Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » vista where are we now ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96203 is a reply to message #96200] |
Fri, 22 February 2008 19:25   |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2/22/08 8:36 PM, in article 47bf86b2$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
<excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> What I do expect you to share is the basic idea that NEITHER of them are
>> perfect and NEITHER of them are COMPLETELY evil. They are both a mix.
>> Sometimes
>> they see a competitor and use their power to club them over the head to
> the
>> detriment of all of us. Both of them do it. One has more ability to do it
>> than the other.
>>
>
> Can you give me an example of Apple doing this?
How about more than one:
1) Shake is a $9900 application in 1999 ($3900 render only)
2) Apply buys it, drops the price a couple of times (OSX version less than
other versions), offering free double licenses for users upgrading to OSX.
3) Apple discontinues Windows support for it.
4) Fast forward to 2003, Shake is still $2999 for both OSX and Linux.
5) Apple drops the OSX version price to $499. Linux version remains $2999.
See more here for the price change details and decide for yourself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shake_(software)
Just my opinion, but anytime an app is dropped from $3k to $500, selling
software as a profitable product isn't the goal.
Next:
1) Apple buys Emagic (there's a song in this one somewhere...;-)
2) Drops PC support for Logic promptly.
3) Slow development ensues...then finally core audio appears
4) Apple signs exclusive deal with Apogee for Symphony, Ensemble, etc for
Logic/Mac only
5) Symphony reports lower latency and better performance than other apps
under core audio
6) Speculation (no, I can't prove it - yet) is that Apple gave Apogee lower
level access to core audio that isn't in the SDK, thereby giving the
Apogee/Logic combo a significant edge over Digital Performer, Nuendo/Cubase,
RME, MOTU, Digidesign, etc.
7) Apple drops the price of Logic to $500, with additional software/etc
thrown in (imho, this is below average market value for a DAW software and
most likely a loss leader).
8) Why? To sell Macs and Apogee interfaces. Logic is priced too low to be
a profit center - it's just a marketing tool now to expand the Mac's
position in consumer, prosumer, hobby, and beginner, lower end musician
markets, to the detriment of other 3rd party companies also developing for
the platform.
In both cases, Apple is using applications to push their hardware, even
though there are competing applications, and the Microsoft argument would
suggest that using applications and exclusivity of them, and hardware, is a
conflict of interest for an operating system developer, much less a computer
builder.
Just my .02 - can't prove it any more than anyone can *prove* Microsoft is
evil. I don't like MS, but Apple isn't making friends in my end of the pro
audio world - just putting this in perspective. Btw, I'm not the only one
with this supposition - there are some other well respected audio people in
agreement.
Btw - didn't post this to get deeper into an argument - just since you asked
for an example, and I had read the same supposition of Apple's move with
core audio from another Nuendo user just today, so might as well pass it on
here.
I don't hate Apple - but I do hate exclusive deals, and lock outs that do
nothing but hurt the consumer by limiting options. I have yet to verify
that core audio really is faster with Apogee interfaces, so take that with a
grain of salt - Apogee claims they are, of course. Point is, if to get the
most out of your Mac for audio, you not only have to buy and Apogee
interface (an Apple partner), but Logic as well, and don't have the option
of running a MOTU interface, RME, Lynx, M-Audio, etc with any other
software, your are sacrificing options.
Sounds like a text book Digidesign move to me, but it's Apple doing the
price cuts and exclusive deals to undercut the market and sell more Macs and
other Apple-partner products. If there were no Mac support from other
companies (MOTU, RME, Lynx, etc), you could call it "their product, their
market", but we are comparing operating systems and computers here, so that
doesn't stand. It may not be illegal (but I believe it is close), but it is
hurting consumers.
Regards,
Dedric
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96204 is a reply to message #96177] |
Fri, 22 February 2008 20:06 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_00DB_01C8759F.2F37E020
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
We'll just have to disagree about it I guess. I still like ya and I =
think you're a cool dude, just a bit misguided :) I find nothing ethical =
in the things I've posted about so far and you could post the same kind =
of things about MS and we'd see that together. But not the mighty blue =
apple? Added to that the Jobs li(n)e by li(n)e <-bad pun #1> that was =
pushed on the public (*).=20
It ain't like I'm saying MS is ethical - they're not, either - but the =
only thing keeping Apple from being the same ugly foul hairy beast is =
financial firepower. Gates lies about how great Vista is. It's a turd. =
Jobs lied about how great Motorola chips were. They were turds. Gates =
forces you as a business to buy office/OS's through each planned =
obsolescene upgrade. Jobs tells you to think you're safe from virii as =
an ad campaign and tells you how Mac runs office 'just as well as a PC'. =
but fails to mention it's OLD version of office, years old in fact. =
There are 60 known virii in the wild for Mac, but you won't hear about =
that from Jobs/Apple. =20
Apple Ads, speaking of....PC's are cold and harsh and only good at =
office apps, 'eh? Somebody should tell that to all the video and audio =
guys that make wonderful art every single day on a windows PC, because =
they didn't get the memo. I will say that iLife and GarageBand are =
pretty cool, though not pro of course. I have 2 macs at my avail at =
work, and several PC's. Frankly, they both tick me off from time to time =
but the Win boxes see more use and tick me off a whole lot less. Nothing =
like plugging in a KVM and having your Mac reach an unrecoverable error =
and forced shutdown because it doesn't like the KVM. Every time. But not =
being the latest OS I can't get support for it w/o buying some more =
"apple care", and Belkin had no idea what would cause it, nor my vendor. =
I had been considering a Mini for personal use (with boot camp of =
course), but that kinda gotcha rather cinched the "think I'll pass for =
now" for me. MacOS-x 10.29 on dual procs, and it's a foot prop under my =
desk now. At least it doesn't crash that way and it's more ergonomic for =
my peds, heh... I get a warm fuzzy and smirk when my feet hit it :>
(*) Apple is so much faster, Apple is so much more interesting, Apple is =
so much better at.... er, .... hey, it's the new and improved Apple now =
with INTEL hardware (IE, that's called a PC Steve-O, and no amount of =
backpeddling will cover the fact that you were lying through your teeth =
about how much faster Motorola's I'd-rather-be-in-a-cell-phone chips =
were over INTEL) and it's so much better than , uh.. running windows =
(can't say PC anymore at this point)! Er, wait.. now you can run Windows =
on your Apple! (which I don't have a problem with, in fact I applaud =
that one but don't you think that's rather odd for Apple to say bad =
windows, bad windows.. hey, you can now run windows?) I also give major =
points to that dually quicksilver being WAY cleanly designed inside. =
Superb visual build inside the box. Too bad it's an ergonomic foot =
device now.=20
You talked about MS stealing the macOS software GUI. Ok, where did Apple =
get their code base from for OS-X? Can't see the worm in both apples, =
'eh? <-yes, that was bad pun #2.... but I am a punny guy!>
They screwed you as a clone seller even and still you deny. Horse, =
water, no drinky. You're probably thinking the same thing about the =
majority here. In all seriousness, I'm glad you have enjoyed your =
relationships with Mac, I cannot report the same, unfortunately. I =
absolutely adore my iPOD though, and although iPhone is tre' cool, it's =
not cutting it with me on the tech end so it's off the list of 'to buy'. =
I also thought that the Cinema Display was about the most beautiful =
display ever as far back as 4~5 years ago. on the overall though, I =
didn't like Apple computer kool-aid any better than MS's kool-aid.
You're ok in my book man, so don't take any of this all personal or =
anything, it's really not meant that way. I haven't forgotten when I had =
a problem with a Mac you are the first and only dude offered and =
followed through to help me out. Some day I'll get a chance to repay in =
kind.
AA
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:47bf218e$1@linux...
>=20
> For the record, it was what Apple did to the cloners that drove me =
into the
> ever welcoming arms of Redmond. I couldn't afford Apple hardware, but =
I could
> afford a Power 603e machine that was my first experience with computer =
audio.
> Less than a year after that Apple shut down the cloners and I =
realized, 'Hey,
> these are greedy corporate bastards just like Microsoft. And Windows =
hardware
> is cheap and I can build my own.' Which lead me to a 400 Mhz Celeron + =
Paris,
> and the rest is (grim, money losing, book publishing) history.=20
>=20
> Your story is one version. Another is that Power was a smart, =
talented, agile
> hardware vendor who was beating the daylights out of Apple because =
they were
> everything Apple had long since ceased to be--entrepreneurial and =
customer
> oriented.=20
>=20
> TCB
>=20
> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>"Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message=20
>>>news:47bba823$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market =
share?
>> I
>>>
>>>How about the time the pulled the OS licensing from PowerComputing =
and
> UMaxx
>>
>>>and closed two entire companies and threw all those folks out of =
work.
>>>
>>>
>>Deej since you mentioned PowerComputing,there are a few things that =
should
>>be noted. As I've said, the cloners ate in to Apple's sales. The =
clones
>>advertised mainly in Mac publications to Mac users, If they had =
advertised
>>in PC publications and did other forms of advertising to non Mac users =
they
>>would have grown the market. They didn't, they cherry picked Apple =
sales.
>> One such famous incident was when PowerComputing was directly =
competing
>>with Apple by selling 3000 clones to Apple's long time customer =
Lockheed
>>Martin, that didn't go over to well. PowerComputing also worked a =
deal
> with
>>IBM to get the fastest PowerPC processors before Apple could, this =
further
>>cost Apple sales.
>>
>>Steve Jobs went to all the cloners and tried to renegotiate the =
licensing
>>prices, the cloners wouldn't hear of it, so Apple did not renew the =
licensing
>>with Mac OS 8. Apple did not pull the licensing. The cloners could =
still
>>build systems and ship them with Mac OS 7.6 installed, and bundled OS =
8,
>>they chose not to. PowerComputing announced after that, that they =
were
> going
>>to start building PCs, which I think they did for a short time. In =
the
> end,
>>Apple bought out PowerComputing for 100 million dollars in Apple =
stock.
>=20
>>I think that was pretty generous of Apple. I believe it was up to =
Kahng
>>to take care of his workers from there.
>>
>>As far as UMAX, they continued on for years building scanners and =
other
> products
>>as they did before they made clones.
>
------=_NextPart_000_00DB_01C8759F.2F37E020
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16608" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>We'll just have to disagree about it I guess. I =
still like=20
ya and I think you're a cool dude, just a bit misguided :) I find =
nothing=20
ethical in the things I've posted about so far and you could post the =
same kind=20
of things about MS and we'd see that together. But not the mighty blue =
apple?=20
Added to that the Jobs li(n)e by li(n)e <-bad pun #1> that was =
pushed on=20
the public<STRONG> (*).</STRONG> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>It ain't like I'm saying MS is ethical - they're =
not,=20
either - but the only thing keeping Apple from being the same ugly =
foul=20
hairy beast is financial firepower. Gates lies about how great Vista is. =
It's a=20
turd. Jobs lied about how great Motorola chips were. They were turds. =
Gates=20
forces you as a business to buy office/OS's through each planned =
obsolescene=20
upgrade. </FONT><FONT face=3DArial>Jobs tells you to think you're =
safe from=20
virii as an ad campaign and tells you how Mac runs office 'just as well =
as a=20
PC'. but fails to mention it's OLD version of office, years old in fact. =
There=20
are 60 known virii in the wild for Mac, but you won't =
hear about=20
that from Jobs/Apple. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Apple Ads, speaking of....PC's are cold and =
harsh and only=20
good at office apps, 'eh? Somebody should tell that to all the video and =
audio=20
guys that make wonderful art every single day on a windows PC, because =
they=20
didn't get the memo. I will say that iLife and GarageBand are pretty =
cool,=20
though not pro of course. I have 2 macs at my avail at work, and several =
PC's.=20
Frankly, they both tick me off from time to time but the Win boxes =
see more=20
use and tick me off a whole lot less. Nothing like plugging in a KVM and =
having=20
your Mac reach an unrecoverable error and forced shutdown because =
it=20
doesn't like the KVM. Every time. But not being the latest OS I can't =
get=20
support for it w/o buying some more "apple care", and Belkin had no idea =
what=20
would cause it, nor my vendor. I had been considering a Mini for =
personal=20
use (with boot camp of course), but that kinda gotcha rather cinched the =
"think=20
I'll pass for now" for me. MacOS-x 10.29 on dual procs, and it's a foot =
prop=20
under my desk now. At least it doesn't crash that way and it's more =
ergonomic=20
for my peds, heh... I get a warm fuzzy and smirk when my feet =
hit it=20
:></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><STRONG>(*)</STRONG> Apple is so much =
faster, Apple=20
is so much more interesting, Apple is so much better at.... er, .... =
hey, it's=20
the new and improved Apple now with INTEL hardware (IE, that's called a =
PC=20
Steve-O, and no amount of backpeddling will cover the fact that you were =
lying=20
through your teeth about how much=20
faster Motorola's I'd-rather-be-in-a-cell- phone chips were =
over INTEL)=20
and it's so much better than , uh.. running windows (can't say PC =
anymore at=20
this point)! Er, wait.. now you can run Windows on your Apple! (which I =
don't=20
have a problem with, in fact I applaud that one but don't you think =
that's=20
rather odd for Apple to say bad windows, bad windows.. hey, you can now =
run=20
windows?) I also give major points to that dually quicksilver being WAY =
cleanly=20
designed inside. Superb visual build inside the box. Too bad it's an =
ergonomic=20
foot device now. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>You talked about MS stealing the macOS software =
GUI. Ok,=20
where did Apple get their code base from for OS-X? Can't see the worm in =
both=20
apples, 'eh? <-yes, that was bad pun #2.... but I am a punny=20
guy!></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>They screwed you as a clone seller even and =
still you=20
deny. Horse, water, no drinky. You're probably thinking the same =
thing=20
about the majority here. In all seriousness, I'm glad you have =
enjoyed your=20
relationships with Mac, I cannot report the same, unfortunately. I =
absolutely=20
adore my iPOD though, and although iPhone is tre' cool, it's not cutting =
it with=20
me on the tech end so it's off the list of 'to buy'. I also thought that =
the=20
Cinema Display was about the most beautiful display ever as far back as =
4~5=20
years ago. on the overall though, I didn't like Apple =
computer kool-aid any=20
better than MS's kool-aid.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>You're ok in my book man, so don't take any of =
this all=20
personal or anything, it's really not meant that way. I haven't =
forgotten when I=20
had a problem with a Mac you are the first and only dude offered and =
followed=20
through to help me out. Some day I'll get a chance to repay in=20
kind.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>AA</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"TCB" <</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:nobody@ishere.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>nobody@ishere.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> =
wrote in message=20
</FONT><A href=3D"news:47bf218e$1@linux"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>news:47bf218e$1@linux</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>...</FONT></DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> <BR>> For =
the record, it=20
was what Apple did to the cloners that drove me into the<BR>> ever =
welcoming=20
arms of Redmond. I couldn't afford Apple hardware, but I could<BR>> =
afford a=20
Power 603e machine that was my first experience with computer =
audio.<BR>>=20
Less than a year after that Apple shut down the cloners and I realized,=20
'Hey,<BR>> these are greedy corporate bastards just like Microsoft. =
And=20
Windows hardware<BR>> is cheap and I can build my own.' Which lead me =
to a=20
400 Mhz Celeron + Paris,<BR>> and the rest is (grim, money losing, =
book=20
publishing) history. <BR>> <BR>> Your story is one version. =
Another is=20
that Power was a smart, talented, agile<BR>> hardware vendor who was =
beating=20
the daylights out of Apple because they were<BR>> everything Apple =
had long=20
since ceased to be--entrepreneurial and customer<BR>> oriented. =
<BR>>=20
<BR>> TCB<BR>> <BR>> "James McCloskey" <</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>excelsm@hotmail.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>>=20
wrote:<BR>>><BR>>>"Deej" <</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:noway@jose.net"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>noway@jose.net</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>>=20
wrote:<BR>>>><BR>>>> "James McCloskey" <</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>excelsm@hotmail.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> =
wrote in=20
message=20
<BR>>>>news:47bba823$1@linux...<BR>>>>><BR>>>&=
gt;>=20
Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market=20
share?<BR>>> I<BR>>>><BR>>>>How about the time =
the=20
pulled the OS licensing from PowerComputing and<BR>>=20
UMaxx<BR>>><BR>>>>and closed two entire companies and =
threw all=20
those folks out of work.<BR>>>><BR>>>> <BR>>>Deej =
since=20
you mentioned PowerComputing,there are a few things that =
should<BR>>>be=20
noted. As I've said, the cloners ate in to Apple's sales. =
The=20
clones<BR>>>advertised mainly in Mac publications to Mac users, If =
they=20
had advertised<BR>>>in PC publications and did other forms of =
advertising=20
to non Mac users they<BR>>>would have grown the market. They =
didn't,=20
they cherry picked Apple sales.<BR>>> One such famous incident was =
when=20
PowerComputing was directly competing<BR>>>with Apple by selling =
3000=20
clones to Apple's long time customer Lockheed<BR>>>Martin, that =
didn't go=20
over to well. PowerComputing also worked a deal<BR>>=20
with<BR>>>IBM to get the fastest PowerPC processors before Apple =
could,=20
this further<BR>>>cost Apple sales.<BR>>><BR>>>Steve =
Jobs went=20
to all the cloners and tried to renegotiate the =
licensing<BR>>>prices, the=20
cloners wouldn't hear of it, so Apple did not renew the=20
licensing<BR>>>with Mac OS 8. Apple did not pull the=20
licensing. The cloners could still<BR>>>build systems and =
ship them=20
with Mac OS 7.6 installed, and bundled OS 8,<BR>>>they chose not =
to. =20
PowerComputing announced after that, that they were<BR>> =
going<BR>>>to=20
start building PCs, which I think they did for a short time. In=20
the<BR>> end,<BR>>>Apple bought out PowerComputing for 100 =
million=20
dollars in Apple stock.<BR>> <BR>>>I think that was pretty =
generous of=20
Apple. I believe it was up to Kahng<BR>>>to take care of his =
workers=20
from there.<BR>>><BR>>>As far as UMAX, they continued on for =
years=20
building scanners and other<BR>> products<BR>>>as they did =
before they=20
made clones.<BR>></FONT></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_00DB_01C8759F.2F37E020--
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96210 is a reply to message #96203] |
Fri, 22 February 2008 22:22 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
A lot of this is speculation, not fact. I will say over the years many companies
dropped support for the Mac platform, one example was when Parsons dropped
Quick Books for Mac, luckily we got that one back. Mac users have had to
deal with this for years.
