Help me out here what are the best examples of Linux currently shipping, and what is its compatability issues or non-issues on Intel HW? I keep hearing about the Linux threat, and I would like to know what that is and I would suppose that something like that would be made even more potent when Intel really gets the "standard" chipset going.
The "Linux threat" is a bit of a joke. At the very least it is contained within a few fairly narrow market boxes -- servers and geeks, primarily. It certainly can't touch the consumer space in any serious way, and its impact on the professional/business markets will be limited for the same reasons. <cue response from outraged Linux pundits now, filters on>
Microsoft has a solid user base to rely on, but they are concerned about all potential markets because they want all the business they can get. Apple can potentially get at the markets where MS doesn't need to worry about Linux, but I doubt MS is all that concerned given Apple's tiny marketshare and their historical inability to grow it in a serious way. MS is probably more concerned about Apple's recent successes and how they are getting in the way of more potential revenue...
Help me out here what are the best examples of Linux currently shipping, and what is its compatability issues or non-issues on Intel HW? I keep hearing about the Linux threat, and I would like to know what that is and I would suppose that something like that would be made even more potent when Intel really gets the "standard" chipset going.
Ty
It depends. The large commercial versions have no HW incompatibilities. Driver issues are also not much of a problem for them. For the market they play in, the business apps and hardware are there.
It's the more hobby oriented Linux distro's that have problems.
As for the desktop, it's a myth that it's a competitor either here, in Europe, or Japan. It competes in third world countries for the desktop. But the evidence is scanty as to what is actually happening there.
It seems as though many computers are sold with Linux. The purchaser then walks into the street with his new machine, and for about a dollar or three, buys a bootleg disk with both Windows and Office. He then goes home and formats the disk which is then loaded with Windows and Office.
The problem is that there is no real way to get numbers on how many people actually use Linux. The stories are apocryphal, and told by the Linux fans themselves. Since few of these people buy a product, there is no way to get numbers. The vast majority of them also regularly use Windows or OS X as well.
Help me out here what are the best examples of Linux currently shipping, and what is its compatability issues or non-issues on Intel HW? I keep hearing about the Linux threat, and I would like to know what that is and I would suppose that something like that would be made even more potent when Intel really gets the "standard" chipset going.
Ty
The best Linux shipping depends on what you're trying to do.
The Linux "threat" IMHO (and it really is just IMHO) comes from the ability of other large companies (IBM, HP, etc) to pour money and technology into a commodity OS that lowers the waters for everyone competing in the OS segment (that they already lost a decade ago). It also serves as a great platform to assault some other MS market strengths...like the office arena (Open Office) and as a core technology (LAMP) that competes with .NET.
All at little cost and risk to themselves. The cost of maintaining AIX and HPUX disappears. They get some "open source" street cred. There's little downside.
Personally, I prefer OSX for the desktop (surprise!). I believe that Solaris scales better (though, Google would disagree mightily). Sunapple would be awesome but only from a technology perspective. As a single corporate entity it would be a disaster.
This is hard to say. I've given it more thought that I'd like.
I shall happily even agree that you have given this more thought than I.
Quote:
It depends on how Apple gets its marketshare.
If it increases, but slows down, that's one thing. So, we see 4.3% now. If we see 5.3 next year, then 6.3, then 7.3, etc, Ms might not have a problem. The percentage of growth is slowing down fast. By the time it would get to 10%, it might be coming to a halt, not getting above 11% or so, about the higest it's ever been. Considering tha Mac users buy a lot of Office, and less but still significant amounts of VPC and Windows products, MS might be fairly happy.
But, if the pace quickens... 4.3% this year, 6.3 the next, 8.3 after that, maybe 10.5 after that, MS would get very concerned before it got to that level.
The fear is that they would stop development of Office, and then discontinue it. Also, make it more difficult to connect to Windows networks, etc. [/B]
Yes, growth curve is likely the most important statistic...but okay...as much as I like OSX I really don't see that latter scenario. Especially since its made its splash and is relatively well known. Perhaps with going to intel it will have a second chance...perhaps as a media center OS that "doesn't suck".
WRT to Office, yes that's a potential problem. On the other hand MS has to play somewhat nice in that arena given the pressure of OO and ODF (minor it may be today). You also have to consider, it's one of those problems you'd like to have right?
I use (and even like) Office but if it were not for work I suppose I could get by with iWork...'tho I'd hope that the db and spreadsheet portions of AppleWorks makes it in there someday. I'm sure they're sitting in a lab somewhere, updated and waiting for the no-Office scenario to occur.
I shall happily even agree that you have given this more thought than I.
Yes, growth curve is likely the most important statistic...but okay...as much as I like OSX I really don't see that latter scenario. Especially since its made its splash and is relatively well known. Perhaps with going to intel it will have a second chance...perhaps as a media center OS that "doesn't suck".
WRT to Office, yes that's a potential problem. On the other hand MS has to play somewhat nice in that arena given the pressure of OO and ODF (minor it may be today). You also have to consider, it's one of those problems you'd like to have right?
I use (and even like) Office but if it were not for work I suppose I could get by with iWork...'tho I'd hope that the db and spreadsheet portions of AppleWorks makes it in there someday. I'm sure they're sitting in a lab somewhere, updated and waiting for the no-Office scenario to occur.
Vinea
The problem with the Officeless environment, is that it isn't what most people who think that iWork (which is selling poorly, by the way) can take it over, with just a few additions, think it is.
Office is more than just a spreadsheet, presentation package, word processor, and in the Windows environment, database.
It's also a developmental environment. Companies build business software around Office, digging into and using its API's etc.
Just substituting something else that's file compatible won't suffice.
Look at the Windows world. Why hasn't StarOffice made a bigger dent? OpenOffice? It's FREE, and compatible!
How about Lotus? Corel Office, etc?
None of these have made a dent. Office has a 95% marketshare.
