Text 1753, 123 rader
Skriven 2006-06-04 23:10:00 av Robert E Starr JR (2198.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Atheists: America's m
=================================
* * * This message was from Gregory Weston to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <uce-A6992B.21281304062006@comcast.dca.giganews.com>
@REPLY: <1148535437.681322.123970@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
In article <HNmdnQoR869v3R7ZnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@comcast.com>,
 "Carl" <cengman7@hotmail.com> wrote:

> "Gregory Weston" <uce@splook.com> wrote in message 
> news:uce-54DF73.14065004062006@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> > In article <oO6dnfNuDIXNEhzZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > "Carl" <cengman7@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> As to Apple, it will be interesting to see what happens with the shift to
> >> Intel.  SO far, every time Apple has shifted platforms  (680x0 to Power 
> >> PC,
> >> then to OSX etc) their market share has halved.  Now they're going into 
> >> the
> >> PC hardware world and they've always considered themselves more of a
> >> hardware company than software.  It will be very interesting to watch.
> >
> > Nits:
> >
> > 1) The major impact on Apple's market share was set in motion before the
> > PPC by the way the company treated 3rd-party developers under John
> > Sculley. Developers were driven away en masse for quite a long time,
> > which tended to restrict the quantity and variety of software which,
> > which impacted the number of new and repeat customers.
> 
> Never having been an Apple developer I have no reason to challenge that.

It's something that a lot of people have forgotten, or missed where the 
pebbles came from that resulted in all those ripples (several of which 
you've noted in your post).


> > 2) Apple's market share has not halved with/since the advent of OS X.
> 
> It had been reported as having done so by InfoWorld.  My understanding
> is that it's at about 3% now.  I'm certainly open to better figures.

Wrong end. It was under 4% when OS X shipped. It was under 3% before the 
iMac debuted. So about 3% now isn't halving. On the other hand, though, 
keep in mind that market share isn't a particularly meaningful number to 
anyone who doesn't have a direct financial stake in a vendor. Market 
share is a percentage of new sales in a given 3-month period. It doesn't 
directly reflect, for example, a vendor's presence in the installed base 
and doesn't represent a good comparison between a vendor whose products 
are bought as commodities and another vendor whose similar products are 
bought as durable goods. (FWIW, Apple's presence in the installed base 
has consistently been much higher than their market share for more than 
20 years.)

> I also don't think that Apple has to turn a Linux box into a full Mac.
> 
> Move the bulk of the GUI to Linux and you do several things:
> 
> 1) Significantly increase the number of developers writing to the API.
> 
>     This is HUGE.

And also a false win. A majority of the API (both in size and 
significance) has nothing to do with the GUI. Most of the low-level 
functional stuff is already available to pretty much anyone who uses gcc 
and there's a good chunk of high-level non-UI stuff that relies on 
supporting technology not currently part of any Linux distribution.

> The developer community has always been pretty small (comparatively) 

.... since Sculley (Seriously. That man's attitude toward developers just 
as Windows was become a viable environment was, IMO, one of the biggest 
blunders in the history of the industry. It took Apple nearly a decade 
to get their developer base back to the same absolute numbers they had 
had before 1990, and they're closing in on a second decade without 
having regained the relative level of support they had.) ...

> and except for a few niche areas, development for the
> Mac was always done last (if at all).  This could change that.
> 
> 2) Significantly increase the number of users that are exposed to ane become 
> accustomed to the GUI.

All griping about how it deviates from what they're used to. ;)


> 3) Provide a mechanism by which users of commodity system might consider a 
> Mac an upgrade to the Linux experience.
> 
> 4) Make Apple the rallying point (once again) for the anti-MS brigade.

Honestly, I don't think that works. Choosing something for the reason 
that it's "not something else" isn't historically a particularly good 
fight. Even worse when the "something" and the "something else" aren't 
the product but the producer. As a related example, consider the case of 
Be. They were a significant anti-establishment rallying point as they 
got off the ground, but many of the people that came to them weren't 
looking for "better than the Amiga/Mac/Windows" so much as they were 
looking for "the Amiga/Mac/Windows, just not from 
Commodore/Apple/Microsoft" (see last comment) which resulted in a 
constant dilution of and distraction from what initially had great 
potential.


> 5) I'm not suggesting that Apple give away the GUI for free, so it would 
> generate a revenue stream for the Mac
>     platform.  Right now the iPod is keeping Apple afloat.

A misconception. A common one, but no more correct for being so. Right 
now, as it has been for about 15 years, the Mac hardware is keeping 
Apple afloat. The iPod (and iTunes music store) are helping to keep 
Apple in the mainstream consciousness, but are certainly not the 
majority contribution to their fiscal status.

G

-- 
What I write is what I mean. I request that anyone who decides to respond
please refrain from "disagreeing" with something I didn't write in the first
place.
    
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)