Why should Apple develop for another platform when it does not benefit them?
They are trying to grow the Mac market not the PC market! I'll remind you
that they offered PC users special pricing, including on hardware. PC users
were not left out in the cold. If you haven't noticed, Apple unlike MS,
sells integrated hardware and software, they have a different business model.
Yes, they use Hardware and software to push each other.
By the way, if you haven't heard, anti trust cases were brought against Microsoft,
these cases were adjudicated and Microsoft was found guilty. Thanks to Bush
and friends, MS has gotten a slap on the wrist instead of a break up. MS
is back to their old tricks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_v._Microsoft
Think what you want!
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>On 2/22/08 8:36 PM, in article 47bf86b2$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
><excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> What I do expect you to share is the basic idea that NEITHER of them
are
>>> perfect and NEITHER of them are COMPLETELY evil. They are both a mix.
>>> Sometimes
>>> they see a competitor and use their power to club them over the head
to
>> the
>>> detriment of all of us. Both of them do it. One has more ability to do
it
>>> than the other.
>>>
>>
>> Can you give me an example of Apple doing this?
>
>How about more than one:
>
>1) Shake is a $9900 application in 1999 ($3900 render only)
>2) Apply buys it, drops the price a couple of times (OSX version less than
>other versions), offering free double licenses for users upgrading to OSX.
>3) Apple discontinues Windows support for it.
>4) Fast forward to 2003, Shake is still $2999 for both OSX and Linux.
>5) Apple drops the OSX version price to $499. Linux version remains $2999.
>
>See more here for the price change details and decide for yourself:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shake_(software)
>
>Just my opinion, but anytime an app is dropped from $3k to $500, selling
>software as a profitable product isn't the goal.
>
>
>Next:
>1) Apple buys Emagic (there's a song in this one somewhere...;-)
>2) Drops PC support for Logic promptly.
>3) Slow development ensues...then finally core audio appears
>4) Apple signs exclusive deal with Apogee for Symphony, Ensemble, etc for
>Logic/Mac only
>5) Symphony reports lower latency and better performance than other apps
>under core audio
>6) Speculation (no, I can't prove it - yet) is that Apple gave Apogee lower
>level access to core audio that isn't in the SDK, thereby giving the
>Apogee/Logic combo a significant edge over Digital Performer, Nuendo/Cubase,
>RME, MOTU, Digidesign, etc.
>7) Apple drops the price of Logic to $500, with additional software/etc
>thrown in (imho, this is below average market value for a DAW software and
>most likely a loss leader).
>8) Why? To sell Macs and Apogee interfaces. Logic is priced too low to
be
>a profit center - it's just a marketing tool now to expand the Mac's
>position in consumer, prosumer, hobby, and beginner, lower end musician
>markets, to the detriment of other 3rd party companies also developing for
>the platform.
>
>In both cases, Apple is using applications to push their hardware, even
>though there are competing applications, and the Microsoft argument would
>suggest that using applications and exclusivity of them, and hardware, is
a
>conflict of interest for an operating system developer, much less a computer
>builder.
>
>Just my .02 - can't prove it any more than anyone can *prove* Microsoft
is
>evil. I don't like MS, but Apple isn't making friends in my end of the
pro
>audio world - just putting this in perspective. Btw, I'm not the only one
>with this supposition - there are some other well respected audio people
in
>agreement.
>
>Btw - didn't post this to get deeper into an argument - just since you asked
>for an example, and I had read the same supposition of Apple's move with
>core audio from another Nuendo user just today, so might as well pass it
on
>here.
>
>I don't hate Apple - but I do hate exclusive deals, and lock outs that do
>nothing but hurt the consumer by limiting options. I have yet to verify
>that core audio really is faster with Apogee interfaces, so take that with
a
>grain of salt - Apogee claims they are, of course. Point is, if to get
the
>most out of your Mac for audio, you not only have to buy and Apogee
>interface (an Apple partner), but Logic as well, and don't have the option
>of running a MOTU interface, RME, Lynx, M-Audio, etc with any other
>software, your are sacrificing options.
>
>Sounds like a text book Digidesign move to me, but it's Apple doing the
>price cuts and exclusive deals to undercut the market and sell more Macs
and
>other Apple-partner products. If there were no Mac support from other
>companies (MOTU, RME, Lynx, etc), you could call it "their product, their
>market", but we are comparing operating systems and computers here, so that
>doesn't stand. It may not be illegal (but I believe it is close), but it
is
>hurting consumers.
>
>Regards,
>Dedric
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96214 is a reply to message #96204] |
Fri, 22 February 2008 22:12 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I know your message is for James but I feel like jumping in... :^)
Aaron Allen wrote:
> We'll just have to disagree about it I guess. I still like ya and I
> think you're a cool dude, just a bit misguided :) I find nothing ethical
> in the things I've posted about so far and you could post the same kind
> of things about MS and we'd see that together. But not the mighty blue
> apple? Added to that the Jobs li(n)e by li(n)e <-bad pun #1> that was
> pushed on the public* (*).*
>
> It ain't like I'm saying MS is ethical - they're not, either - but the
> only thing keeping Apple from being the same ugly foul hairy beast is
> financial firepower.
Interesting, so you're saying that any corporation with a lot of money
is going to be unethical and corrupt? If so, that would explain a lot...
> Gates lies about how great Vista is. It's a turd.
Apparently so.
> Jobs lied about how great Motorola chips were. They were turds.
Heh. Well, although there WERE hyped for sure, they were/are hardly
turds, Aaron. I'm still running a G4 laptop and a dual G5 desktop.
The G4 laptop runs a lot of apps just fine, I use it for article
writing, research, and 2D animation work. Not so much for music and
video because I have the G5, although my wife uses a slightly newer G4
laptop to completely run her business and do voiceover production. My
laptop has a broken hinge, so it's going to be replaced when the next
MacBook Pro update comes out (I'm holding out for Penryn).
The G5 still rocks in a big way, and even though there are faster
machines I'm not in a big hurry to replace it. It still does what I
bought it to do, and does it well. I recently added more RAM to it
bringing it to 4.5GB, and it has room for up to 8. I also have more than
2 terrabytes of HD space hanging off of it. The expandability has been
great.
Granted, about a month after my G5 came out there were faster
Intel/Athlon chips. But it didn't make my G5 quit pulling its weight
around here. :^)
> Gates
> forces you as a business to buy office/OS's through each planned
> obsolescene upgrade.
If you buy into it. Or you could use Open Office, which is what I do
(the NeoOffice version on OSX).
> Jobs tells you to think you're safe from virii as
> an ad campaign and tells you how Mac runs office 'just as well as a PC'.
> but fails to mention it's OLD version of office, years old in fact.
Sometimes the Mac version of Office has been ahead, sometimes the
MSWindows version. Doesn't matter to me because I'm not on that treadmill.
> There are 60 known virii in the wild for Mac, but you won't hear about
> that from Jobs/Apple.
Ooh. 60. Wow. That's what, 1/1000th the amount on MSWindows? ;^)
Haven't seen any here.
> Apple Ads, speaking of....PC's are cold and harsh and only good at
> office apps, 'eh?
Clearly hyperbole. Funny, though.
> Somebody should tell that to all the video and audio
> guys that make wonderful art every single day on a windows PC, because
> they didn't get the memo.
Indeed.
> I will say that iLife and GarageBand are
> pretty cool, though not pro of course.
Yep, GarageBand is cool being for free with the machine, but far short
of Logic.
> I have 2 macs at my avail at
> work, and several PC's. Frankly, they both tick me off from time to time
> but the Win boxes see more use and tick me off a whole lot less.
From what you said below, it sounds like your Macs are pretty old and
not nearly up to date. OSX 10.29? Get 10.3 at least. I'm on 10.4, it's
pretty solid. 10.5 is sitting here, waiting to be installed when the
decks clear enough to get around to it.
> Nothing
> like plugging in a KVM and having your Mac reach an unrecoverable error
> and forced shutdown because it doesn't like the KVM. Every time. But not
> being the latest OS I can't get support for it w/o buying some more
> "apple care", and Belkin had no idea what would cause it, nor my vendor.
Bummer.
> I had been considering a Mini for personal use (with boot camp of
> course), but that kinda gotcha rather cinched the "think I'll pass for
> now" for me. MacOS-x 10.29 on dual procs, and it's a foot prop under my
> desk now. At least it doesn't crash that way and it's more ergonomic for
> my peds, heh... I get a warm fuzzy and smirk when my feet hit it :>
I'll be happy to store it for you. Could probably put it to good use.
The quicksilvers were pretty loud, though. The G5 is much, much quieter,
and the current Intel boxes are also pretty quiet.
> *(*)* Apple is so much faster, Apple is so much more interesting, Apple
> is so much better at.... er, ....
Those whacky marketing types...
> hey, it's the new and improved Apple
> now with INTEL hardware (IE, that's called a PC Steve-O, and no amount
> of backpeddling will cover the fact that you were lying through your
> teeth about how much faster Motorola's I'd-rather-be-in-a-cell-phone
> chips were over INTEL)
For its time the G4 didn't suck. The G5 is still a mighty chip around
here. Keep in mind that the current core 2 duo stuff was not out when
Jobs announced the switch. He switched for the then upcoming processor
road map, which was more attractive from Intel at the time than from
IBM. Turned out to be an OK choice I think, although I have yet to get
one of the Intel Macs.
> and it's so much better than , uh.. running
> windows (can't say PC anymore at this point)!
I think you could always say PC. "Personal computer" fits any of these
boxes.
> Er, wait.. now you can run
> Windows on your Apple! (which I don't have a problem with, in fact I
> applaud that one but don't you think that's rather odd for Apple to say
> bad windows, bad windows.. hey, you can now run windows?)
Since many people are stuck with using MSWindows for specific software,
company policy, etc., it's not so odd for Apple to market to them.
Shocking, maybe. Clever, actually.
> I also give
> major points to that dually quicksilver being WAY cleanly designed
> inside. Superb visual build inside the box. Too bad it's an ergonomic
> foot device now.
Having had both, the G5s are even nicer - with pretty much the same
external case as for the octocore Intel Macs today, although the new
versions have four HD slots and support up to 32GB RAM.
> You talked about MS stealing the macOS software GUI. Ok, where did Apple
> get their code base from for OS-X? Can't see the worm in both apples,
> 'eh? <-yes, that was bad pun #2.... but I am a punny guy!>
The code base for OSX was derived largely from NeXT, the company Steve
Jobs started after been booted out of Apple. I used to work for a NeXT
developer doing documentation and testing. Had a cool NeXT cube. Good
times!
> They screwed you as a clone seller even and still you deny. Horse,
> water, no drinky. You're probably thinking the same thing about the
> majority here. In all seriousness, I'm glad you have enjoyed your
> relationships with Mac, I cannot report the same, unfortunately. I
> absolutely adore my iPOD though, and although iPhone is tre' cool, it's
> not cutting it with me on the tech end so it's off the list of 'to buy'.
I haven't fallen for iPods or iPhones. Yet anyway.
> I also thought that the Cinema Display was about the most beautiful
> display ever as far back as 4~5 years ago. on the overall though, I
> didn't like Apple computer kool-aid any better than MS's kool-aid.
Having spent some time working in development environments on multiple
platforms (not just Apple and Microsoft), I think both of those flavors
of koolaid taste odd. But overall, for the reasons I spelled out in my
other post, Microsoft's koolaid is worse. Apple has actually gotten
better than they were in the 80s/90s, IMO. I was not a fan of OS9 and
before.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> You're ok in my book man, so don't take any of this all personal or
> anything, it's really not meant that way. I haven't forgotten when I had
> a problem with a Mac you are the first and only dude offered and
> followed through to help me out. Some day I'll get a chance to repay in
> kind.
>
> AA
>
>
> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com <mailto:nobody@ishere.com>> wrote in message
> news:47bf218e$1@linux...
> >
> > For the record, it was what Apple did to the cloners that drove me
> into the
> > ever welcoming arms of Redmond. I couldn't afford Apple hardware, but
> I could
> > afford a Power 603e machine that was my first experience with
> computer audio.
> > Less than a year after that Apple shut down the cloners and I
> realized, 'Hey,
> > these are greedy corporate bastards just like Microsoft. And Windows
> hardware
> > is cheap and I can build my own.' Which lead me to a 400 Mhz Celeron
> + Paris,
> > and the rest is (grim, money losing, book publishing) history.
> >
> > Your story is one version. Another is that Power was a smart,
> talented, agile
> > hardware vendor who was beating the daylights out of Apple because
> they were
> > everything Apple had long since ceased to be--entrepreneurial and
> customer
> > oriented.
> >
> > TCB
> >
> > "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com <mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com>>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>"Deej" <noway@jose.net <mailto:noway@jose.net>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com <mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com>>
> wrote in message
> >>>news:47bba823$1@linux...
> >>>>
> >>>> Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market share?
> >> I
> >>>
> >>>How about the time the pulled the OS licensing from PowerComputing and
> > UMaxx
> >>
> >>>and closed two entire companies and threw all those folks out of work.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Deej since you mentioned PowerComputing,there are a few things that
> should
> >>be noted. As I've said, the cloners ate in to Apple's sales. The clones
> >>advertised mainly in Mac publications to Mac users, If they had
> advertised
> >>in PC publications and did other forms of advertising to non Mac
> users they
> >>would have grown the market. They didn't, they cherry picked Apple
> sales.