If MS hampers Office on the Mac, or removes it, Apple will have a problem.
This monopoly thing isn't so simple. MS was declared a monopoly for their OS, but not for Office. They could claim that it didn't make business sense for them to continue development. Or that Apple's marketshare was increasing so that the rules were changing, and that they had to protect themselves. Or say nothing at all.
Remember that these government things take years. If MS was able to stop development during a hearing, and maybe later, when a trial was taking place, it could be too late.
Netscape took them to court. That's what that whole thing was about. What good did it do them? By the time they won, it was too late for them.
And it's difficult to know what this administration would do.
When the trial was going on, Bush was asked what he would do about it when in office. He said that MS was a monopolist, and whatever happened was fine with him.
But when it was almost over, and the fed's had a victory in their hands, the justice department pulled them off (to much criticism), and little happened.
So, if MS stopped development, there might be little Apple could do.
But, if the pace quickens... 4.3% this year, 6.3 the next, 8.3 after that, maybe 10.5 after that, MS would get very concerned before it got to that level.
The fear is that they would stop development of Office, and then discontinue it. Also, make it more difficult to connect to Windows networks, etc.
3 years.... at which point it doesn't matter; open document formats and iWorks Pro.
Assume I conceed all your points re Office. From Apple's perspective:
a) Isn't that a problem you'd like to have? i.e. My growth curve is so aggressive that MS cares about me. The fear of losing MS Office on the OSX platform shouldn't constrain the desire for explosive growth.
b) Losing my less than stellar (read as non-existant) business share where Office integration is dominant to win in the area where growth is most likely to occur for OSX (e.g. media center) is in line with my current business strategy. Its likely worth the hit since my target consumer is more interested in media services than office productivity.
The only caveat to b) is that MS Office would make one heck of a "game" that runs on the 360. That would really hurt the PS3 and the Mac Mini-Media at the expense of royally pissing off Dell, etc. An iffy card to play.
The problem with the Officeless environment, is that it isn't what most people who think that iWork (which is selling poorly, by the way) can take it over, with just a few additions, think it is.
Time and time again you exhibit a lack of understanding of both Apple's underlying philosophies and the Apple user ecosystem as a whole.
Nobody thinks that iWorks is a replacement for Office. Apple did not imagine for a moment that it was going to sell like hot-cakes. It was a strategic play to a) start up an 'Office' programming unit, b) show MS, investors and customers that such a unit was in existence. Also understand that every Apple unit has to try and at least break even so the iWorks productisation brings in revenue to support the unit. Do you honestly believe that Apple do not have an Office replacement in progress considering its strategic importance?
Quote:
Office is more than just a spreadsheet, presentation package, word processor, and in the Windows environment, database.
It's also a developmental environment. Companies build business software around Office, digging into and using its API's etc.
Just substituting something else that's file compatible won't suffice.
This is simply not true for Mac users.
Quote:
Look at the Windows world. Why hasn't StarOffice made a bigger dent? OpenOffice? It's FREE, and compatible!
How about Lotus? Corel Office, etc?
None of these have made a dent. Office has a 95% marketshare.
If MS hampers Office on the Mac, or removes it, Apple will have a problem.
What on earth is the point you are making? A product trying to enter a monopoly situation has no chance unless it is 10 times better; and the alternatives frankly are not. But again, this is of no relevance to the Mac market. If it Office continues to exist and work it will dominate, if MS pull it, it won't and something will fill the void; probably iWorks Pro.
Quote:
This monopoly thing isn't so simple. MS was declared a monopoly for their OS, but not for Office. They could claim that it didn't make business sense for them to continue development. Or that Apple's marketshare was increasing so that the rules were changing, and that they had to protect themselves. Or say nothing at all.
Remember that these government things take years. If MS was able to stop development during a hearing, and maybe later, when a trial was taking place, it could be too late.
Netscape took them to court. That's what that whole thing was about. What good did it do them? By the time they won, it was too late for them.
And it's difficult to know what this administration would do.
When the trial was going on, Bush was asked what he would do about it when in office. He said that MS was a monopolist, and whatever happened was fine with him.
But when it was almost over, and the fed's had a victory in their hands, the justice department pulled them off (to much criticism), and little happened.
So, if MS stopped development, there might be little Apple could do.
Again, what on earth are you talking about? Nobody is going to be taking MS to court for monopolistic practices ever again in the US. Its pointless and frankly MS will do whatever is necessary to avoid it. Not because they are afraid of the toothless US JD but because they are afraid of the EU and Chinese/Korean systems.
[B]Time and time again you exhibit a lack of understanding of both Apple's underlying philosophies and the Apple user ecosystem as a whole.
Nobody thinks that iWorks is a replacement for Office. Apple did not imagine for a moment that it was going to sell like hot-cakes. It was a strategic play to a) start up an 'Office' programming unit, b) show MS, investors and customers that such a unit was in existence. Also understand that every Apple unit has to try and at least break even so the iWorks productisation brings in revenue to support the unit. Do you honestly believe that Apple do not have an Office replacement in progress considering its strategic importance?
That's amusing. I understand quite well. You should learn something about business before you say that.
Most people on these very boards have been touting iWork as a replacement for Office. Just a few posts ago, as a matter of fact. And you do it here, your very self, who is arguing that no one is doing it! That's irony.
You also have absolutely no idea as to what Apple thought. Don't pretend otherwise. You also have no idea why Apple came out with the program. It's more likely that they came out with it as a beginning to replace the very much aged Appleworks, which hasn't been upgraded for years.
There is also no evidence that iWorks is actually making money rather than losing it. Apple has been giving it away with purchases at times in the hope that it would catch on.
I have no idea what Apple might be doing in that department, and neither do you.
Quote:
This is simply not true for Mac users.
So, you now speak for businesses who do use those very products on their Mac's?
