fairwweather

About

Username
fairwweather
Joined
Visits
22
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
19
Badges
0
Posts
29
  • First look: Hands-on with Apple's iPhone X

    Somebody please tell me that the reason there was no iPhone 9 was not because X was afraid of 7...
    sphericargonaut
  • Apple plans new iMac configurations targeting pro users for later this year

    Exactly how is a glued shut, skinny iMac with soldered in memory and on board Vampire Video GPUs going to serve a Pro Market or have any shelf life?

    The very all in one concept of the iMac or a laptop serves the constant churn that may be profitable for Apple, but not what more than a few want or need.
    Most professionals - at least those in the creative fields - do not need monster machines. The majority of these professionals are not cranking out high-end video or 3-D animations, but literature, packaging, websites, photoshop tweaks, and the like. This applies to service bureaus, agencies, corporate in-house, and freelance. For those of who do need the big iron, we definitely want the expandability, the speed, the graphics power and the high-speed storage, but at best I doubt that we represent more than 10% of the market of people who use Macs professionally.
    watto_cobra
  • Editorial: The future of Apple's Macintosh

    This is certainly a thorough article. I take issue with the licensing suggestion, as being unfeasible. As was clearly proven in the past, in order for Apple to make money through licensing, they would have to charge so much for licenses that third party manufacturers would have to charge more for machines than Apple.
    The various clones ranged in quality and price but most of them cost less than an Apple Mac (in contrast the quad processor Daystar Genius was as big as a horse, was very expensive, and was buggy). The PowerComputing machines were in traditional bloody-knuckle stamped metal boxes but were very appealing. The advantage of the clones was that they ordered CPUs in very small quantities, while Apple had to wait for the production of huge numbers, which meant that the clones could beat Apple to the market with the latest and fastest machines.
    I hated to see PowerComputing go away, as they had an attitude you just had to love.
    patchythepirate
  • Apple shareholders again reject proposal to diversify senior management

    Racial quotas is a difficult topic. We should remember that the guy in charge of Apple represents a segment that is often the target of hostility and makes a prominent case, both personally and on the company's behalf, for diversity. If Apple does not have strong minority representation among its brass, I doubt this is due to prejudice. When it comes down to driving and managing revenues in the billions, Apple is about making money and they are going to hire whoever is going to make that happen.
    Apple's hiring process is a heck of a gauntlet, particularly at the top. Whoever has the best chops, the best record, and the best credentials wins.
    SpamSandwich
  • 'Apple Cafe' from 1996 shows early work on branded retail presence

    Mikeymike said: Performas of the mid '90s had more "firsts" in them than anything Apple has ever done since. Same with the PowerBooks.

    "Junk"??  ...Please.
    The Performas were budget-orientd versions of Apple's more serious machines and were intended to compete more directly with the mainstream PCs of they day. They weren't junk, but they weren't as desirable as their more pro-oriented look-alikes. Thanks to Apple's idiotic emphasis on sales without the marketing to back it up created quite a mess. I remember seeing boxes of Performas stacked eight high, five wide and three deep against the front wall of a Computer City (120 of them, going nowhere). Nobody was buying them, but Apple's sales guys had been forcing them into the channel so that they could meet their quotas and earn their bonuses. Embarrassing.

    One can see in the third illustration, the abortive Apple "themes" that they had been playing with; the idea being that people could change the look of their UI to all sorts of Apple and third-party looks (including the Sponge Bob / Tinkertoy look seen in the menu bar, but Apple only demoed them, then offered just two: blue and graphite, ditching the wilder options before they hit the streets. Apple decided that the Mac OS must have a look that clearly identified the Mac as being different than a PC and not some random user-selectable look. This was also in the day of the Copland disaster. Apple really was in serious disarray. 

    As for the flashy clashing colors and overt techy look, innovative art back then was largely related to the advancement of Photoshop (along with KPT) and 3-D apps, with designers tending to go over the top. TechTool Pro (which is still around) had an interface featuring a metallic-sounding robot voice speaking prompts and with all sorts of visual depth to the UI. It would be laughable by today's standards, but people thought it was pretty cool in the day.
    boodlepscooter63