> >> One such famous incident was when PowerComputing was directly competing
> >>with Apple by selling 3000 clones to Apple's long time customer Lockheed
> >>Martin, that didn't go over to well. PowerComputing also worked a deal
> > with
> >>IBM to get the fastest PowerPC processors before Apple could, this
> further
> >>cost Apple sales.
> >>
> >>Steve Jobs went to all the cloners and tried to renegotiate the licensing
> >>prices, the cloners wouldn't hear of it, so Apple did not renew the
> licensing
> >>with Mac OS 8. Apple did not pull the licensing. The cloners could
> still
> >>build systems and ship them with Mac OS 7.6 installed, and bundled OS 8,
> >>they chose not to. PowerComputing announced after that, that they were
> > going
> >>to start building PCs, which I think they did for a short time. In the
> > end,
> >>Apple bought out PowerComputing for 100 million dollars in Apple stock.
> >
> >>I think that was pretty generous of Apple. I believe it was up to Kahng
> >>to take care of his workers from there.
> >>
> >>As far as UMAX, they continued on for years building scanners and other
> > products
> >>as they did before they made clones.
> >
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96215 is a reply to message #96203] |
Fri, 22 February 2008 22:23 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
When Shake was dropped to $500, it was also discontinued. That was a
fire sale for a product that was not going to get more development. Key
features from Shake have already made their way into Motion.
When Apple bought Logic, they were struggling to get audio apps moved
over to the then new operating system, OSX. This was a big transition
period for Apple, a risky period and a critical time to build critical mass.
Had they not bought Logic it may have taken much longer to get decent
audio apps onto OSX because on the one hand, Mac developers and users
were still clinging to OS9. On the other hand, audio development was
starting to pick up on MSWindows. Maybe it was a smart move on Apple's
part to get the ball rolling.
After the more recent price drop for Logic Studio, it still costs more
than Digital Performer, although I agree that the bundled synths make
Logic a very good deal right now, and I can see how some companies may
be threatened by that.
BTW, I use Logic with a MOTU interface. No one is forcing me to buy the
Apogee.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
Dedric Terry wrote:
> On 2/22/08 8:36 PM, in article 47bf86b2$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> What I do expect you to share is the basic idea that NEITHER of them are
>>> perfect and NEITHER of them are COMPLETELY evil. They are both a mix.
>>> Sometimes
>>> they see a competitor and use their power to club them over the head to
>> the
>>> detriment of all of us. Both of them do it. One has more ability to do it
>>> than the other.
>>>
>> Can you give me an example of Apple doing this?
>
> How about more than one:
>
> 1) Shake is a $9900 application in 1999 ($3900 render only)
> 2) Apply buys it, drops the price a couple of times (OSX version less than
> other versions), offering free double licenses for users upgrading to OSX.
> 3) Apple discontinues Windows support for it.
> 4) Fast forward to 2003, Shake is still $2999 for both OSX and Linux.
> 5) Apple drops the OSX version price to $499. Linux version remains $2999.
>
> See more here for the price change details and decide for yourself:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shake_(software)
>
> Just my opinion, but anytime an app is dropped from $3k to $500, selling
> software as a profitable product isn't the goal.
>
>
> Next:
> 1) Apple buys Emagic (there's a song in this one somewhere...;-)
> 2) Drops PC support for Logic promptly.
> 3) Slow development ensues...then finally core audio appears
> 4) Apple signs exclusive deal with Apogee for Symphony, Ensemble, etc for
> Logic/Mac only
> 5) Symphony reports lower latency and better performance than other apps
> under core audio
> 6) Speculation (no, I can't prove it - yet) is that Apple gave Apogee lower
> level access to core audio that isn't in the SDK, thereby giving the
> Apogee/Logic combo a significant edge over Digital Performer, Nuendo/Cubase,
> RME, MOTU, Digidesign, etc.
> 7) Apple drops the price of Logic to $500, with additional software/etc
> thrown in (imho, this is below average market value for a DAW software and
> most likely a loss leader).
> 8) Why? To sell Macs and Apogee interfaces. Logic is priced too low to be
> a profit center - it's just a marketing tool now to expand the Mac's
> position in consumer, prosumer, hobby, and beginner, lower end musician
> markets, to the detriment of other 3rd party companies also developing for
> the platform.
>
> In both cases, Apple is using applications to push their hardware, even
> though there are competing applications, and the Microsoft argument would
> suggest that using applications and exclusivity of them, and hardware, is a
> conflict of interest for an operating system developer, much less a computer
> builder.
>
> Just my .02 - can't prove it any more than anyone can *prove* Microsoft is
> evil. I don't like MS, but Apple isn't making friends in my end of the pro
> audio world - just putting this in perspective. Btw, I'm not the only one
> with this supposition - there are some other well respected audio people in
> agreement.
>
> Btw - didn't post this to get deeper into an argument - just since you asked
> for an example, and I had read the same supposition of Apple's move with
> core audio from another Nuendo user just today, so might as well pass it on
> here.
>
> I don't hate Apple - but I do hate exclusive deals, and lock outs that do
> nothing but hurt the consumer by limiting options. I have yet to verify
> that core audio really is faster with Apogee interfaces, so take that with a
> grain of salt - Apogee claims they are, of course. Point is, if to get the
> most out of your Mac for audio, you not only have to buy and Apogee
> interface (an Apple partner), but Logic as well, and don't have the option
> of running a MOTU interface, RME, Lynx, M-Audio, etc with any other
> software, your are sacrificing options.
>
> Sounds like a text book Digidesign move to me, but it's Apple doing the
> price cuts and exclusive deals to undercut the market and sell more Macs and
> other Apple-partner products. If there were no Mac support from other
> companies (MOTU, RME, Lynx, etc), you could call it "their product, their
> market", but we are comparing operating systems and computers here, so that
> doesn't stand. It may not be illegal (but I believe it is close), but it is
> hurting consumers.
>
> Regards,
> Dedric
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96216 is a reply to message #96210] |
Fri, 22 February 2008 22:54 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2/22/08 11:22 PM, in article 47bfad7b$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
<excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> A lot of this is speculation, not fact. I will say over the years many
> companies
Maybe, maybe not. So far we haven't found objective Mac users to report
anything scientifically yet. But I'm not the only one looking into this,
and not the only one proposing that Apple is holding back to make other OSX
apps and hardware appear inferior (and that was only one example - there are
others). Some pretty sharp and connected guys are saying this as well, so
there is more than speculation behind it - the numbers aren't adding up
(Nuendo/RME/Lynx aren't performing nearly as well on OSX as on XP, same
hardware - so either Apogee is lying about their 96k 1.6ms performance
stats, or Apple gave only them the keys to the kernel).
Anyone want to loan me a dual quad G5? Seriously. I'm looking for a way to
make this testing happen objectively and accurately, and I know a few other
guys that are as well. If Apple is holding back, users need to know so they
don't go in expecting unrealistic performance, and why. If not, users need
to know which are the best performing software/hardware combos, regardless
of Apple/MS preferences. It's kind of a big deal to a lot of users right
now, where trying to prove/disprove if Microsoft is more or less evil,
really doesn't help us in the least.
Dedric
> dropped support for the Mac platform, one example was when Parsons dropped
> Quick Books for Mac, luckily we got that one back. Mac users have had to
> deal with this for years.
>
> Why should Apple develop for another platform when it does not benefit them?
> They are trying to grow the Mac market not the PC market! I'll remind you
> that they offered PC users special pricing, including on hardware. PC users
> were not left out in the cold. If you haven't noticed, Apple unlike MS,
> sells integrated hardware and software, they have a different business model.
> Yes, they use Hardware and software to push each other.
>
> By the way, if you haven't heard, anti trust cases were brought against
> Microsoft,
> these cases were adjudicated and Microsoft was found guilty. Thanks to Bush
> and friends, MS has gotten a slap on the wrist instead of a break up. MS
> is back to their old tricks.
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_v._Microsoft
>
>
> Think what you want!
>
> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>> On 2/22/08 8:36 PM, in article 47bf86b2$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> What I do expect you to share is the basic idea that NEITHER of them
> are
>>>> perfect and NEITHER of them are COMPLETELY evil. They are both a mix.
>>>> Sometimes
>>>> they see a competitor and use their power to club them over the head
> to
>>> the
>>>> detriment of all of us. Both of them do it. One has more ability to do
> it
>>>> than the other.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can you give me an example of Apple doing this?
>>
>> How about more than one:
>>
>> 1) Shake is a $9900 application in 1999 ($3900 render only)
>> 2) Apply buys it, drops the price a couple of times (OSX version less than
>> other versions), offering free double licenses for users upgrading to OSX.
>> 3) Apple discontinues Windows support for it.
>> 4) Fast forward to 2003, Shake is still $2999 for both OSX and Linux.
>> 5) Apple drops the OSX version price to $499. Linux version remains $2999.
>>
>> See more here for the price change details and decide for yourself:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shake_(software)
>>
>> Just my opinion, but anytime an app is dropped from $3k to $500, selling
>> software as a profitable product isn't the goal.
>>
>>
>> Next:
>> 1) Apple buys Emagic (there's a song in this one somewhere...;-)
>> 2) Drops PC support for Logic promptly.
>> 3) Slow development ensues...then finally core audio appears
>> 4) Apple signs exclusive deal with Apogee for Symphony, Ensemble, etc for
>> Logic/Mac only
>> 5) Symphony reports lower latency and better performance than other apps
>> under core audio
>> 6) Speculation (no, I can't prove it - yet) is that Apple gave Apogee lower
>> level access to core audio that isn't in the SDK, thereby giving the
>> Apogee/Logic combo a significant edge over Digital Performer, Nuendo/Cubase,
>> RME, MOTU, Digidesign, etc.
>> 7) Apple drops the price of Logic to $500, with additional software/etc
>> thrown in (imho, this is below average market value for a DAW software and
>> most likely a loss leader).
>> 8) Why? To sell Macs and Apogee interfaces. Logic is priced too low to
> be
>> a profit center - it's just a marketing tool now to expand the Mac's
>> position in consumer, prosumer, hobby, and beginner, lower end musician
>> markets, to the detriment of other 3rd party companies also developing for
>> the platform.
>>
>> In both cases, Apple is using applications to push their hardware, even
>> though there are competing applications, and the Microsoft argument would
>> suggest that using applications and exclusivity of them, and hardware, is
> a
>> conflict of interest for an operating system developer, much less a computer
>> builder.
>>
>> Just my .02 - can't prove it any more than anyone can *prove* Microsoft
> is
>> evil. I don't like MS, but Apple isn't making friends in my end of the
> pro
>> audio world - just putting this in perspective. Btw, I'm not the only one
>> with this supposition - there are some other well respected audio people
> in
>> agreement.
>>
>> Btw - didn't post this to get deeper into an argument - just since you asked
>> for an example, and I had read the same supposition of Apple's move with
>> core audio from another Nuendo user just today, so might as well pass it
> on
>> here.
>>
>> I don't hate Apple - but I do hate exclusive deals, and lock outs that do
>> nothing but hurt the consumer by limiting options. I have yet to verify
>> that core audio really is faster with Apogee interfaces, so take that with
> a
>> grain of salt - Apogee claims they are, of course. Point is, if to get
> the
>> most out of your Mac for audio, you not only have to buy and Apogee
>> interface (an Apple partner), but Logic as well, and don't have the option
>> of running a MOTU interface, RME, Lynx, M-Audio, etc with any other
>> software, your are sacrificing options.
>>
>> Sounds like a text book Digidesign move to me, but it's Apple doing the
>> price cuts and exclusive deals to undercut the market and sell more Macs
> and
>> other Apple-partner products. If there were no Mac support from other
>> companies (MOTU, RME, Lynx, etc), you could call it "their product, their
>> market", but we are comparing operating systems and computers here, so that
>> doesn't stand. It may not be illegal (but I believe it is close), but it
> is
>> hurting consumers.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96217 is a reply to message #96216] |
Sat, 23 February 2008 00:28 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Gibson bought opcode and dropped PC development, what do you think about
that? Hey where's the Mac versions of Cakewalk, sonar, Audition, Acid, Vegas,
Sound forge, etc? What about the slow development of Steinberg products
for Mac? Always a second class citizen.
Did you ever notice that PT plugins cost more than native or VST? Hmmmm...I
wonder why that is???
One other thing I believe the apogee latency thing has to do with the DSP
hardware on the apogee cards, not a special deal??? Not the same hardware.
Someone said that Apple was evil, or just as evil as MS, I took issue with
that.
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>On 2/22/08 11:22 PM, in article 47bfad7b$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
><excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> A lot of this is speculation, not fact. I will say over the years many
>> companies
>
>Maybe, maybe not. So far we haven't found objective Mac users to report
>anything scientifically yet. But I'm not the only one looking into this,
>and not the only one proposing that Apple is holding back to make other
OSX
>apps and hardware appear inferior (and that was only one example - there
are
>others). Some pretty sharp and connected guys are saying this as well,
so
>there is more than speculation behind it - the numbers aren't adding up
>(Nuendo/RME/Lynx aren't performing nearly as well on OSX as on XP, same
>hardware - so either Apogee is lying about their 96k 1.6ms performance
>stats, or Apple gave only them the keys to the kernel).
>
>Anyone want to loan me a dual quad G5? Seriously. I'm looking for a way
to
>make this testing happen objectively and accurately, and I know a few other
>guys that are as well. If Apple is holding back, users need to know so
they
>don't go in expecting unrealistic performance, and why. If not, users need
>to know which are the best performing software/hardware combos, regardless
>of Apple/MS preferences. It's kind of a big deal to a lot of users right
>now, where trying to prove/disprove if Microsoft is more or less evil,
>really doesn't help us in the least.
>
>Dedric
>
>> dropped support for the Mac platform, one example was when Parsons dropped
>> Quick Books for Mac, luckily we got that one back. Mac users have had
to
>> deal with this for years.
>>
>> Why should Apple develop for another platform when it does not benefit
them?
>> They are trying to grow the Mac market not the PC market! I'll remind
you
>> that they offered PC users special pricing, including on hardware. PC
users
>> were not left out in the cold. If you haven't noticed, Apple unlike MS,
>> sells integrated hardware and software, they have a different business
model.
>> Yes, they use Hardware and software to push each other.
>>
>> By the way, if you haven't heard, anti trust cases were brought against
>> Microsoft,
>> these cases were adjudicated and Microsoft was found guilty. Thanks to
Bush
>> and friends, MS has gotten a slap on the wrist instead of a break up.
MS
>> is back to their old tricks.
>>
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_v._Microsoft
>>
>>
>> Think what you want!
>>
>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>> On 2/22/08 8:36 PM, in article 47bf86b2$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> What I do expect you to share is the basic idea that NEITHER of them
>> are
>>>>> perfect and NEITHER of them are COMPLETELY evil. They are both a mix.
>>>>> Sometimes
>>>>> they see a competitor and use their power to club them over the head
>> to
>>>> the
>>>>> detriment of all of us. Both of them do it. One has more ability to
do
>> it
>>>>> than the other.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can you give me an example of Apple doing this?
>>>
>>> How about more than one:
>>>
>>> 1) Shake is a $9900 application in 1999 ($3900 render only)
>>> 2) Apply buys it, drops the price a couple of times (OSX version less
than
>>> other versions), offering free double licenses for users upgrading to
OSX.
>>> 3) Apple discontinues Windows support for it.
>>> 4) Fast forward to 2003, Shake is still $2999 for both OSX and Linux.
>>> 5) Apple drops the OSX version price to $499. Linux version remains
$2999.
>>>
>>> See more here for the price change details and decide for yourself:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shake_(software)
>>>
>>> Just my opinion, but anytime an app is dropped from $3k to $500, selling
>>> software as a profitable product isn't the goal.
>>>
>>>
>>> Next:
>>> 1) Apple buys Emagic (there's a song in this one somewhere...;-)
>>> 2) Drops PC support for Logic promptly.