Quote:
What on earth is the point you are making? A product trying to enter a monopoly situation has no chance unless it is 10 times better; and the alternatives frankly are not. But again, this is of no relevance to the Mac market. If it Office continues to exist and work it will dominate, if MS pull it, it won't and something will fill the void; probably iWorks Pro.
So, a product would have to be 10 times better on Windows to compete with Office, but not on the Mac? That's drivel. Back to iWorks?
Quote:
Again, what on earth are you talking about? Nobody is going to be taking MS to court for monopolistic practices ever again in the US. Its pointless and frankly MS will do whatever is necessary to avoid it. Not because they are afraid of the toothless US JD but because they are afraid of the EU and Chinese/Korean systems.
Thank you for agreeing with my point! Though we can see just how afraid they are of both of those systems. So far they haven't given one inch (or, line of code). They're facing huge fines, and still they stand fast.
Nobody thinks that iWorks is a replacement for Office. Apple did not imagine for a moment that it was going to sell like hot-cakes. It was a strategic play to a) start up an 'Office' programming unit, b) show MS, investors and customers that such a unit was in existence.
Eh? AppleWorks has been around since 1984. Arguably you could say the current incarnation only existed since 1999 for the purposes of having an office programming unit despite being fairly dormant until iWork shipped. We'll see how iWork '06 looks soon methinks.
Most people on these very boards have been touting iWork as a replacement for Office. Just a few posts ago, as a matter of fact. And you do it here, your very self, who is arguing that no one is doing it! That's irony.
I guess that would be me.
Yes, if it were not for work, I could likely get by with iWork except for the missing spreadsheet part. My most challenging need is the occasional newsletter and christmas missive. I think iWork/Pages is more than suitable for that.
For school presentations, were I to go back to school, Keynote would be suitable as would Pages to write papers.
Given that anything dubbed "work or works" is a lightweight office suite, where do you see iWork not being suitable as an Office replacement within the design constraints?
A co-worker once built a spacecraft control/monitoring system via VBA and MS Excel as a prototype. It was quite possibly one of the dumbest smart thing I've seen but it worked. Probably. Enough to demo anyway. People integrate the wierdest things with MS Office but it doesn't make MS Office irreplaceable as a starting point.
I suspect many heavyweight business apps (like SAS, etc) that offer MS Office integration has portal integration capability too. Between that and file compatability I dunno that the loss of Office integration via VBA is the kiss of death as long as you have a compatible web browser.
That last may be a little tricky but a different arguement.
Yes, if it were not for work, I could likely get by with iWork except for the missing spreadsheet part. My most challenging need is the occasional newsletter and christmas missive. I think iWork/Pages is more than suitable for that.
For school presentations, were I to go back to school, Keynote would be suitable as would Pages to write papers.
Given that anything dubbed "work or works" is a lightweight office suite, where do you see iWork not being suitable as an Office replacement within the design constraints?
A co-worker once built a spacecraft control/monitoring system via VBA and MS Excel as a prototype. It was quite possibly one of the dumbest smart thing I've seen but it worked. Probably. Enough to demo anyway. People integrate the wierdest things with MS Office but it doesn't make MS Office irreplaceable as a starting point.
I suspect many heavyweight business apps (like SAS, etc) that offer MS Office integration has portal integration capability too. Between that and file compatability I dunno that the loss of Office integration via VBA is the kiss of death as long as you have a compatible web browser.
That last may be a little tricky but a different arguement.
Vinea
I bought iWork for my daughter when it first came out. She had been using Pagemaker on OS 9 for years and loved it. She's now 14, and uses inDesign, but finds it too complex for schoolwork. Appleworks is too outdated.
While Pages is a nice combination of a WP and a page layout program, it's far too weak in either of those areas to be of use to anyone for much other than home use and high school work.
The entire thing would have to be rewritten from the ground up.
Keynote is also nice, but also too simple, and needs far more templates. All too often several people in class will use the same ones simply because the selection is too limited. At least that's what she says, and I have no reason to doubt it.
Neither program has the "feel" of a program intended for professional work.
Or, perhaps more simply, Apple discovered that the user-serviceable part that was removed in the latest revision (HD) wasn't really such an important thing for the iMac customer.
I think, at least for Apple, the problems with user-serviceable iMacs outweighed the originally intended benefits ...
Speaking from experience, removing and reinstalling the logic board on a rev. A last year was more involved than I'd anticipated. It made me realize how easy it would be for someone who was just a bit too "careless" to damage something in the process. I've witnessed enough "average" users mistreating (heck, I'd consider it abusing) their computers and peripherals to shudder at the thought of them attempting iMac self-repair.
Also, it's not hard to imagine troubles with accurately diagnosing hardware-related problems so proper parts would be replaced.
So, what may have seemed like a good idea at first possibly ended up causing too many negative iMac repair incidents, both for Apple and customers. Frankly, I didn't mind letting a service tech take responsibility when I took my rev. B in for repair this year . But I'm very glad it's still partly user-serviceable, unlike the rev. C, so I could remove the hard drive beforehand.
The rev. A was probably too "generous" with self-repair and the rev. C seems overly restrictive. For me anyway, Apple's design/policy with the rev. B is an acceptable compromise.
Keynote is also nice, but also too simple, and needs far more templates. All too often several people in class will use the same ones simply because the selection is too limited. At least that's what she says, and I have no reason to doubt it.
Neither program has the "feel" of a program intended for professional work.
Probably because they aren't intended for professional work? Hence the xxxWork moniker over the xxxOffice moniker? Besides, this IS the first incarnation.
WRT to Keynote, I see the same thing with Powerpoint. Too many students and other folks using the same stock template (and usually its that bad looking spiral notebook one).
While creating a full up theme is apparently a lot of work, you can buy one for $20 and tailor from there if you want to stand out and don't have a lot of time.
That's amusing. I understand quite well. You should learn something about business before you say that.
You should look up 'patronising' in the dictionary.
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Most people on these very boards have been touting iWork as a replacement for Office. Just a few posts ago, as a matter of fact. And you do it here, your very self, who is arguing that no one is doing it! That's irony.
