 3.1 was: Set it up, lock it down, and have it run exactly the same OS and exactly the same software for years.
And if you are going to sweep out your hardware, get a whole new platform and a new OS, the Mac will look more attractive because it's secure, virus-free, and comes with a hard disk.
Windows-based PCs already can function as a dumb terminal, they are cheap and disposable, with much greater flexibility and power than a diskless workstation. Sorry, but when you can get a PC from Dell for $399, or a "dumb terminal" thingie for $199 which relies on a network always being up and expensive servers at its beck and call, there's just no reason.
Apple is NOT going to take a swipe at this worthless market...Sun, HP, Tektronic, etc have tried this crap before, and it's always failed. Yet they keep on doing it because of some false belief of efficiency and as the Xfiles poster says, "I WANT TO BELIEVE."
But theres a business opportunity to be had here if we can quickly solve the security problem of Windows.
So what is that?
So what is this network client strategy telling people? If you want a secure platform, don't buy XP and don't buy commodity PCs!