>>> 3) Slow development ensues...then finally core audio appears
>>> 4) Apple signs exclusive deal with Apogee for Symphony, Ensemble, etc
for
>>> Logic/Mac only
>>> 5) Symphony reports lower latency and better performance than other
apps
>>> under core audio
>>> 6) Speculation (no, I can't prove it - yet) is that Apple gave Apogee
lower
>>> level access to core audio that isn't in the SDK, thereby giving the
>>> Apogee/Logic combo a significant edge over Digital Performer, Nuendo/Cubase,
>>> RME, MOTU, Digidesign, etc.
>>> 7) Apple drops the price of Logic to $500, with additional software/etc
>>> thrown in (imho, this is below average market value for a DAW software
and
>>> most likely a loss leader).
>>> 8) Why? To sell Macs and Apogee interfaces. Logic is priced too low
to
>> be
>>> a profit center - it's just a marketing tool now to expand the Mac's
>>> position in consumer, prosumer, hobby, and beginner, lower end musician
>>> markets, to the detriment of other 3rd party companies also developing
for
>>> the platform.
>>>
>>> In both cases, Apple is using applications to push their hardware, even
>>> though there are competing applications, and the Microsoft argument would
>>> suggest that using applications and exclusivity of them, and hardware,
is
>> a
>>> conflict of interest for an operating system developer, much less a computer
>>> builder.
>>>
>>> Just my .02 - can't prove it any more than anyone can *prove* Microsoft
>> is
>>> evil. I don't like MS, but Apple isn't making friends in my end of the
>> pro
>>> audio world - just putting this in perspective. Btw, I'm not the only
one
>>> with this supposition - there are some other well respected audio people
>> in
>>> agreement.
>>>
>>> Btw - didn't post this to get deeper into an argument - just since you
asked
>>> for an example, and I had read the same supposition of Apple's move with
>>> core audio from another Nuendo user just today, so might as well pass
it
>> on
>>> here.
>>>
>>> I don't hate Apple - but I do hate exclusive deals, and lock outs that
do
>>> nothing but hurt the consumer by limiting options. I have yet to verify
>>> that core audio really is faster with Apogee interfaces, so take that
with
>> a
>>> grain of salt - Apogee claims they are, of course. Point is, if to get
>> the
>>> most out of your Mac for audio, you not only have to buy and Apogee
>>> interface (an Apple partner), but Logic as well, and don't have the option
>>> of running a MOTU interface, RME, Lynx, M-Audio, etc with any other
>>> software, your are sacrificing options.
>>>
>>> Sounds like a text book Digidesign move to me, but it's Apple doing the
>>> price cuts and exclusive deals to undercut the market and sell more Macs
>> and
>>> other Apple-partner products. If there were no Mac support from other
>>> companies (MOTU, RME, Lynx, etc), you could call it "their product, their
>>> market", but we are comparing operating systems and computers here, so
that
>>> doesn't stand. It may not be illegal (but I believe it is close), but
it
>> is
>>> hurting consumers.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96218 is a reply to message #96204] |
Sat, 23 February 2008 00:59 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Aaron I think your Ok too. Yes we do disagree on some things. I believe
that the G4 was the diesel engine of processors, and a heavy lifter in it's
time. The G4 got long in the tooth, Motorola screwed apple around for a
long time getting out faster processors. It was pay back time. It was a
good thing in the end because Apple had to put out multi processor machines
and develop the OS to keep up.
IBM also screwed Apple around with the G5, they promised Apple 3 GHz Processors
with in a year. Jobs announced it at MacWorld, a year later he had to face
Mac users, I'm sure it was embarrassing. After all the IBM hoopla about
the new plant, the new processor and their relation ship with Apple, they
gave a couple of press releases were they said Apple was insignificant to
their business. When you publicly insult your customer, and you don't meet
your obligations, it shouldn't be a surprise when they go to your competitor.
That's what Apple did. IBM could not get out faster processors on time.
I think you and Deej should both send me you old Mac G4s, I'll even give
you guys something for them if they are running.
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>
>
>We'll just have to disagree about it I guess. I still like ya and I =
>think you're a cool dude, just a bit misguided :) I find nothing ethical
=
>in the things I've posted about so far and you could post the same kind
=
>of things about MS and we'd see that together. But not the mighty blue =
>apple? Added to that the Jobs li(n)e by li(n)e <-bad pun #1> that was =
>pushed on the public (*).=20
>
>It ain't like I'm saying MS is ethical - they're not, either - but the =
>only thing keeping Apple from being the same ugly foul hairy beast is =
>financial firepower. Gates lies about how great Vista is. It's a turd. =
>Jobs lied about how great Motorola chips were. They were turds. Gates =
>forces you as a business to buy office/OS's through each planned =
>obsolescene upgrade. Jobs tells you to think you're safe from virii as =
>an ad campaign and tells you how Mac runs office 'just as well as a PC'.
=
>but fails to mention it's OLD version of office, years old in fact. =
>There are 60 known virii in the wild for Mac, but you won't hear about =
>that from Jobs/Apple. =20
>
>Apple Ads, speaking of....PC's are cold and harsh and only good at =
>office apps, 'eh? Somebody should tell that to all the video and audio =
>guys that make wonderful art every single day on a windows PC, because =
>they didn't get the memo. I will say that iLife and GarageBand are =
>pretty cool, though not pro of course. I have 2 macs at my avail at =
>work, and several PC's. Frankly, they both tick me off from time to time
=
>but the Win boxes see more use and tick me off a whole lot less. Nothing
=
>like plugging in a KVM and having your Mac reach an unrecoverable error
=
>and forced shutdown because it doesn't like the KVM. Every time. But not
=
>being the latest OS I can't get support for it w/o buying some more =
>"apple care", and Belkin had no idea what would cause it, nor my vendor.
=
> I had been considering a Mini for personal use (with boot camp of =
>course), but that kinda gotcha rather cinched the "think I'll pass for =
>now" for me. MacOS-x 10.29 on dual procs, and it's a foot prop under my
=
>desk now. At least it doesn't crash that way and it's more ergonomic for
=
>my peds, heh... I get a warm fuzzy and smirk when my feet hit it :>
>
>(*) Apple is so much faster, Apple is so much more interesting, Apple is
=
>so much better at.... er, .... hey, it's the new and improved Apple now
=
>with INTEL hardware (IE, that's called a PC Steve-O, and no amount of =
>backpeddling will cover the fact that you were lying through your teeth
=
>about how much faster Motorola's I'd-rather-be-in-a-cell-phone chips =
>were over INTEL) and it's so much better than , uh.. running windows =
>(can't say PC anymore at this point)! Er, wait.. now you can run Windows
=
>on your Apple! (which I don't have a problem with, in fact I applaud =
>that one but don't you think that's rather odd for Apple to say bad =
>windows, bad windows.. hey, you can now run windows?) I also give major
=
>points to that dually quicksilver being WAY cleanly designed inside. =
>Superb visual build inside the box. Too bad it's an ergonomic foot =
>device now.=20
>
>You talked about MS stealing the macOS software GUI. Ok, where did Apple
=
>get their code base from for OS-X? Can't see the worm in both apples, =
>'eh? <-yes, that was bad pun #2.... but I am a punny guy!>
>
>They screwed you as a clone seller even and still you deny. Horse, =
>water, no drinky. You're probably thinking the same thing about the =
>majority here. In all seriousness, I'm glad you have enjoyed your =
>relationships with Mac, I cannot report the same, unfortunately. I =
>absolutely adore my iPOD though, and although iPhone is tre' cool, it's
=
>not cutting it with me on the tech end so it's off the list of 'to buy'.
=
>I also thought that the Cinema Display was about the most beautiful =
>display ever as far back as 4~5 years ago. on the overall though, I =
>didn't like Apple computer kool-aid any better than MS's kool-aid.
>
>You're ok in my book man, so don't take any of this all personal or =
>anything, it's really not meant that way. I haven't forgotten when I had
=
>a problem with a Mac you are the first and only dude offered and =
>followed through to help me out. Some day I'll get a chance to repay in
=
>kind.
>
>AA
>
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:47bf218e$1@linux...
>>=20
>> For the record, it was what Apple did to the cloners that drove me =
>into the
>> ever welcoming arms of Redmond. I couldn't afford Apple hardware, but
=
>I could
>> afford a Power 603e machine that was my first experience with computer
=
>audio.
>> Less than a year after that Apple shut down the cloners and I =
>realized, 'Hey,
>> these are greedy corporate bastards just like Microsoft. And Windows =
>hardware
>> is cheap and I can build my own.' Which lead me to a 400 Mhz Celeron +
=
>Paris,
>> and the rest is (grim, money losing, book publishing) history.=20
>>=20
>> Your story is one version. Another is that Power was a smart, =
>talented, agile
>> hardware vendor who was beating the daylights out of Apple because =
>they were
>> everything Apple had long since ceased to be--entrepreneurial and =
>customer
>> oriented.=20
>>=20
>> TCB
>>=20
>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>"Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message=20
>>>>news:47bba823$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market =
>share?
>>> I
>>>>
>>>>How about the time the pulled the OS licensing from PowerComputing =
>and
>> UMaxx
>>>
>>>>and closed two entire companies and threw all those folks out of =
>work.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Deej since you mentioned PowerComputing,there are a few things that =
>should
>>>be noted. As I've said, the cloners ate in to Apple's sales. The =
>clones
>>>advertised mainly in Mac publications to Mac users, If they had =
>advertised
>>>in PC publications and did other forms of advertising to non Mac users
=
>they
>>>would have grown the market. They didn't, they cherry picked Apple =
>sales.
>>> One such famous incident was when PowerComputing was directly =
>competing
>>>with Apple by selling 3000 clones to Apple's long time customer =
>Lockheed
>>>Martin, that didn't go over to well. PowerComputing also worked a =
>deal
>> with
>>>IBM to get the fastest PowerPC processors before Apple could, this =
>further
>>>cost Apple sales.
>>>
>>>Steve Jobs went to all the cloners and tried to renegotiate the =
>licensing
>>>prices, the cloners wouldn't hear of it, so Apple did not renew the =
>licensing
>>>with Mac OS 8. Apple did not pull the licensing. The cloners could =
>still
>>>build systems and ship them with Mac OS 7.6 installed, and bundled OS
=
>8,
>>>they chose not to. PowerComputing announced after that, that they =
>were
>> going
>>>to start building PCs, which I think they did for a short time. In =
>the
>> end,
>>>Apple bought out PowerComputing for 100 million dollars in Apple =
>stock.
>>=20
>>>I think that was pretty generous of Apple. I believe it was up to =
>Kahng
>>>to take care of his workers from there.
>>>
>>>As far as UMAX, they continued on for years building scanners and =
>other
>> products
>>>as they did before they made clones.
>>
>
><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
><HTML><HEAD>
><META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
>charset=3Diso-8859-1">
><META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16608" name=3DGENERATOR>
><STYLE></STYLE>
></HEAD>
><BODY>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>We'll just have to disagree about it I guess. I
=
>still like=20
>ya and I think you're a cool dude, just a bit misguided :) I find =
>nothing=20
>ethical in the things I've posted about so far and you could post the =
>same kind=20
>of things about MS and we'd see that together. But not the mighty blue =
>apple?=20
>Added to that the Jobs li(n)e by li(n)e <-bad pun #1> that was =
>pushed on=20
>the public<STRONG> (*).</STRONG> </FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>It ain't like I'm saying MS is ethical - they're
=
>not,=20
>either - but the only thing keeping Apple from being the same ugly =
>foul=20
>hairy beast is financial firepower. Gates lies about how great Vista is.
=
>It's a=20
>turd. Jobs lied about how great Motorola chips were. They were turds. =
>Gates=20
>forces you as a business to buy office/OS's through each planned =
>obsolescene=20
>upgrade. </FONT><FONT face=3DArial>Jobs tells you to think you're =
>safe from=20
>virii as an ad campaign and tells you how Mac runs office 'just as well
=
>as a=20
>PC'. but fails to mention it's OLD version of office, years old in fact.