For a lot of people it is! The nay-sayers seem to be those people that expect it to work exactly like Word or Powerpoint. Hey - it's never going to and I'm all for that. The MS toolset design is so creaky it's painful.
Keynote is already a better presentation tool than Powerpoint and Pages can do things that you just simply can't do in Word. That's not to say that neither have their own problems but they are generally adequate replacements for most people. All we need now is a spreadsheet program better than Appleworks' sheet and capable enough for most people that would otherwise use Excel. I'm really looking forward to iWork06 and Pages moving beyond it's 1.0 state.
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
You also have absolutely no idea as to what Apple thought. Don't pretend otherwise. You also have no idea why Apple came out with the program. It's more likely that they came out with it as a beginning to replace the very much aged Appleworks, which hasn't been upgraded for years.
There is also no evidence that iWorks is actually making money rather than losing it. Apple has been giving it away with purchases at times in the hope that it would catch on.
I have no idea what Apple might be doing in that department, and neither do you.
Does it matter? AppleWorks was an adequate replacement for Office for a lot of people who didn't want to spend hundreds on Office and didn't need the whole featureset. If it's of strategic importance to Apple then it also doesn't really matter if it makes money yet.
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
So, you now speak for businesses who do use those very products on their Mac's?
I run a business. I use them all the time in preference to Office which I've also got because they do things I can't do in Office. And they save my business hundreds of dollars. Try exporting to Flash in Office. ;-)
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
So, a product would have to be 10 times better on Windows to compete with Office, but not on the Mac? That's drivel. Back to iWorks?
I used to use Lotus' Word processor and 123 on Windows. They were both easily better than Microsoft's products IMHO. But, since file formats were proprietary, interoperability with other people was almost impossible. That's why MS wins, not because of it's software which frankly sucks.
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Thank you for agreeing with my point! Though we can see just how afraid they are of both of those systems. So far they haven't given one inch (or, line of code). They're facing huge fines, and still they stand fast.
The belief is that there will be a compromise.
What will happen is they'll be forced to open up their file formats. EU law will make them do it if you USAians don't. Incidentally, although Apple uses XML for it's iWork file formats, a little more open-ness and support of emerging open doc formats would be nice.
Probably because they aren't intended for professional work? Hence the xxxWork moniker over the xxxOffice moniker? Besides, this IS the first incarnation.
WRT to Keynote, I see the same thing with Powerpoint. Too many students and other folks using the same stock template (and usually its that bad looking spiral notebook one).
While creating a full up theme is apparently a lot of work, you can buy one for $20 and tailor from there if you want to stand out and don't have a lot of time.
Vinea
I don't know where all the free Keynote templates on http://www.iworkcommunity.com/ went but they had loads at one point. Still loads of pages templates.
Wheeee!!! Off this thread goes to topics wide and far. I guess we're all just whiling away the time waiting for the Keynote, or some other juicy tidbit to pop-up.
My $0.02 on this Office rabbit trail:
For big businesses, it's all about the support contracts and volume licensing. The fewer vendors to deal with the better. So while Apple may have a great little OS, well integrated machines, and run MS Office, the support contractors favor Windows heavily. It's easier to train support personel on ONE set of things, so OS, word processor, presentation, email, etc. from ONE vendor supported by ONE contractor is better. IBM & HP _MIGHT_ be able to put together a Linux & OpenOffice package and lure some customers, but that's the only way I see the MS monopoly being threatened. And I doubt IBM or HP would bother to make their distribution available/user friendly to the Average Joe.
And personally, I think if Apple started to make real inroads in the OS market, MS would happily port their other big software (SQL Server, Exchange, et al) to run on Macs.
Windows is just the launching point for all the rest of MS's software. Since IT departments like uniformity, as long as MS provides solutions that are "good enough" in the other areas IT departments care about (email servers, web servers, etc.), big companies will continue to standardize across the board on MS. And the home users will just want to buy what they have at work so they can easily share files/steal software from work.
Apple will always be a niche player in the PC world. Only those who care enough to seek out something beyond what "everyone else" has will buy Macs.
While Pages is a nice combination of a WP and a page layout program, it's far too weak in either of those areas to be of use to anyone for much other than home use and high school work.
I use it for invoicing, newsletters and even did a 48 page magazine design with it. It's weak points are in technical document writing and in designing for print. There's also issues in that it outputs a newer version of PDF than most print shops can cope with.
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
The entire thing would have to be rewritten from the ground up.
I entirely disagree. It needs to be faster and they should do something about the section/page confusion where deleting a 'page' deletes more than a page if your text flows past the end of the physical page but other than that it's got some extremely good ideas in there. I think the image placement and layout tools are fantastic and prefer them to absolutely anything produced by Quark or Adobe.
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Keynote is also nice, but also too simple, and needs far more templates. All too often several people in class will use the same ones simply because the selection is too limited. At least that's what she says, and I have no reason to doubt it.
There's over a hundred with Powerpoint, although many are repeated with simple colour changes and many are so cheesy that I can't imagine ever using them in a professional context. Which does beg the question of where you'd use them?
Keynote2 has about 20 but much higher quality. Also, in using Keynote what makes the difference I find over people giving Powerpoint presentations are the transitions and better font aliasing. I tend to stick to fairly boring gradients for the templates.
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Neither program has the "feel" of a program intended for professional work.
I think you're wrong there but certainly Pages has some rough 1.0 edges that need sorting. Keynote2 - no problems really.
Comments
Originally posted by Brendon
Help me out here what are the best examples of Linux currently shipping, and what is its compatability issues or non-issues on Intel HW? I keep hearing about the Linux threat, and I would like to know what that is and I would suppose that something like that would be made even more potent when Intel really gets the "standard" chipset going.