=
>There=20
>are 60 known virii in the wild for Mac, but you won't =
>hear about=20
>that from Jobs/Apple. </FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Apple Ads, speaking of....PC's are cold and =
>harsh and only=20
>good at office apps, 'eh? Somebody should tell that to all the video and
=
>audio=20
>guys that make wonderful art every single day on a windows PC, because =
>they=20
>didn't get the memo. I will say that iLife and GarageBand are pretty =
>cool,=20
>though not pro of course. I have 2 macs at my avail at work, and several
=
>PC's.=20
>Frankly, they both tick me off from time to time but the Win boxes =
>see more=20
>use and tick me off a whole lot less. Nothing like plugging in a KVM and
=
>having=20
>your Mac reach an unrecoverable error and forced shutdown because =
>it=20
>doesn't like the KVM. Every time. But not being the latest OS I can't =
>get=20
>support for it w/o buying some more "apple care", and Belkin had no idea
=
>what=20
>would cause it, nor my vendor. I had been considering a Mini for =
>personal=20
>use (with boot camp of course), but that kinda gotcha rather cinched the
=
>"think=20
>I'll pass for now" for me. MacOS-x 10.29 on dual procs, and it's a foot
=
>prop=20
>under my desk now. At least it doesn't crash that way and it's more =
>ergonomic=20
>for my peds, heh... I get a warm fuzzy and smirk when my feet =
>hit it=20
>:></FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial><STRONG>(*)</STRONG> Apple is so much =
>faster, Apple=20
>is so much more interesting, Apple is so much better at.... er, .... =
>hey, it's=20
>the new and improved Apple now with INTEL hardware (IE, that's called a
=
>PC=20
>Steve-O, and no amount of backpeddling will cover the fact that you were
=
>lying=20
>through your teeth about how much=20
>faster Motorola's I'd-rather-be-in-a-cell-phone chips were =
>over INTEL)=20
>and it's so much better than , uh.. running windows (can't say PC =
>anymore at=20
>this point)! Er, wait.. now you can run Windows on your Apple! (which I
=
>don't=20
>have a problem with, in fact I applaud that one but don't you think =
>that's=20
>rather odd for Apple to say bad windows, bad windows.. hey, you can now
=
>run=20
>windows?) I also give major points to that dually quicksilver being WAY
=
>cleanly=20
>designed inside. Superb visual build inside the box. Too bad it's an =
>ergonomic=20
>foot device now. </FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>You talked about MS stealing the macOS software
=
>GUI. Ok,=20
>where did Apple get their code base from for OS-X? Can't see the worm in
=
>both=20
>apples, 'eh? <-yes, that was bad pun #2.... but I am a punny=20
>guy!></FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>They screwed you as a clone seller even and =
>still you=20
>deny. Horse, water, no drinky. You're probably thinking the same =
>thing=20
>about the majority here. In all seriousness, I'm glad you have =
>enjoyed your=20
>relationships with Mac, I cannot report the same, unfortunately. I =
>absolutely=20
>adore my iPOD though, and although iPhone is tre' cool, it's not cutting
=
>it with=20
>me on the tech end so it's off the list of 'to buy'. I also thought that
=
>the=20
>Cinema Display was about the most beautiful display ever as far back as
=
>4~5=20
>years ago. on the overall though, I didn't like Apple =
>computer kool-aid any=20
>better than MS's kool-aid.</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>You're ok in my book man, so don't take any of =
>this all=20
>personal or anything, it's really not meant that way. I haven't =
>forgotten when I=20
>had a problem with a Mac you are the first and only dude offered and =
>followed=20
>through to help me out. Some day I'll get a chance to repay in=20
>kind.</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>AA</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"TCB" <</FONT><A=20
>href=3D"mailto:nobody@ishere.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>size=3D2>nobody@ishere.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> =
>wrote in message=20
></FONT><A href=3D"news:47bf218e$1@linux"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>size=3D2>news:47bf218e$1@linux</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial=20
>size=3D2>...</FONT></DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> <BR>> For =
>the record, it=20
>was what Apple did to the cloners that drove me into the<BR>> ever =
>welcoming=20
>arms of Redmond. I couldn't afford Apple hardware, but I could<BR>> =
>afford a=20
>Power 603e machine that was my first experience with computer =
>audio.<BR>>=20
>Less than a year after that Apple shut down the cloners and I realized,=20
>'Hey,<BR>> these are greedy corporate bastards just like Microsoft. =
>And=20
>Windows hardware<BR>> is cheap and I can build my own.' Which lead me =
>to a=20
>400 Mhz Celeron + Paris,<BR>> and the rest is (grim, money losing, =
>book=20
>publishing) history. <BR>> <BR>> Your story is one version. =
>Another is=20
>that Power was a smart, talented, agile<BR>> hardware vendor who was =
>beating=20
>the daylights out of Apple because they were<BR>> everything Apple =
>had long=20
>since ceased to be--entrepreneurial and customer<BR>> oriented. =
><BR>>=20
><BR>> TCB<BR>> <BR>> "James McCloskey" <</FONT><A=20
>href=3D"mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>size=3D2>excelsm@hotmail.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>>=20
>wrote:<BR>>><BR>>>"Deej" <</FONT><A=20
>href=3D"mailto:noway@jose.net"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>size=3D2>noway@jose.net</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>>=20
>wrote:<BR>>>><BR>>>>"James McCloskey" <</FONT><A=20
>href=3D"mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>size=3D2>excelsm@hotmail.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> =
>wrote in=20
>message=20
><BR>>>>news:47bba823$1@linux...<BR>>>>><BR>>>&=
>gt;>=20
>Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market=20
>share?<BR>>> I<BR>>>><BR>>>>How about the time =
>the=20
>pulled the OS licensing from PowerComputing and<BR>>=20
>UMaxx<BR>>><BR>>>>and closed two entire companies and =
>threw all=20
>those folks out of work.<BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>Deej =
>since=20
>you mentioned PowerComputing,there are a few things that =
>should<BR>>>be=20
>noted. As I've said, the cloners ate in to Apple's sales. =
>The=20
>clones<BR>>>advertised mainly in Mac publications to Mac users, If =
>they=20
>had advertised<BR>>>in PC publications and did other forms of =
>advertising=20
>to non Mac users they<BR>>>would have grown the market. They =
>didn't,=20
>they cherry picked Apple sales.<BR>>> One such famous incident was =
>when=20
>PowerComputing was directly competing<BR>>>with Apple by selling =
>3000=20
>clones to Apple's long time customer Lockheed<BR>>>Martin, that =
>didn't go=20
>over to well. PowerComputing also worked a deal<BR>>=20
>with<BR>>>IBM to get the fastest PowerPC processors before Apple =
>could,=20
>this further<BR>>>cost Apple sales.<BR>>><BR>>>Steve =
>Jobs went=20
>to all the cloners and tried to renegotiate the =
>licensing<BR>>>prices, the=20
>cloners wouldn't hear of it, so Apple did not renew the=20
>licensing<BR>>>with Mac OS 8. Apple did not pull the=20
>licensing. The cloners could still<BR>>>build systems and =
>ship them=20
>with Mac OS 7.6 installed, and bundled OS 8,<BR>>>they chose not =
>to. =20
>PowerComputing announced after that, that they were<BR>> =
>going<BR>>>to=20
>start building PCs, which I think they did for a short time. In=20
>the<BR>> end,<BR>>>Apple bought out PowerComputing for 100 =
>million=20
>dollars in Apple stock.<BR>> <BR>>>I think that was pretty =
>generous of=20
>Apple. I believe it was up to Kahng<BR>>>to take care of his =
>workers=20
>from there.<BR>>><BR>>>As far as UMAX, they continued on for =
>years=20
>building scanners and other<BR>> products<BR>>>as they did =
>before they=20
>made clones.<BR>></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96219 is a reply to message #96204] |
Sat, 23 February 2008 01:10 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
You guys are going to love this. I'm thinking about moving a Paris system
over to a PC, mainly because of Mike's plugins. Aaron, there is something
you can do for me, you can help me out when I switch a Paris system over
to my PC, if your up for it?
"Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>
>
>We'll just have to disagree about it I guess. I still like ya and I =
>think you're a cool dude, just a bit misguided :) I find nothing ethical
=
>in the things I've posted about so far and you could post the same kind
=
>of things about MS and we'd see that together. But not the mighty blue =
>apple? Added to that the Jobs li(n)e by li(n)e <-bad pun #1> that was =
>pushed on the public (*).=20
>
>It ain't like I'm saying MS is ethical - they're not, either - but the =
>only thing keeping Apple from being the same ugly foul hairy beast is =
>financial firepower. Gates lies about how great Vista is. It's a turd. =
>Jobs lied about how great Motorola chips were. They were turds. Gates =
>forces you as a business to buy office/OS's through each planned =
>obsolescene upgrade. Jobs tells you to think you're safe from virii as =
>an ad campaign and tells you how Mac runs office 'just as well as a PC'.
=
>but fails to mention it's OLD version of office, years old in fact. =
>There are 60 known virii in the wild for Mac, but you won't hear about =
>that from Jobs/Apple. =20
>
>Apple Ads, speaking of....PC's are cold and harsh and only good at =
>office apps, 'eh? Somebody should tell that to all the video and audio =
>guys that make wonderful art every single day on a windows PC, because =
>they didn't get the memo. I will say that iLife and GarageBand are =
>pretty cool, though not pro of course. I have 2 macs at my avail at =
>work, and several PC's. Frankly, they both tick me off from time to time
=
>but the Win boxes see more use and tick me off a whole lot less. Nothing
=
>like plugging in a KVM and having your Mac reach an unrecoverable error
=
>and forced shutdown because it doesn't like the KVM. Every time. But not
=
>being the latest OS I can't get support for it w/o buying some more =
>"apple care", and Belkin had no idea what would cause it, nor my vendor.
=
> I had been considering a Mini for personal use (with boot camp of =
>course), but that kinda gotcha rather cinched the "think I'll pass for =
>now" for me. MacOS-x 10.29 on dual procs, and it's a foot prop under my
=
>desk now. At least it doesn't crash that way and it's more ergonomic for
=
>my peds, heh... I get a warm fuzzy and smirk when my feet hit it :>
>
>(*) Apple is so much faster, Apple is so much more interesting, Apple is
=
>so much better at.... er, .... hey, it's the new and improved Apple now
=
>with INTEL hardware (IE, that's called a PC Steve-O, and no amount of =
>backpeddling will cover the fact that you were lying through your teeth
=
>about how much faster Motorola's I'd-rather-be-in-a-cell-phone chips =
>were over INTEL) and it's so much better than , uh.. running windows =
>(can't say PC anymore at this point)! Er, wait.. now you can run Windows
=
>on your Apple! (which I don't have a problem with, in fact I applaud =
>that one but don't you think that's rather odd for Apple to say bad =
>windows, bad windows.. hey, you can now run windows?) I also give major
=
>points to that dually quicksilver being WAY cleanly designed inside. =
>Superb visual build inside the box. Too bad it's an ergonomic foot =
>device now.=20
>
>You talked about MS stealing the macOS software GUI. Ok, where did Apple
=
>get their code base from for OS-X? Can't see the worm in both apples, =
>'eh? <-yes, that was bad pun #2.... but I am a punny guy!>
>
>They screwed you as a clone seller even and still you deny. Horse, =
>water, no drinky. You're probably thinking the same thing about the =
>majority here. In all seriousness, I'm glad you have enjoyed your =
>relationships with Mac, I cannot report the same, unfortunately. I =
>absolutely adore my iPOD though, and although iPhone is tre' cool, it's
=
>not cutting it with me on the tech end so it's off the list of 'to buy'.
=
>I also thought that the Cinema Display was about the most beautiful =
>display ever as far back as 4~5 years ago. on the overall though, I =
>didn't like Apple computer kool-aid any better than MS's kool-aid.
>
>You're ok in my book man, so don't take any of this all personal or =
>anything, it's really not meant that way. I haven't forgotten when I had
=
>a problem with a Mac you are the first and only dude offered and =
>followed through to help me out. Some day I'll get a chance to repay in
=
>kind.
>
>AA
>
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:47bf218e$1@linux...
>>=20
>> For the record, it was what Apple did to the cloners that drove me =
>into the
>> ever welcoming arms of Redmond. I couldn't afford Apple hardware, but
=
>I could
>> afford a Power 603e machine that was my first experience with computer
=
>audio.
>> Less than a year after that Apple shut down the cloners and I =
>realized, 'Hey,
>> these are greedy corporate bastards just like Microsoft. And Windows =
>hardware
>> is cheap and I can build my own.' Which lead me to a 400 Mhz Celeron +
=
>Paris,
>> and the rest is (grim, money losing, book publishing) history.=20
>>=20
>> Your story is one version. Another is that Power was a smart, =
>talented, agile
>> hardware vendor who was beating the daylights out of Apple because =
>they were
>> everything Apple had long since ceased to be--entrepreneurial and =
>customer
>> oriented.=20
>>=20
>> TCB
>>=20
>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>"Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message=20
>>>>news:47bba823$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market =
>share?
>>> I
>>>>
>>>>How about the time the pulled the OS licensing from PowerComputing =
>and
>> UMaxx
>>>
>>>>and closed two entire companies and threw all those folks out of =
>work.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Deej since you mentioned PowerComputing,there are a few things that =
>should
>>>be noted. As I've said, the cloners ate in to Apple's sales. The =
>clones
>>>advertised mainly in Mac publications to Mac users, If they had =
>advertised
>>>in PC publications and did other forms of advertising to non Mac users
=
>they
>>>would have grown the market. They didn't, they cherry picked Apple =
>sales.
>>> One such famous incident was when PowerComputing was directly =
>competing
>>>with Apple by selling 3000 clones to Apple's long time customer =
>Lockheed
>>>Martin, that didn't go over to well. PowerComputing also worked a =
>deal
>> with
>>>IBM to get the fastest PowerPC processors before Apple could, this =
>further
>>>cost Apple sales.
>>>
>>>Steve Jobs went to all the cloners and tried to renegotiate the =
>licensing
>>>prices, the cloners wouldn't hear of it, so Apple did not renew the =
>licensing
>>>with Mac OS 8. Apple did not pull the licensing. The cloners could =
>still
>>>build systems and ship them with Mac OS 7.6 installed, and bundled OS
=
>8,
>>>they chose not to. PowerComputing announced after that, that they =
>were
>> going
>>>to start building PCs, which I think they did for a short time. In =
>the
>> end,
>>>Apple bought out PowerComputing for 100 million dollars in Apple =
>stock.
>>=20
>>>I think that was pretty generous of Apple. I believe it was up to =
>Kahng
>>>to take care of his workers from there.
>>>
>>>As far as UMAX, they continued on for years building scanners and =
>other
>> products
>>>as they did before they made clones.
>>
>
><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
><HTML><HEAD>
><META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
>charset=3Diso-8859-1">
><META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16608" name=3DGENERATOR>
><STYLE></STYLE>
></HEAD>
><BODY>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>We'll just have to disagree about it I guess. I
=
>still like=20
>ya and I think you're a cool dude, just a bit misguided :) I find =
>nothing=20
>ethical in the things I've posted about so far and you could post the =
>same kind=20
>of things about MS and we'd see that together. But not the mighty blue =
>apple?=20
>Added to that the Jobs li(n)e by li(n)e <-bad pun #1> that was =
>pushed on=20
>the public<STRONG> (*).</STRONG> </FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>It ain't like I'm saying MS is ethical - they're
=
>not,=20
>either - but the only thing keeping Apple from being the same ugly =
>foul=20
>hairy beast is financial firepower. Gates lies about how great Vista is.
=
>It's a=20
>turd. Jobs lied about how great Motorola chips were. They were turds. =
>Gates=20
>forces you as a business to buy office/OS's through each planned =
>obsolescene=20
>upgrade. </FONT><FONT face=3DArial>Jobs tells you to think you're =
>safe from=20
>virii as an ad campaign and tells you how Mac runs office 'just as well
=
>as a=20
>PC'. but fails to mention it's OLD version of office, years old in fact.
=
>There=20
>are 60 known virii in the wild for Mac, but you won't =
>hear about=20
>that from Jobs/Apple. </FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Apple Ads, speaking of....PC's are cold and =
>harsh and only=20
>good at office apps, 'eh? Somebody should tell that to all the video and
=
>audio=20
>guys that make wonderful art every single day on a windows PC, because =
>they=20
>didn't get the memo. I will say that iLife and GarageBand are pretty =
>cool,=20
>though not pro of course. I have 2 macs at my avail at work, and several
=
>PC's.=20
>Frankly, they both tick me off from time to time but the Win boxes =
>see more=20
>use and tick me off a whole lot less. Nothing like plugging in a KVM and
=
>having=20
>your Mac reach an unrecoverable error and forced shutdown because =
>it=20
>doesn't like the KVM. Every time. But not being the latest OS I can't =
>get=20
>support for it w/o buying some more "apple care", and Belkin had no idea
=
>what=20
>would cause it, nor my vendor. I had been considering a Mini for =
>personal=20
>use (with boot camp of course), but that kinda gotcha rather cinched the
=
>"think=20
>I'll pass for now" for me. MacOS-x 10.29 on dual procs, and it's a foot
=
>prop=20
>under my desk now. At least it doesn't crash that way and it's more =
>ergonomic=20
>for my peds, heh... I get a warm fuzzy and smirk when my feet =
>hit it=20
>:></FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial><STRONG>(*)</STRONG> Apple is so much =
>faster, Apple=20
>is so much more interesting, Apple is so much better at.... er, .... =
>hey, it's=20
>the new and improved Apple now with INTEL hardware (IE, that's called a
=
>PC=20
>Steve-O, and no amount of backpeddling will cover the fact that you were
=
>lying=20
>through your teeth about how much=20
>faster Motorola's I'd-rather-be-in-a-cell-phone chips were =
>over INTEL)=20
>and it's so much better than , uh.. running windows (can't say PC =
>anymore at=20
>this point)! Er, wait.. now you can run Windows on your Apple! (which I
=
>don't=20
>have a problem with, in fact I applaud that one but don't you think =
>that's=20
>rather odd for Apple to say bad windows, bad windows.. hey, you can now
=
>run=20
>windows?) I also give major points to that dually quicksilver being WAY
=
>cleanly=20
>designed inside. Superb visual build inside the box. Too bad it's an =
>ergonomic=20
>foot device now. </FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>You talked about MS stealing the macOS software
=
>GUI. Ok,=20
>where did Apple get their code base from for OS-X? Can't see the worm in
=
>both=20
>apples, 'eh? <-yes, that was bad pun #2.... but I am a punny=20
>guy!></FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>They screwed you as a clone seller even and =
>still you=20
>deny. Horse, water, no drinky. You're probably thinking the same =
>thing=20
>about the majority here. In all seriousness, I'm glad you have =
>enjoyed your=20
>relationships with Mac, I cannot report the same, unfortunately. I =
>absolutely=20
>adore my iPOD though, and although iPhone is tre' cool, it's not cutting
=
>it with=20
>me on the tech end so it's off the list of 'to buy'. I also thought that
=
>the=20
>Cinema Display was about the most beautiful display ever as far back as
=
>4~5=20
>years ago. on the overall though, I didn't like Apple =
>computer kool-aid any=20
>better than MS's kool-aid.</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>You're ok in my book man, so don't take any of =
>this all=20
>personal or anything, it's really not meant that way. I haven't =
>forgotten when I=20
>had a problem with a Mac you are the first and only dude offered and =
>followed=20
>through to help me out. Some day I'll get a chance to repay in=20
>kind.</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>AA</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"TCB" <</FONT><A=20
>href=3D"mailto:nobody@ishere.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>size=3D2>nobody@ishere.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> =
>wrote in message=20
></FONT><A href=3D"news:47bf218e$1@linux"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>size=3D2>news:47bf218e$1@linux</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial=20
>size=3D2>...</FONT></DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> <BR>> For =
>the record, it=20
>was what Apple did to the cloners that drove me into the<BR>> ever =
>welcoming=20
>arms of Redmond. I couldn't afford Apple hardware, but I could<BR>> =
>afford a=20
>Power 603e machine that was my first experience with computer =
>audio.<BR>>=20
>Less than a year after that Apple shut down the cloners and I realized,=20
>'Hey,<BR>> these are greedy corporate bastards just like Microsoft. =
>And=20
>Windows hardware<BR>> is cheap and I can build my own.' Which lead me =
>to a=20
>400 Mhz Celeron + Paris,<BR>> and the rest is (grim, money losing, =
>book=20
>publishing) history. <BR>> <BR>> Your story is one version. =
>Another is=20
>that Power was a smart, talented, agile<BR>> hardware vendor who was =
>beating=20
>the daylights out of Apple because they were<BR>> everything Apple =
>had long=20
>since ceased to be--entrepreneurial and customer<BR>> oriented. =
><BR>>=20
><BR>> TCB<BR>> <BR>> "James McCloskey" <</FONT><A=20
>href=3D"mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>size=3D2>excelsm@hotmail.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>>=20
>wrote:<BR>>><BR>>>"Deej" <</FONT><A=20
>href=3D"mailto:noway@jose.net"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>size=3D2>noway@jose.net</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>>=20
>wrote:<BR>>>><BR>>>>"James McCloskey" <</FONT><A=20
>href=3D"mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>size=3D2>excelsm@hotmail.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> =
>wrote in=20
>message=20
><BR>>>>news:47bba823$1@linux...<BR>>>>><BR>>>&=
>gt;>=20
>Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market=20
>share?<BR>>> I<BR>>>><BR>>>>How about the time =
>the=20
>pulled the OS licensing from PowerComputing and<BR>>=20
>UMaxx<BR>>><BR>>>>and closed two entire companies and =
>threw all=20
>those folks out of work.<BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>Deej =
>since=20
>you mentioned PowerComputing,there are a few things that =
>should<BR>>>be=20
>noted. As I've said, the cloners ate in to Apple's sales. =
>The=20
>clones<BR>>>advertised mainly in Mac publications to Mac users, If =
>they=20
>had advertised<BR>>>in PC publications and did other forms of =
>advertising=20
>to non Mac users they<BR>>>would have grown the market. They =
>didn't,=20
>they cherry picked Apple sales.<BR>>> One such famous incident was =
>when=20
>PowerComputing was directly competing<BR>>>with Apple by selling =
>3000=20
>clones to Apple's long time customer Lockheed<BR>>>Martin, that =
>didn't go=20
>over to well. PowerComputing also worked a deal<BR>>=20
>with<BR>>>IBM to get the fastest PowerPC processors before Apple =
>could,=20
>this further<BR>>>cost Apple sales.<BR>>><BR>>>Steve =
>Jobs went=20
>to all the cloners and tried to renegotiate the =
>licensing<BR>>>prices, the=20
>cloners wouldn't hear of it, so Apple did not renew the=20
>licensing<BR>>>with Mac OS 8. Apple did not pull the=20
>licensing. The cloners could still<BR>>>build systems and =
>ship them=20
>with Mac OS 7.6 installed, and bundled OS 8,<BR>>>they chose not =
>to. =20
>PowerComputing announced after that, that they were<BR>> =
>going<BR>>>to=20
>start building PCs, which I think they did for a short time. In=20
>the<BR>> end,<BR>>>Apple bought out PowerComputing for 100 =
>million=20
>dollars in Apple stock.<BR>> <BR>>>I think that was pretty =
>generous of=20
>Apple. I believe it was up to Kahng<BR>>>to take care of his =
>workers=20
>from there.<BR>>><BR>>>As far as UMAX, they continued on for =
>years=20
>building scanners and other<BR>> products<BR>>>as they did =
>before they=20
>made clones.<BR>></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96224 is a reply to message #96214] |
Sat, 23 February 2008 02:19 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Nah, it's pretty much open field man. Jump on in!
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:47bfbc71@linux...
>
> I know your message is for James but I feel like jumping in... :^)
>
> Aaron Allen wrote:
>> We'll just have to disagree about it I guess. I still like ya and I think
>> you're a cool dude, just a bit misguided :) I find nothing ethical in the
>> things I've posted about so far and you could post the same kind of
>> things about MS and we'd see that together. But not the mighty blue
>> apple? Added to that the Jobs li(n)e by li(n)e <-bad pun #1> that was
>> pushed on the public* (*).*
>> It ain't like I'm saying MS is ethical - they're not, either - but the
>> only thing keeping Apple from being the same ugly foul hairy beast is
>> financial firepower.
>
> Interesting, so you're saying that any corporation with a lot of money is
> going to be unethical and corrupt? If so, that would explain a lot...
No, I'm saying that those two particular corp's have shown that money 'n'
power is around the top of their list and they'll absolutely abuse it for
more money 'n' power. Greed, money and power aren't necessarily hand in
hand, but admittedly more often they are than not. Private sector, gov't or
3rd world regimes..... it's human trait that those who want to rise to power
get soaked in it and want more. I don't want that kind of power, therefore I
do not seek it. Those who do, will.
>
>
>> Gates lies about how great Vista is. It's a turd.
>
> Apparently so.
>
>
>> Jobs lied about how great Motorola chips were. They were turds.
>
> Heh. Well, although there WERE hyped for sure, they were/are hardly turds,
> Aaron. I'm still running a G4 laptop and a dual G5 desktop.
No it's a lie. That's not ethical. There's no 'hype' or grey area here, it's
a flat out lie perpetuated by Apple.
I have everything from a 1.2 up to my newest aquisition Quad Core here
(unless you count my laptops too, then it starts with a PIII/1.0). I have
roughly 10 computers here. They all still work, and do what I built them to
do and well. . I'm typing this post on an old athlon2800 that still kicks
ass every single day for me. It's been on every single day for 4 years. Zero
failures. Home rolled from parts and leftovers and upgrades. It renders
video, it has multitrack software and a boatload of office apps to boot. Did
I mention, zero failures? (now I'm tempting the computer Gods to kill it,
aren't I ahahah?)
>
> The G4 laptop runs a lot of apps just fine, I use it for article writing,
> research, and 2D animation work.
Shoot Jamie, I've got an old Athlon 1.2 and a 1.4 that'll do all that (and
more.. ) and I think both are older than your G4. And, I can still get parts
for them (as if I wanted to, but that's not my point)..... will Apple still
sell you G4/Motorola parts if something dies, without raking your over the
coals if at all (Also or course, as if you wanted to put more money in that
rather than shiny'n'new) ?
>Not so much for music and video because I have the G5, although my wife
>uses a slightly newer G4 laptop to completely run her business and do
>voiceover production. My laptop has a broken hinge, so it's going to be
>replaced when the next MacBook Pro update comes out (I'm holding out for
>Penryn).
I'm curious, platform agnostically speaking... why a laptop? Those are
notoriously more expensive, less empowered and have yesterday's technologies
in them not to mention the bus length / speed being slower.
>
> The G5 still rocks in a big way, and even though there are faster machines
> I'm not in a big hurry to replace it. It still does what I bought it to
> do, and does it well. I recently added more RAM to it bringing it to
> 4.5GB, and it has room for up to 8. I also have more than 2 terrabytes of
> HD space hanging off of it. The expandability has been great.
No G5 here, and no interest in one to be honest. I got plenty of the G3's
and G4's and I didn't like it :) There's an old saying, Fool me once shame
on you, fool me twice shame on me.
I can't talk much details about it, but suffice to say when time to spec
some video edit systems for a certain employer I told them 8 Mac towers with
at least Quad's in them. And 8 licenses of XP w/Bootcamp to go with 'em :)
>
> Granted, about a month after my G5 came out there were faster Intel/Athlon
> chips. But it didn't make my G5 quit pulling its weight around here. :^)
Nah, new is always just a day away and I've learned that the next upgrade
just isn't necessary. I kinda like the whole stability thing and cutting
edge doesn't pay a lot of attention to that 'minor' detail. I finally bought
myself a quad core a few days ago though and hopefully all the parts will be
here next week. It oughta scha-weet. I'm pretty sure of this - the
equivalent of what I bought would be at least 3x the price if it'd been an
Apple product. Q6600, 250 GB sata, 400 GB sata, 2 GB ram, DVD+-Dual Layer
drive, TI chipset IEEE1394, 6 USB, legacy P/S2 should I need it, built in
dual head graphics.... rig ran me about $700. Now THAT is value dude.
>
>
>> Gates forces you as a business to buy office/OS's through each planned
>> obsolescene upgrade.
>
> If you buy into it. Or you could use Open Office, which is what I do (the
> NeoOffice version on OSX).
>
as do I. I'm not paying that kind of stupid money to Bill & company - but
this is a thread about vista sucking turned into a thread about mac being
more ethical than MS. Sorry, I don't buy that.
>
>> Jobs tells you to think you're safe from virii as an ad campaign and
>> tells you how Mac runs office 'just as well as a PC'. but fails to
>> mention it's OLD version of office, years old in fact.
>
> Sometimes the Mac version of Office has been ahead, sometimes the
> MSWindows version. Doesn't matter to me because I'm not on that treadmill.
Dude... office 2004 is more than a little behind don'cha think? That'd be a
4 year old product. Most computers don't live that long.
>
>
>> There are 60 known virii in the wild for Mac, but you won't hear about
>> that from Jobs/Apple.
>
> Ooh. 60. Wow. That's what, 1/1000th the amount on MSWindows? ;^)
>
> Haven't seen any here.
Which is what makes it so dangerous. Mac folks think they're insulated
completely and they are NOT. Do you have phishing/pharming protection?
That's another huge Mac misconception. For Jobs & company to mislead their
users into that situation just to try to make Windows look bad is NOT
ethical.
>
>
>> Apple Ads, speaking of....PC's are cold and harsh and only good at office
>> apps, 'eh?
>
> Clearly hyperbole. Funny, though.
No, clearly a lie. I find humor in the commercials as well. But a lie is a
lie, ainnit?
>
>
>> Somebody should tell that to all the video and audio guys that make
>> wonderful art every single day on a windows PC, because they didn't get
>> the memo.
>
> Indeed.
>
>
>> I will say that iLife and GarageBand are pretty cool, though not pro of
>> course.
>
> Yep, GarageBand is cool being for free with the machine, but far short of
> Logic.
>
>
>> I have 2 macs at my avail at work, and several PC's. Frankly, they both
>> tick me off from time to time but the Win boxes see more use and tick me
>> off a whole lot less.
>
> From what you said below, it sounds like your Macs are pretty old and not
> nearly up to date. OSX 10.29? Get 10.3 at least. I'm on 10.4, it's pretty
> solid. 10.5 is sitting here, waiting to be installed when the decks clear
> enough to get around to it.
10.3, correct me if I'm wrong, is another paid upgrade. For a machine I
won't use over stability problems - no thanks.
XP service pack 1, 2 and the coming 3 are ALL FREE. And make no mistake,
those are just as much an overhaul as the paid for upgrade Apple wants to
soak you for.
That sound ethical to you guys?
>
>
>> Nothing like plugging in a KVM and having your Mac reach an unrecoverable
>> error and forced shutdown because it doesn't like the KVM. Every time.
>> But not being the latest OS I can't get support for it w/o buying some
>> more "apple care", and Belkin had no idea what would cause it, nor my
>> vendor.
>
> Bummer.
Yeah, I was totally stoked that the G4 duallie liked my Dell keyboard/mouse
just fine... but I have dual monitors at my day gig and having a 3rd in my
limited desk space just ain't in the plan. So I bought a decent KVM that
every PC, even 5 year old ones, seem to like just fine. Not the Mac, it goes
into some corrupted
we're-shutting-down-don't-care-if-you-have-saved-your-work mode within 5
minutes or less. Total drag. I even had that machine playing somewhat nice
with my MS server 2k3. Oh well, foot prop now.
>
>
>> I had been considering a Mini for personal use (with boot camp of
>> course), but that kinda gotcha rather cinched the "think I'll pass for
>> now" for me. MacOS-x 10.29 on dual procs, and it's a foot prop under my
>> desk now. At least it doesn't crash that way and it's more ergonomic for
>> my peds, heh... I get a warm fuzzy and smirk when my feet hit it :>
>
> I'll be happy to store it for you. Could probably put it to good use. The
> quicksilvers were pretty loud, though. The G5 is much, much quieter, and
> the current Intel boxes are also pretty quiet.
Yeah, Hoover's got nothing on this box (dam or vacuum cleaner, LOL)
>
>
>> *(*)* Apple is so much faster, Apple is so much more interesting, Apple
>> is so much better at.... er, ....
>
> Those whacky marketing types...
.....are lying. On Apple's behalf, and on Apple's dime. Funny yes, honest no.
Not Ethical.
>
>> hey, it's the new and improved Apple now with INTEL hardware (IE, that's
>> called a PC Steve-O, and no amount of backpeddling will cover the fact
>> that you were lying through your teeth about how much faster Motorola's
>> I'd-rather-be-in-a-cell-phone chips were over INTEL)
>
> For its time the G4 didn't suck. The G5 is still a mighty chip around
> here. Keep in mind that the current core 2 duo stuff was not out when Jobs
> announced the switch. He switched for the then upcoming processor road
> map, which was more attractive from Intel at the time than from IBM.
> Turned out to be an OK choice I think, although I have yet to get one of
> the Intel Macs.
Ditto, but I hear great things about Intel Mac boxes. And frankly, I think
he made a huge mistake not going with AMD.
However, back on topic: is Apple an ethical company..... :)
>
>
>> and it's so much better than , uh.. running windows (can't say PC anymore
>> at this point)!
>
> I think you could always say PC. "Personal computer" fits any of these
> boxes.
Then why are the Apple ads saying *hi, I'm a PC... and hi, I'm a Mac* ??
Apple's making that distinction, not me.
>
>
>> Er, wait.. now you can run Windows on your Apple! (which I don't have a
>> problem with, in fact I applaud that one but don't you think that's
>> rather odd for Apple to say bad windows, bad windows.. hey, you can now
>> run windows?)
>
> Since many people are stuck with using MSWindows for specific software,
> company policy, etc., it's not so odd for Apple to market to them.
> Shocking, maybe. Clever, actually.
I like the choice, as stated earlier I spec'd apple boxes with an extra OS
license of XP for each 10.5 OS box and Boot Camp.
>
>
>> I also give major points to that dually quicksilver being WAY cleanly
>> designed inside. Superb visual build inside the box. Too bad it's an
>> ergonomic foot device now.
>
> Having had both, the G5s are even nicer - with pretty much the same
> external case as for the octocore Intel Macs today, although the new
> versions have four HD slots and support up to 32GB RAM.
>
>
>> You talked about MS stealing the macOS software GUI. Ok, where did Apple
>> get their code base from for OS-X? Can't see the worm in both apples,
>> 'eh? <-yes, that was bad pun #2.... but I am a punny guy!>
>
> The code base for OSX was derived largely from NeXT, the company Steve
> Jobs started after been booted out of Apple. I used to work for a NeXT
> developer doing documentation and testing. Had a cool NeXT cube. Good
> times!
So, you're saying it is not BSD? Interesting......
>
>
>> They screwed you as a clone seller even and still you deny. Horse, water,
>> no drinky. You're probably thinking the same thing about the majority
>> here. In all seriousness, I'm glad you have enjoyed your relationships
>> with Mac, I cannot report the same, unfortunately. I absolutely adore my
>> iPOD though, and although iPhone is tre' cool, it's not cutting it with
>> me on the tech end so it's off the list of 'to buy'.
>
> I haven't fallen for iPods or iPhones. Yet anyway.