The "Linux threat" is a bit of a joke. At the very least it is contained within a few fairly narrow market boxes -- servers and geeks, primarily. It certainly can't touch the consumer space in any serious way, and its impact on the professional/business markets will be limited for the same reasons. <cue response from outraged Linux pundits now, filters on>
Microsoft has a solid user base to rely on, but they are concerned about all potential markets because they want all the business they can get. Apple can potentially get at the markets where MS doesn't need to worry about Linux, but I doubt MS is all that concerned given Apple's tiny marketshare and their historical inability to grow it in a serious way. MS is probably more concerned about Apple's recent successes and how they are getting in the way of more potential revenue...
Originally posted by Brendon
Help me out here what are the best examples of Linux currently shipping, and what is its compatability issues or non-issues on Intel HW? I keep hearing about the Linux threat, and I would like to know what that is and I would suppose that something like that would be made even more potent when Intel really gets the "standard" chipset going.
Ty
It depends. The large commercial versions have no HW incompatibilities. Driver issues are also not much of a problem for them. For the market they play in, the business apps and hardware are there.
It's the more hobby oriented Linux distro's that have problems.
As for the desktop, it's a myth that it's a competitor either here, in Europe, or Japan. It competes in third world countries for the desktop. But the evidence is scanty as to what is actually happening there.
It seems as though many computers are sold with Linux. The purchaser then walks into the street with his new machine, and for about a dollar or three, buys a bootleg disk with both Windows and Office. He then goes home and formats the disk which is then loaded with Windows and Office.
The problem is that there is no real way to get numbers on how many people actually use Linux. The stories are apocryphal, and told by the Linux fans themselves. Since few of these people buy a product, there is no way to get numbers. The vast majority of them also regularly use Windows or OS X as well.
Originally posted by Brendon
Help me out here what are the best examples of Linux currently shipping, and what is its compatability issues or non-issues on Intel HW? I keep hearing about the Linux threat, and I would like to know what that is and I would suppose that something like that would be made even more potent when Intel really gets the "standard" chipset going.
Ty
The best Linux shipping depends on what you're trying to do.
The Linux "threat" IMHO (and it really is just IMHO) comes from the ability of other large companies (IBM, HP, etc) to pour money and technology into a commodity OS that lowers the waters for everyone competing in the OS segment (that they already lost a decade ago). It also serves as a great platform to assault some other MS market strengths...like the office arena (Open Office) and as a core technology (LAMP) that competes with .NET.
All at little cost and risk to themselves. The cost of maintaining AIX and HPUX disappears. They get some "open source" street cred. There's little downside.
Personally, I prefer OSX for the desktop (surprise!). I believe that Solaris scales better (though, Google would disagree mightily). Sunapple would be awesome but only from a technology perspective. As a single corporate entity it would be a disaster.
Vinea
Originally posted by melgross
This is hard to say. I've given it more thought that I'd like.
I shall happily even agree that you have given this more thought than I.
It depends on how Apple gets its marketshare.
If it increases, but slows down, that's one thing. So, we see 4.3% now. If we see 5.3 next year, then 6.3, then 7.3, etc, Ms might not have a problem. The percentage of growth is slowing down fast. By the time it would get to 10%, it might be coming to a halt, not getting above 11% or so, about the higest it's ever been. Considering tha Mac users buy a lot of Office, and less but still significant amounts of VPC and Windows products, MS might be fairly happy.
But, if the pace quickens... 4.3% this year, 6.3 the next, 8.3 after that, maybe 10.5 after that, MS would get very concerned before it got to that level.
The fear is that they would stop development of Office, and then discontinue it. Also, make it more difficult to connect to Windows networks, etc. [/B]
Yes, growth curve is likely the most important statistic...but okay...as much as I like OSX I really don't see that latter scenario. Especially since its made its splash and is relatively well known. Perhaps with going to intel it will have a second chance...perhaps as a media center OS that "doesn't suck".
WRT to Office, yes that's a potential problem. On the other hand MS has to play somewhat nice in that arena given the pressure of OO and ODF (minor it may be today). You also have to consider, it's one of those problems you'd like to have right?
I use (and even like) Office but if it were not for work I suppose I could get by with iWork...'tho I'd hope that the db and spreadsheet portions of AppleWorks makes it in there someday. I'm sure they're sitting in a lab somewhere, updated and waiting for the no-Office scenario to occur.
Vinea
Originally posted by vinea
I shall happily even agree that you have given this more thought than I.
Yes, growth curve is likely the most important statistic...but okay...as much as I like OSX I really don't see that latter scenario. Especially since its made its splash and is relatively well known. Perhaps with going to intel it will have a second chance...perhaps as a media center OS that "doesn't suck".
WRT to Office, yes that's a potential problem. On the other hand MS has to play somewhat nice in that arena given the pressure of OO and ODF (minor it may be today). You also have to consider, it's one of those problems you'd like to have right?
I use (and even like) Office but if it were not for work I suppose I could get by with iWork...'tho I'd hope that the db and spreadsheet portions of AppleWorks makes it in there someday. I'm sure they're sitting in a lab somewhere, updated and waiting for the no-Office scenario to occur.
Vinea
The problem with the Officeless environment, is that it isn't what most people who think that iWork (which is selling poorly, by the way) can take it over, with just a few additions, think it is.
Office is more than just a spreadsheet, presentation package, word processor, and in the Windows environment, database.
It's also a developmental environment. Companies build business software around Office, digging into and using its API's etc.
Just substituting something else that's file compatible won't suffice.
Look at the Windows world. Why hasn't StarOffice made a bigger dent? OpenOffice? It's FREE, and compatible!
How about Lotus? Corel Office, etc?
None of these have made a dent. Office has a 95% marketshare.
If MS hampers Office on the Mac, or removes it, Apple will have a problem.
This monopoly thing isn't so simple. MS was declared a monopoly for their OS, but not for Office. They could claim that it didn't make business sense for them to continue development. Or that Apple's marketshare was increasing so that the rules were changing, and that they had to protect themselves. Or say nothing at all.