I bet you will. iPOD's rock, but I would steer clear of the cheap seats -
like anything else in life. I think, however, that I will not buy another
movie from them because I don't like being locked out of being able to make
a DVD for backup/viewing outside my computer. That sucks.
and iTUNES has turned into a fat piece of bloated code IMO as well. I'm
about to jump to Media Monkey I think.
>
>
>> I also thought that the Cinema Display was about the most beautiful
>> display ever as far back as 4~5 years ago. on the overall though, I
>> didn't like Apple computer kool-aid any better than MS's kool-aid.
>
> Having spent some time working in development environments on multiple
> platforms (not just Apple and Microsoft), I think both of those flavors of
> koolaid taste odd. But overall, for the reasons I spelled out in my other
> post, Microsoft's koolaid is worse. Apple has actually gotten better than
> they were in the 80s/90s, IMO. I was not a fan of OS9 and before.
I didn't dig ANY os that could crash with unprotected memory. BAD juju man.
Glad they got that one dealt with.
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>> You're ok in my book man, so don't take any of this all personal or
>> anything, it's really not meant that way. I haven't forgotten when I had
>> a problem with a Mac you are the first and only dude offered and followed
>> through to help me out. Some day I'll get a chance to repay in kind.
>> AA
>> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com <mailto:nobody@ishere.com>> wrote in message
>> news:47bf218e$1@linux...
>> >
>> > For the record, it was what Apple did to the cloners that drove me
>> into the
>> > ever welcoming arms of Redmond. I couldn't afford Apple hardware, but
>> I could
>> > afford a Power 603e machine that was my first experience with computer
>> audio.
>> > Less than a year after that Apple shut down the cloners and I
>> realized, 'Hey,
>> > these are greedy corporate bastards just like Microsoft. And Windows
>> hardware
>> > is cheap and I can build my own.' Which lead me to a 400 Mhz Celeron +
>> Paris,
>> > and the rest is (grim, money losing, book publishing) history.
>> >
>> > Your story is one version. Another is that Power was a smart,
>> talented, agile
>> > hardware vendor who was beating the daylights out of Apple because
>> they were
>> > everything Apple had long since ceased to be--entrepreneurial and
>> customer
>> > oriented.
>> >
>> > TCB
>> >
>> > "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com <mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>"Deej" <noway@jose.net <mailto:noway@jose.net>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com <mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com>>
>> wrote in message
>> >>>news:47bba823$1@linux...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market
>> share?
>> >> I
>> >>>
>> >>>How about the time the pulled the OS licensing from PowerComputing
>> and
>> > UMaxx
>> >>
>> >>>and closed two entire companies and threw all those folks out of
>> work.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>Deej since you mentioned PowerComputing,there are a few things that
>> should
>> >>be noted. As I've said, the cloners ate in to Apple's sales. The
>> clones
>> >>advertised mainly in Mac publications to Mac users, If they had
>> advertised
>> >>in PC publications and did other forms of advertising to non Mac users
>> they
>> >>would have grown the market. They didn't, they cherry picked Apple
>> sales.
>> >> One such famous incident was when PowerComputing was directly
>> competing
>> >>with Apple by selling 3000 clones to Apple's long time customer
>> Lockheed
>> >>Martin, that didn't go over to well. PowerComputing also worked a
>> deal
>> > with
>> >>IBM to get the fastest PowerPC processors before Apple could, this
>> further
>> >>cost Apple sales.
>> >>
>> >>Steve Jobs went to all the cloners and tried to renegotiate the
>> licensing
>> >>prices, the cloners wouldn't hear of it, so Apple did not renew the
>> licensing
>> >>with Mac OS 8. Apple did not pull the licensing. The cloners could
>> still
>> >>build systems and ship them with Mac OS 7.6 installed, and bundled OS
>> 8,
>> >>they chose not to. PowerComputing announced after that, that they
>> were
>> > going
>> >>to start building PCs, which I think they did for a short time. In
>> the
>> > end,
>> >>Apple bought out PowerComputing for 100 million dollars in Apple
>> stock.
>> >
>> >>I think that was pretty generous of Apple. I believe it was up to
>> Kahng
>> >>to take care of his workers from there.
>> >>
>> >>As far as UMAX, they continued on for years building scanners and
>> other
>> > products
>> >>as they did before they made clones.
>> >
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96225 is a reply to message #96218] |
Sat, 23 February 2008 02:34 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:47bfd24d$1@linux...
>
> Aaron I think your Ok too. Yes we do disagree on some things. I believe
> that the G4 was the diesel engine of processors, and a heavy lifter in
> it's
> time. The G4 got long in the tooth, Motorola screwed apple around for a
> long time getting out faster processors. It was pay back time. It was a
> good thing in the end because Apple had to put out multi processor
> machines
> and develop the OS to keep up.
Well, I see what you are saying and maybe that's the small edge shown on
some apps with OSX and XP on the same machine - assuming, that is it was
transferrable code from the Motorola/IBM thing over to Intel chips. I'm not
sure I'd comfortably make that assumption though.
>
> IBM also screwed Apple around with the G5, they promised Apple 3 GHz
> Processors
> with in a year. Jobs announced it at MacWorld, a year later he had to
> face
> Mac users, I'm sure it was embarrassing. After all the IBM hoopla about
> the new plant, the new processor and their relation ship with Apple, they
> gave a couple of press releases were they said Apple was insignificant to
> their business. When you publicly insult your customer, and you don't
> meet
> your obligations, it shouldn't be a surprise when they go to your
> competitor.
> That's what Apple did. IBM could not get out faster processors on time.
AMD probably would have. I still don't get it why they didn't partner up
with AMD unless AMD didn't want their business because Dell would've flipped
out or Jobs overbearing "my vision, my way" attitude scared them? I remember
the rumors flying about that partnership then the phone line went completely
dead.
>
> I think you and Deej should both send me you old Mac G4s, I'll even give
> you guys something for them if they are running.
Both belong to my day gig, or I'd be happy to unload. They both work fine if
you don't count the old versions of Office I'm forced to contend with or the
KVM issue. I keep my things in pristine shape as a general rule, but took
exception to the tower once that nonsense started. Laptop 10.4 has nary a
scratch on it, it's just horridly slow IMO and the battery is getting kind
of long in tooth..
> "Aaron Allen" <know-spam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>
>>
>>We'll just have to disagree about it I guess. I still like ya and I =
>>think you're a cool dude, just a bit misguided :) I find nothing ethical
> =
>>in the things I've posted about so far and you could post the same kind
> =
>>of things about MS and we'd see that together. But not the mighty blue =
>>apple? Added to that the Jobs li(n)e by li(n)e <-bad pun #1> that was =
>>pushed on the public (*).=20
>>
>>It ain't like I'm saying MS is ethical - they're not, either - but the =
>>only thing keeping Apple from being the same ugly foul hairy beast is =
>>financial firepower. Gates lies about how great Vista is. It's a turd. =
>>Jobs lied about how great Motorola chips were. They were turds. Gates =
>>forces you as a business to buy office/OS's through each planned =
>>obsolescene upgrade. Jobs tells you to think you're safe from virii as =
>>an ad campaign and tells you how Mac runs office 'just as well as a PC'.
> =
>>but fails to mention it's OLD version of office, years old in fact. =
>>There are 60 known virii in the wild for Mac, but you won't hear about =
>>that from Jobs/Apple. =20
>>
>>Apple Ads, speaking of....PC's are cold and harsh and only good at =
>>office apps, 'eh? Somebody should tell that to all the video and audio =
>>guys that make wonderful art every single day on a windows PC, because =
>>they didn't get the memo. I will say that iLife and GarageBand are =
>>pretty cool, though not pro of course. I have 2 macs at my avail at =
>>work, and several PC's. Frankly, they both tick me off from time to time
> =
>>but the Win boxes see more use and tick me off a whole lot less. Nothing
> =
>>like plugging in a KVM and having your Mac reach an unrecoverable error
> =
>>and forced shutdown because it doesn't like the KVM. Every time. But not
> =
>>being the latest OS I can't get support for it w/o buying some more =
>>"apple care", and Belkin had no idea what would cause it, nor my vendor.
> =
>> I had been considering a Mini for personal use (with boot camp of =
>>course), but that kinda gotcha rather cinched the "think I'll pass for =
>>now" for me. MacOS-x 10.29 on dual procs, and it's a foot prop under my
> =
>>desk now. At least it doesn't crash that way and it's more ergonomic for
> =
>>my peds, heh... I get a warm fuzzy and smirk when my feet hit it :>
>>
>>(*) Apple is so much faster, Apple is so much more interesting, Apple is
> =
>>so much better at.... er, .... hey, it's the new and improved Apple now
> =
>>with INTEL hardware (IE, that's called a PC Steve-O, and no amount of =
>>backpeddling will cover the fact that you were lying through your teeth
> =
>>about how much faster Motorola's I'd-rather-be-in-a-cell-phone chips =
>>were over INTEL) and it's so much better than , uh.. running windows =
>>(can't say PC anymore at this point)! Er, wait.. now you can run Windows
> =
>>on your Apple! (which I don't have a problem with, in fact I applaud =
>>that one but don't you think that's rather odd for Apple to say bad =
>>windows, bad windows.. hey, you can now run windows?) I also give major
> =
>>points to that dually quicksilver being WAY cleanly designed inside. =
>>Superb visual build inside the box. Too bad it's an ergonomic foot =
>>device now.=20
>>
>>You talked about MS stealing the macOS software GUI. Ok, where did Apple
> =
>>get their code base from for OS-X? Can't see the worm in both apples, =
>>'eh? <-yes, that was bad pun #2.... but I am a punny guy!>
>>
>>They screwed you as a clone seller even and still you deny. Horse, =
>>water, no drinky. You're probably thinking the same thing about the =
>>majority here. In all seriousness, I'm glad you have enjoyed your =
>>relationships with Mac, I cannot report the same, unfortunately. I =
>>absolutely adore my iPOD though, and although iPhone is tre' cool, it's
> =
>>not cutting it with me on the tech end so it's off the list of 'to buy'.
> =
>>I also thought that the Cinema Display was about the most beautiful =
>>display ever as far back as 4~5 years ago. on the overall though, I =
>>didn't like Apple computer kool-aid any better than MS's kool-aid.
>>
>>You're ok in my book man, so don't take any of this all personal or =
>>anything, it's really not meant that way. I haven't forgotten when I had
> =
>>a problem with a Mac you are the first and only dude offered and =
>>followed through to help me out. Some day I'll get a chance to repay in
> =
>>kind.
>>
>>AA
>>
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:47bf218e$1@linux...
>>>=20
>>> For the record, it was what Apple did to the cloners that drove me =
>>into the
>>> ever welcoming arms of Redmond. I couldn't afford Apple hardware, but
> =
>>I could
>>> afford a Power 603e machine that was my first experience with computer
> =
>>audio.
>>> Less than a year after that Apple shut down the cloners and I =
>>realized, 'Hey,
>>> these are greedy corporate bastards just like Microsoft. And Windows =
>>hardware
>>> is cheap and I can build my own.' Which lead me to a 400 Mhz Celeron +
> =
>>Paris,
>>> and the rest is (grim, money losing, book publishing) history.=20
>>>=20
>>> Your story is one version. Another is that Power was a smart, =
>>talented, agile
>>> hardware vendor who was beating the daylights out of Apple because =
>>they were
>>> everything Apple had long since ceased to be--entrepreneurial and =
>>customer
>>> oriented.=20
>>>=20
>>> TCB
>>>=20
>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"Deej" <noway@jose.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message=20
>>>>>news:47bba823$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market =
>>share?
>>>> I
>>>>>
>>>>>How about the time the pulled the OS licensing from PowerComputing =
>>and
>>> UMaxx
>>>>
>>>>>and closed two entire companies and threw all those folks out of =
>>work.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Deej since you mentioned PowerComputing,there are a few things that =
>>should
>>>>be noted. As I've said, the cloners ate in to Apple's sales. The =
>>clones
>>>>advertised mainly in Mac publications to Mac users, If they had =
>>advertised
>>>>in PC publications and did other forms of advertising to non Mac users
> =
>>they
>>>>would have grown the market. They didn't, they cherry picked Apple =
>>sales.
>>>> One such famous incident was when PowerComputing was directly =
>>competing
>>>>with Apple by selling 3000 clones to Apple's long time customer =
>>Lockheed
>>>>Martin, that didn't go over to well. PowerComputing also worked a =
>>deal
>>> with
>>>>IBM to get the fastest PowerPC processors before Apple could, this =
>>further
>>>>cost Apple sales.
>>>>
>>>>Steve Jobs went to all the cloners and tried to renegotiate the =
>>licensing
>>>>prices, the cloners wouldn't hear of it, so Apple did not renew the =
>>licensing
>>>>with Mac OS 8. Apple did not pull the licensing. The cloners could =
>>still
>>>>build systems and ship them with Mac OS 7.6 installed, and bundled OS
> =
>>8,
>>>>they chose not to. PowerComputing announced after that, that they =
>>were
>>> going
>>>>to start building PCs, which I think they did for a short time. In =
>>the
>>> end,
>>>>Apple bought out PowerComputing for 100 million dollars in Apple =
>>stock.
>>>=20
>>>>I think that was pretty generous of Apple. I believe it was up to =
>>Kahng
>>>>to take care of his workers from there.
>>>>
>>>>As far as UMAX, they continued on for years building scanners and =
>>other
>>> products
>>>>as they did before they made clones.
>>>
>>
>><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
>><HTML><HEAD>
>><META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
>>charset=3Diso-8859-1">
>><META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16608" name=3DGENERATOR>
>><STYLE></STYLE>
>></HEAD>
>><BODY>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>We'll just have to disagree about it I guess. I
> =
>>still like=20
>>ya and I think you're a cool dude, just a bit misguided :) I find =
>>nothing=20
>>ethical in the things I've posted about so far and you could post the =
>>same kind=20
>>of things about MS and we'd see that together. But not the mighty blue =
>>apple?=20
>>Added to that the Jobs li(n)e by li(n)e <-bad pun #1> that was =
>>pushed on=20
>>the public<STRONG> (*).</STRONG> </FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>It ain't like I'm saying MS is ethical - they're
> =
>>not,=20
>>either - but the only thing keeping Apple from being the same ugly =
>>foul=20
>>hairy beast is financial firepower. Gates lies about how great Vista is.
> =
>>It's a=20
>>turd. Jobs lied about how great Motorola chips were. They were turds. =
>>Gates=20
>>forces you as a business to buy office/OS's through each planned =
>>obsolescene=20
>>upgrade. </FONT><FONT face=3DArial>Jobs tells you to think you're =
>>safe from=20
>>virii as an ad campaign and tells you how Mac runs office 'just as well
> =
>>as a=20
>>PC'. but fails to mention it's OLD version of office, years old in fact.