Remember that these government things take years. If MS was able to stop development during a hearing, and maybe later, when a trial was taking place, it could be too late.
Netscape took them to court. That's what that whole thing was about. What good did it do them? By the time they won, it was too late for them.
And it's difficult to know what this administration would do.
When the trial was going on, Bush was asked what he would do about it when in office. He said that MS was a monopolist, and whatever happened was fine with him.
But when it was almost over, and the fed's had a victory in their hands, the justice department pulled them off (to much criticism), and little happened.
So, if MS stopped development, there might be little Apple could do.
Originally posted by melgross
But, if the pace quickens... 4.3% this year, 6.3 the next, 8.3 after that, maybe 10.5 after that, MS would get very concerned before it got to that level.
The fear is that they would stop development of Office, and then discontinue it. Also, make it more difficult to connect to Windows networks, etc.
3 years.... at which point it doesn't matter; open document formats and iWorks Pro.
Originally posted by vinney57
3 years.... at which point it doesn't matter; open document formats and iWorks Pro.
Forget it. Read my post above.
Originally posted by melgross
Forget it. Read my post above.
Assume I conceed all your points re Office. From Apple's perspective:
a) Isn't that a problem you'd like to have? i.e. My growth curve is so aggressive that MS cares about me. The fear of losing MS Office on the OSX platform shouldn't constrain the desire for explosive growth.
b) Losing my less than stellar (read as non-existant) business share where Office integration is dominant to win in the area where growth is most likely to occur for OSX (e.g. media center) is in line with my current business strategy. Its likely worth the hit since my target consumer is more interested in media services than office productivity.
The only caveat to b) is that MS Office would make one heck of a "game" that runs on the 360. That would really hurt the PS3 and the Mac Mini-Media at the expense of royally pissing off Dell, etc. An iffy card to play.
Vinea
Originally posted by melgross
The problem with the Officeless environment, is that it isn't what most people who think that iWork (which is selling poorly, by the way) can take it over, with just a few additions, think it is.
Time and time again you exhibit a lack of understanding of both Apple's underlying philosophies and the Apple user ecosystem as a whole.
Nobody thinks that iWorks is a replacement for Office. Apple did not imagine for a moment that it was going to sell like hot-cakes. It was a strategic play to a) start up an 'Office' programming unit, b) show MS, investors and customers that such a unit was in existence. Also understand that every Apple unit has to try and at least break even so the iWorks productisation brings in revenue to support the unit. Do you honestly believe that Apple do not have an Office replacement in progress considering its strategic importance?
Office is more than just a spreadsheet, presentation package, word processor, and in the Windows environment, database.
It's also a developmental environment. Companies build business software around Office, digging into and using its API's etc.
Just substituting something else that's file compatible won't suffice.
This is simply not true for Mac users.
Look at the Windows world. Why hasn't StarOffice made a bigger dent? OpenOffice? It's FREE, and compatible!
How about Lotus? Corel Office, etc?
None of these have made a dent. Office has a 95% marketshare.
If MS hampers Office on the Mac, or removes it, Apple will have a problem.
What on earth is the point you are making? A product trying to enter a monopoly situation has no chance unless it is 10 times better; and the alternatives frankly are not. But again, this is of no relevance to the Mac market. If it Office continues to exist and work it will dominate, if MS pull it, it won't and something will fill the void; probably iWorks Pro.
This monopoly thing isn't so simple. MS was declared a monopoly for their OS, but not for Office. They could claim that it didn't make business sense for them to continue development. Or that Apple's marketshare was increasing so that the rules were changing, and that they had to protect themselves. Or say nothing at all.
Remember that these government things take years. If MS was able to stop development during a hearing, and maybe later, when a trial was taking place, it could be too late.
Netscape took them to court. That's what that whole thing was about. What good did it do them? By the time they won, it was too late for them.
And it's difficult to know what this administration would do.
When the trial was going on, Bush was asked what he would do about it when in office. He said that MS was a monopolist, and whatever happened was fine with him.
But when it was almost over, and the fed's had a victory in their hands, the justice department pulled them off (to much criticism), and little happened.
So, if MS stopped development, there might be little Apple could do.
Again, what on earth are you talking about? Nobody is going to be taking MS to court for monopolistic practices ever again in the US. Its pointless and frankly MS will do whatever is necessary to avoid it. Not because they are afraid of the toothless US JD but because they are afraid of the EU and Chinese/Korean systems.
Originally posted by vinney57
[B]Time and time again you exhibit a lack of understanding of both Apple's underlying philosophies and the Apple user ecosystem as a whole.
Nobody thinks that iWorks is a replacement for Office. Apple did not imagine for a moment that it was going to sell like hot-cakes. It was a strategic play to a) start up an 'Office' programming unit, b) show MS, investors and customers that such a unit was in existence. Also understand that every Apple unit has to try and at least break even so the iWorks productisation brings in revenue to support the unit. Do you honestly believe that Apple do not have an Office replacement in progress considering its strategic importance?
That's amusing. I understand quite well. You should learn something about business before you say that.
Most people on these very boards have been touting iWork as a replacement for Office. Just a few posts ago, as a matter of fact. And you do it here, your very self, who is arguing that no one is doing it! That's irony.
You also have absolutely no idea as to what Apple thought. Don't pretend otherwise. You also have no idea why Apple came out with the program. It's more likely that they came out with it as a beginning to replace the very much aged Appleworks, which hasn't been upgraded for years.
There is also no evidence that iWorks is actually making money rather than losing it. Apple has been giving it away with purchases at times in the hope that it would catch on.
I have no idea what Apple might be doing in that department, and neither do you.
This is simply not true for Mac users.
So, you now speak for businesses who do use those very products on their Mac's?
What on earth is the point you are making? A product trying to enter a monopoly situation has no chance unless it is 10 times better; and the alternatives frankly are not. But again, this is of no relevance to the Mac market. If it Office continues to exist and work it will dominate, if MS pull it, it won't and something will fill the void; probably iWorks Pro.
So, a product would have to be 10 times better on Windows to compete with Office, but not on the Mac? That's drivel. Back to iWorks?
Again, what on earth are you talking about? Nobody is going to be taking MS to court for monopolistic practices ever again in the US. Its pointless and frankly MS will do whatever is necessary to avoid it. Not because they are afraid of the toothless US JD but because they are afraid of the EU and Chinese/Korean systems.
Thank you for agreeing with my point! Though we can see just how afraid they are of both of those systems. So far they haven't given one inch (or, line of code). They're facing huge fines, and still they stand fast.
The belief is that there will be a compromise.
Originally posted by vinney57
Nobody thinks that iWorks is a replacement for Office. Apple did not imagine for a moment that it was going to sell like hot-cakes. It was a strategic play to a) start up an 'Office' programming unit, b) show MS, investors and customers that such a unit was in existence.
Eh? AppleWorks has been around since 1984. Arguably you could say the current incarnation only existed since 1999 for the purposes of having an office programming unit despite being fairly dormant until iWork shipped. We'll see how iWork '06 looks soon methinks.
iWork Pro is almost an oxymoron...
Vinea
Here is an article from the ever controversial theinquirer.net
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28602
Originally posted by melgross
Most people on these very boards have been touting iWork as a replacement for Office. Just a few posts ago, as a matter of fact. And you do it here, your very self, who is arguing that no one is doing it! That's irony.
I guess that would be me.
Yes, if it were not for work, I could likely get by with iWork except for the missing spreadsheet part. My most challenging need is the occasional newsletter and christmas missive. I think iWork/Pages is more than suitable for that.
For school presentations, were I to go back to school, Keynote would be suitable as would Pages to write papers.
Given that anything dubbed "work or works" is a lightweight office suite, where do you see iWork not being suitable as an Office replacement within the design constraints?
A co-worker once built a spacecraft control/monitoring system via VBA and MS Excel as a prototype. It was quite possibly one of the dumbest smart thing I've seen but it worked. Probably. Enough to demo anyway. People integrate the wierdest things with MS Office but it doesn't make MS Office irreplaceable as a starting point.
I suspect many heavyweight business apps (like SAS, etc) that offer MS Office integration has portal integration capability too. Between that and file compatability I dunno that the loss of Office integration via VBA is the kiss of death as long as you have a compatible web browser.
That last may be a little tricky but a different arguement.
Vinea
Originally posted by vinea
I guess that would be me.
Yes, if it were not for work, I could likely get by with iWork except for the missing spreadsheet part. My most challenging need is the occasional newsletter and christmas missive. I think iWork/Pages is more than suitable for that.
For school presentations, were I to go back to school, Keynote would be suitable as would Pages to write papers.
Given that anything dubbed "work or works" is a lightweight office suite, where do you see iWork not being suitable as an Office replacement within the design constraints?
A co-worker once built a spacecraft control/monitoring system via VBA and MS Excel as a prototype. It was quite possibly one of the dumbest smart thing I've seen but it worked. Probably. Enough to demo anyway. People integrate the wierdest things with MS Office but it doesn't make MS Office irreplaceable as a starting point.
I suspect many heavyweight business apps (like SAS, etc) that offer MS Office integration has portal integration capability too. Between that and file compatability I dunno that the loss of Office integration via VBA is the kiss of death as long as you have a compatible web browser.
That last may be a little tricky but a different arguement.
Vinea
I bought iWork for my daughter when it first came out. She had been using Pagemaker on OS 9 for years and loved it. She's now 14, and uses inDesign, but finds it too complex for schoolwork. Appleworks is too outdated.
While Pages is a nice combination of a WP and a page layout program, it's far too weak in either of those areas to be of use to anyone for much other than home use and high school work.
The entire thing would have to be rewritten from the ground up.
Keynote is also nice, but also too simple, and needs far more templates. All too often several people in class will use the same ones simply because the selection is too limited. At least that's what she says, and I have no reason to doubt it.
Neither program has the "feel" of a program intended for professional work.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Or, perhaps more simply, Apple discovered that the user-serviceable part that was removed in the latest revision (HD) wasn't really such an important thing for the iMac customer.
I think, at least for Apple, the problems with user-serviceable iMacs outweighed the originally intended benefits ...
Speaking from experience, removing and reinstalling the logic board on a rev. A last year was more involved than I'd anticipated. It made me realize how easy it would be for someone who was just a bit too "careless" to damage something in the process. I've witnessed enough "average" users mistreating (heck, I'd consider it abusing) their computers and peripherals to shudder at the thought of them attempting iMac self-repair.
Also, it's not hard to imagine troubles with accurately diagnosing hardware-related problems so proper parts would be replaced.
So, what may have seemed like a good idea at first possibly ended up causing too many negative iMac repair incidents, both for Apple and customers. Frankly, I didn't mind letting a service tech take responsibility when I took my rev. B in for repair this year . But I'm very glad it's still partly user-serviceable, unlike the rev. C, so I could remove the hard drive beforehand.
The rev. A was probably too "generous" with self-repair and the rev. C seems overly restrictive. For me anyway, Apple's design/policy with the rev. B is an acceptable compromise.
Originally posted by melgross
Keynote is also nice, but also too simple, and needs far more templates. All too often several people in class will use the same ones simply because the selection is too limited. At least that's what she says, and I have no reason to doubt it.
Neither program has the "feel" of a program intended for professional work.
Probably because they aren't intended for professional work? Hence the xxxWork moniker over the xxxOffice moniker? Besides, this IS the first incarnation.
WRT to Keynote, I see the same thing with Powerpoint. Too many students and other folks using the same stock template (and usually its that bad looking spiral notebook one).
While creating a full up theme is apparently a lot of work, you can buy one for $20 and tailor from there if you want to stand out and don't have a lot of time.
Vinea
Originally posted by melgross
That's amusing. I understand quite well. You should learn something about business before you say that.
You should look up 'patronising' in the dictionary.
Originally posted by melgross
Most people on these very boards have been touting iWork as a replacement for Office. Just a few posts ago, as a matter of fact. And you do it here, your very self, who is arguing that no one is doing it! That's irony.
For a lot of people it is! The nay-sayers seem to be those people that expect it to work exactly like Word or Powerpoint. Hey - it's never going to and I'm all for that. The MS toolset design is so creaky it's painful.
Keynote is already a better presentation tool than Powerpoint and Pages can do things that you just simply can't do in Word. That's not to say that neither have their own problems but they are generally adequate replacements for most people. All we need now is a spreadsheet program better than Appleworks' sheet and capable enough for most people that would otherwise use Excel. I'm really looking forward to iWork06 and Pages moving beyond it's 1.0 state.
Originally posted by melgross
You also have absolutely no idea as to what Apple thought. Don't pretend otherwise. You also have no idea why Apple came out with the program. It's more likely that they came out with it as a beginning to replace the very much aged Appleworks, which hasn't been upgraded for years.
There is also no evidence that iWorks is actually making money rather than losing it. Apple has been giving it away with purchases at times in the hope that it would catch on.
I have no idea what Apple might be doing in that department, and neither do you.
Does it matter? AppleWorks was an adequate replacement for Office for a lot of people who didn't want to spend hundreds on Office and didn't need the whole featureset. If it's of strategic importance to Apple then it also doesn't really matter if it makes money yet.
Originally posted by melgross
So, you now speak for businesses who do use those very products on their Mac's?
I run a business. I use them all the time in preference to Office which I've also got because they do things I can't do in Office. And they save my business hundreds of dollars. Try exporting to Flash in Office. ;-)
Originally posted by melgross
So, a product would have to be 10 times better on Windows to compete with Office, but not on the Mac? That's drivel. Back to iWorks?
I used to use Lotus' Word processor and 123 on Windows. They were both easily better than Microsoft's products IMHO. But, since file formats were proprietary, interoperability with other people was almost impossible. That's why MS wins, not because of it's software which frankly sucks.
Originally posted by melgross
Thank you for agreeing with my point! Though we can see just how afraid they are of both of those systems. So far they haven't given one inch (or, line of code). They're facing huge fines, and still they stand fast.
The belief is that there will be a compromise.
What will happen is they'll be forced to open up their file formats. EU law will make them do it if you USAians don't. Incidentally, although Apple uses XML for it's iWork file formats, a little more open-ness and support of emerging open doc formats would be nice.
Originally posted by vinea
Probably because they aren't intended for professional work? Hence the xxxWork moniker over the xxxOffice moniker? Besides, this IS the first incarnation.
WRT to Keynote, I see the same thing with Powerpoint. Too many students and other folks using the same stock template (and usually its that bad looking spiral notebook one).
While creating a full up theme is apparently a lot of work, you can buy one for $20 and tailor from there if you want to stand out and don't have a lot of time.
Vinea
I don't know where all the free Keynote templates on http://www.iworkcommunity.com/ went but they had loads at one point. Still loads of pages templates.
My $0.02 on this Office rabbit trail:
For big businesses, it's all about the support contracts and volume licensing. The fewer vendors to deal with the better. So while Apple may have a great little OS, well integrated machines, and run MS Office, the support contractors favor Windows heavily. It's easier to train support personel on ONE set of things, so OS, word processor, presentation, email, etc. from ONE vendor supported by ONE contractor is better. IBM & HP _MIGHT_ be able to put together a Linux & OpenOffice package and lure some customers, but that's the only way I see the MS monopoly being threatened. And I doubt IBM or HP would bother to make their distribution available/user friendly to the Average Joe.
And personally, I think if Apple started to make real inroads in the OS market, MS would happily port their other big software (SQL Server, Exchange, et al) to run on Macs.
Windows is just the launching point for all the rest of MS's software. Since IT departments like uniformity, as long as MS provides solutions that are "good enough" in the other areas IT departments care about (email servers, web servers, etc.), big companies will continue to standardize across the board on MS. And the home users will just want to buy what they have at work so they can easily share files/steal software from work.
Apple will always be a niche player in the PC world. Only those who care enough to seek out something beyond what "everyone else" has will buy Macs.
- Jasen.
Originally posted by melgross
While Pages is a nice combination of a WP and a page layout program, it's far too weak in either of those areas to be of use to anyone for much other than home use and high school work.
I use it for invoicing, newsletters and even did a 48 page magazine design with it. It's weak points are in technical document writing and in designing for print. There's also issues in that it outputs a newer version of PDF than most print shops can cope with.
Originally posted by melgross
The entire thing would have to be rewritten from the ground up.
I entirely disagree. It needs to be faster and they should do something about the section/page confusion where deleting a 'page' deletes more than a page if your text flows past the end of the physical page but other than that it's got some extremely good ideas in there. I think the image placement and layout tools are fantastic and prefer them to absolutely anything produced by Quark or Adobe.
Originally posted by melgross
Keynote is also nice, but also too simple, and needs far more templates. All too often several people in class will use the same ones simply because the selection is too limited. At least that's what she says, and I have no reason to doubt it.
There's over a hundred with Powerpoint, although many are repeated with simple colour changes and many are so cheesy that I can't imagine ever using them in a professional context. Which does beg the question of where you'd use them?
Keynote2 has about 20 but much higher quality. Also, in using Keynote what makes the difference I find over people giving Powerpoint presentations are the transitions and better font aliasing. I tend to stick to fairly boring gradients for the templates.
Originally posted by melgross
Neither program has the "feel" of a program intended for professional work.
I think you're wrong there but certainly Pages has some rough 1.0 edges that need sorting. Keynote2 - no problems really.