> =
>>There=20
>>are 60 known virii in the wild for Mac, but you won't =
>>hear about=20
>>that from Jobs/Apple. </FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Apple Ads, speaking of....PC's are cold and =
>>harsh and only=20
>>good at office apps, 'eh? Somebody should tell that to all the video and
> =
>>audio=20
>>guys that make wonderful art every single day on a windows PC, because =
>>they=20
>>didn't get the memo. I will say that iLife and GarageBand are pretty =
>>cool,=20
>>though not pro of course. I have 2 macs at my avail at work, and several
> =
>>PC's.=20
>>Frankly, they both tick me off from time to time but the Win boxes =
>>see more=20
>>use and tick me off a whole lot less. Nothing like plugging in a KVM and
> =
>>having=20
>>your Mac reach an unrecoverable error and forced shutdown because =
>>it=20
>>doesn't like the KVM. Every time. But not being the latest OS I can't =
>>get=20
>>support for it w/o buying some more "apple care", and Belkin had no idea
> =
>>what=20
>>would cause it, nor my vendor. I had been considering a Mini for =
>>personal=20
>>use (with boot camp of course), but that kinda gotcha rather cinched the
> =
>>"think=20
>>I'll pass for now" for me. MacOS-x 10.29 on dual procs, and it's a foot
> =
>>prop=20
>>under my desk now. At least it doesn't crash that way and it's more =
>>ergonomic=20
>>for my peds, heh... I get a warm fuzzy and smirk when my feet =
>>hit it=20
>>:></FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial><STRONG>(*)</STRONG> Apple is so much =
>>faster, Apple=20
>>is so much more interesting, Apple is so much better at.... er, .... =
>>hey, it's=20
>>the new and improved Apple now with INTEL hardware (IE, that's called a
> =
>>PC=20
>>Steve-O, and no amount of backpeddling will cover the fact that you were
> =
>>lying=20
>>through your teeth about how much=20
>>faster Motorola's I'd-rather-be-in-a-cell-phone chips were =
>>over INTEL)=20
>>and it's so much better than , uh.. running windows (can't say PC =
>>anymore at=20
>>this point)! Er, wait.. now you can run Windows on your Apple! (which I
> =
>>don't=20
>>have a problem with, in fact I applaud that one but don't you think =
>>that's=20
>>rather odd for Apple to say bad windows, bad windows.. hey, you can now
> =
>>run=20
>>windows?) I also give major points to that dually quicksilver being WAY
> =
>>cleanly=20
>>designed inside. Superb visual build inside the box. Too bad it's an =
>>ergonomic=20
>>foot device now. </FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>You talked about MS stealing the macOS software
> =
>>GUI. Ok,=20
>>where did Apple get their code base from for OS-X? Can't see the worm in
> =
>>both=20
>>apples, 'eh? <-yes, that was bad pun #2.... but I am a punny=20
>>guy!></FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>They screwed you as a clone seller even and =
>>still you=20
>>deny. Horse, water, no drinky. You're probably thinking the same =
>>thing=20
>>about the majority here. In all seriousness, I'm glad you have =
>>enjoyed your=20
>>relationships with Mac, I cannot report the same, unfortunately. I =
>>absolutely=20
>>adore my iPOD though, and although iPhone is tre' cool, it's not cutting
> =
>>it with=20
>>me on the tech end so it's off the list of 'to buy'. I also thought that
> =
>>the=20
>>Cinema Display was about the most beautiful display ever as far back as
> =
>>4~5=20
>>years ago. on the overall though, I didn't like Apple =
>>computer kool-aid any=20
>>better than MS's kool-aid.</FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>You're ok in my book man, so don't take any of =
>>this all=20
>>personal or anything, it's really not meant that way. I haven't =
>>forgotten when I=20
>>had a problem with a Mac you are the first and only dude offered and =
>>followed=20
>>through to help me out. Some day I'll get a chance to repay in=20
>>kind.</FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial>AA</FONT></DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
>><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"TCB" <</FONT><A=20
>>href=3D"mailto:nobody@ishere.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>>size=3D2>nobody@ishere.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> =
>>wrote in message=20
>></FONT><A href=3D"news:47bf218e$1@linux"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>>size=3D2>news:47bf218e$1@linux</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial=20
>>size=3D2>...</FONT></DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> <BR>> For =
>>the record, it=20
>>was what Apple did to the cloners that drove me into the<BR>> ever =
>>welcoming=20
>>arms of Redmond. I couldn't afford Apple hardware, but I could<BR>> =
>>afford a=20
>>Power 603e machine that was my first experience with computer =
>>audio.<BR>>=20
>>Less than a year after that Apple shut down the cloners and I realized,=20
>>'Hey,<BR>> these are greedy corporate bastards just like Microsoft. =
>>And=20
>>Windows hardware<BR>> is cheap and I can build my own.' Which lead me =
>>to a=20
>>400 Mhz Celeron + Paris,<BR>> and the rest is (grim, money losing, =
>>book=20
>>publishing) history. <BR>> <BR>> Your story is one version. =
>>Another is=20
>>that Power was a smart, talented, agile<BR>> hardware vendor who was =
>>beating=20
>>the daylights out of Apple because they were<BR>> everything Apple =
>>had long=20
>>since ceased to be--entrepreneurial and customer<BR>> oriented. =
>><BR>>=20
>><BR>> TCB<BR>> <BR>> "James McCloskey" <</FONT><A=20
>>href=3D"mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>>size=3D2>excelsm@hotmail.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>>=20
>>wrote:<BR>>><BR>>>"Deej" <</FONT><A=20
>>href=3D"mailto:noway@jose.net"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>>size=3D2>noway@jose.net</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>>=20
>>wrote:<BR>>>><BR>>>>"James McCloskey" <</FONT><A=20
>>href=3D"mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
>>size=3D2>excelsm@hotmail.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> =
>>wrote in=20
>>message=20
>><BR>>>>news:47bba823$1@linux...<BR>>>>><BR>>>&=
>>gt;>=20
>>Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market=20
>>share?<BR>>> I<BR>>>><BR>>>>How about the time =
>>the=20
>>pulled the OS licensing from PowerComputing and<BR>>=20
>>UMaxx<BR>>><BR>>>>and closed two entire companies and =
>>threw all=20
>>those folks out of work.<BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>Deej =
>>since=20
>>you mentioned PowerComputing,there are a few things that =
>>should<BR>>>be=20
>>noted. As I've said, the cloners ate in to Apple's sales. =
>>The=20
>>clones<BR>>>advertised mainly in Mac publications to Mac users, If =
>>they=20
>>had advertised<BR>>>in PC publications and did other forms of =
>>advertising=20
>>to non Mac users they<BR>>>would have grown the market. They =
>>didn't,=20
>>they cherry picked Apple sales.<BR>>> One such famous incident was =
>>when=20
>>PowerComputing was directly competing<BR>>>with Apple by selling =
>>3000=20
>>clones to Apple's long time customer Lockheed<BR>>>Martin, that =
>>didn't go=20
>>over to well. PowerComputing also worked a deal<BR>>=20
>>with<BR>>>IBM to get the fastest PowerPC processors before Apple =
>>could,=20
>>this further<BR>>>cost Apple sales.<BR>>><BR>>>Steve =
>>Jobs went=20
>>to all the cloners and tried to renegotiate the =
>>licensing<BR>>>prices, the=20
>>cloners wouldn't hear of it, so Apple did not renew the=20
>>licensing<BR>>>with Mac OS 8. Apple did not pull the=20
>>licensing. The cloners could still<BR>>>build systems and =
>>ship them=20
>>with Mac OS 7.6 installed, and bundled OS 8,<BR>>>they chose not =
>>to. =20
>>PowerComputing announced after that, that they were<BR>> =
>>going<BR>>>to=20
>>start building PCs, which I think they did for a short time. In=20
>>the<BR>> end,<BR>>>Apple bought out PowerComputing for 100 =
>>million=20
>>dollars in Apple stock.<BR>> <BR>>>I think that was pretty =
>>generous of=20
>>Apple. I believe it was up to Kahng<BR>>>to take care of his =
>>workers=20
>>from there.<BR>>><BR>>>As far as UMAX, they continued on for =
>>years=20
>>building scanners and other<BR>> products<BR>>>as they did =
>>before they=20
>>made clones.<BR>></FONT></BODY></HTML>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96235 is a reply to message #96224] |
Sat, 23 February 2008 08:00 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Aaron Allen wrote:
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:47bfbc71@linux...
>> Interesting, so you're saying that any corporation with a lot of money is
>> going to be unethical and corrupt? If so, that would explain a lot...
>
> No, I'm saying that those two particular corp's have shown that money 'n'
> power is around the top of their list and they'll absolutely abuse it for
> more money 'n' power. Greed, money and power aren't necessarily hand in
> hand, but admittedly more often they are than not. Private sector, gov't or
> 3rd world regimes..... it's human trait that those who want to rise to power
> get soaked in it and want more. I don't want that kind of power, therefore I
> do not seek it. Those who do, will.
If I can help, you can send any extra money here and I'll put it to good
use.
>>> Jobs lied about how great Motorola chips were. They were turds.
>> Heh. Well, although there WERE hyped for sure, they were/are hardly turds,
>> Aaron. I'm still running a G4 laptop and a dual G5 desktop.
>
> No it's a lie. That's not ethical. There's no 'hype' or grey area here, it's
> a flat out lie perpetuated by Apple.
Your characterization of the G4 and G5 chips as "turds" is itself
hyperbole. That's an exaggeration when describing working and reasonably
fast chips, among the fastest when they first shipped.
In Apple's case, I call their claims hype because while the G5 WAS the
fastest chip when it came out, that distinction lasted only a few weeks
before it was passed again, overall, by Intel/Athlon. Apple's marketing
department is legendary for using very specific tests to "prove" a speed
advantage, such as individual Photoshop filters that worked better under
Altavec, even if other tests didn't compare so well. I'll grant you that
a lot of companies exaggerate in their advertising claims. But it's easy
enough to check these days with a visit to tech sites for more objective
test results.
> I have everything from a 1.2 up to my newest aquisition Quad Core here
> (unless you count my laptops too, then it starts with a PIII/1.0). I have
> roughly 10 computers here. They all still work, and do what I built them to
> do and well. .
Great. They aren't "turds" then. :^)
> I'm typing this post on an old athlon2800 that still kicks
> ass every single day for me. It's been on every single day for 4 years. Zero
> failures. Home rolled from parts and leftovers and upgrades. It renders
> video, it has multitrack software and a boatload of office apps to boot. Did
> I mention, zero failures? (now I'm tempting the computer Gods to kill it,
> aren't I ahahah?)
Now you've done it! ;^)
>> The G4 laptop runs a lot of apps just fine, I use it for article writing,
>> research, and 2D animation work.
>
> Shoot Jamie, I've got an old Athlon 1.2 and a 1.4 that'll do all that (and
> more.. ) and I think both are older than your G4. And, I can still get parts
> for them (as if I wanted to, but that's not my point)..... will Apple still
> sell you G4/Motorola parts if something dies, without raking your over the
> coals if at all (Also or course, as if you wanted to put more money in that
> rather than shiny'n'new) ?
I dunno, probably (isn't there some law about supporting products for a
certain number of years?) but we're digressing now. My laptop is old, it
has a G4, and it still works fine (other than the hinge, which, BTW, I
consider a design flaw, the newer Macbooks/pros have a more rugged hinge
design). The only thing I've replaced is the battery, which was easily
available and gave it new life while I await the next Macbook Pro model.
>> Not so much for music and video because I have the G5, although my wife
>> uses a slightly newer G4 laptop to completely run her business and do
>> voiceover production. My laptop has a broken hinge, so it's going to be
>> replaced when the next MacBook Pro update comes out (I'm holding out for
>> Penryn).
>
> I'm curious, platform agnostically speaking... why a laptop? Those are
> notoriously more expensive, less empowered and have yesterday's technologies
> in them not to mention the bus length / speed being slower.
The reason laptops are becoming more popular is that they are portable.
And for most tasks they are fast enough. The latest Macbooks/Pros are
probably faster than my G5 at most tasks.
In my wife's case, she moves here computer around quite a bit. It's very
convenient for her. The G4 is still fast enough for what she does.
In my case I have both, and when I get my next laptop it will share
duties with the G5, especially animation rendering. (Although the
OctoMac is VERY tempting for that.)
>> The G5 still rocks in a big way, and even though there are faster machines
>> I'm not in a big hurry to replace it. It still does what I bought it to
>> do, and does it well. I recently added more RAM to it bringing it to
>> 4.5GB, and it has room for up to 8. I also have more than 2 terrabytes of
>> HD space hanging off of it. The expandability has been great.
>
> No G5 here, and no interest in one to be honest. I got plenty of the G3's
> and G4's and I didn't like it :) There's an old saying, Fool me once shame
> on you, fool me twice shame on me.
Having moved up from a dual G4 to a dual G5 I can share that you stopped
one model too soon. Essentially, you fooled yourself without trying by
using your G3/G4 experiences to discount the G5. The G5 is a BIG step up.
> I can't talk much details about it, but suffice to say when time to spec
> some video edit systems for a certain employer I told them 8 Mac towers with
> at least Quad's in them. And 8 licenses of XP w/Bootcamp to go with 'em :)
Apparently that works great if there's some MSWindows software you still
need to run. Not such an odd thing after all, that MSWindows support,
eh? At least for people in your situation. And there are a lot of people
in your situation.
>> Granted, about a month after my G5 came out there were faster Intel/Athlon
>> chips. But it didn't make my G5 quit pulling its weight around here. :^)
>
> Nah, new is always just a day away and I've learned that the next upgrade
> just isn't necessary.
Yep. If what you buy does what you bought it for it's less likely to
become instantly obsolete.
> I kinda like the whole stability thing and cutting
> edge doesn't pay a lot of attention to that 'minor' detail. I finally bought
> myself a quad core a few days ago though and hopefully all the parts will be
> here next week. It oughta scha-weet. I'm pretty sure of this - the
> equivalent of what I bought would be at least 3x the price if it'd been an
> Apple product. Q6600, 250 GB sata, 400 GB sata, 2 GB ram, DVD+-Dual Layer
> drive, TI chipset IEEE1394, 6 USB, legacy P/S2 should I need it, built in
> dual head graphics.... rig ran me about $700. Now THAT is value dude.
Enjoy!
>>> Gates forces you as a business to buy office/OS's through each planned
>>> obsolescene upgrade.
>> If you buy into it. Or you could use Open Office, which is what I do (the
>> NeoOffice version on OSX).
>>
> as do I. I'm not paying that kind of stupid money to Bill & company - but
> this is a thread about vista sucking turned into a thread about mac being
> more ethical than MS. Sorry, I don't buy that.
That's because you're ignoring the actual criminal record Microsoft has
built up. If you step back and consider the bigger picture, you might
change your view.
I can criticize them both for deeds done. But on the scales of justice,
Microsoft's past weighs heavier, based on actual criminal prosecution
(and what was prosecuted was likely just the tip of the iceberg).
>>> Jobs tells you to think you're safe from virii as an ad campaign and
>>> tells you how Mac runs office 'just as well as a PC'. but fails to
>>> mention it's OLD version of office, years old in fact.
>> Sometimes the Mac version of Office has been ahead, sometimes the
>> MSWindows version. Doesn't matter to me because I'm not on that treadmill.
>
> Dude... office 2004 is more than a little behind don'cha think? That'd be a
> 4 year old product. Most computers don't live that long.
Mine do. :^)
The Mac version was ahead when it came out, right? It's just a word
processor/spreadsheet/presentation, what's lacking that the MSWindows
version has? It'll be ahead again when the next update comes out, right?
Any day now...
I admit that I don't follow that product line closely since I don't want
or need it.
>>> There are 60 known virii in the wild for Mac, but you won't hear about
>>> that from Jobs/Apple.
>> Ooh. 60. Wow. That's what, 1/1000th the amount on MSWindows? ;^)
>>
>> Haven't seen any here.
>
> Which is what makes it so dangerous. Mac folks think they're insulated
> completely and they are NOT. Do you have phishing/pharming protection?
Yep, common sense.
> That's another huge Mac misconception. For Jobs & company to mislead their
> users into that situation just to try to make Windows look bad is NOT
> ethical.
Whether you think OSX is more secure or just less likely to be hacked,
it does have a security advantage.
>>> Apple Ads, speaking of....PC's are cold and harsh and only good at office
>>> apps, 'eh?
>> Clearly hyperbole. Funny, though.
>
> No, clearly a lie. I find humor in the commercials as well. But a lie is a
> lie, ainnit?
That's a lie. ;^)
Advertising is built on the same sandy foundation as political
blathering. Shady logic and exaggeration. Caveat emptor.
>>> I have 2 macs at my avail at work, and several PC's. Frankly, they both
>>> tick me off from time to time but the Win boxes see more use and tick me
>>> off a whole lot less.
>> From what you said below, it sounds like your Macs are pretty old and not
>> nearly up to date. OSX 10.29? Get 10.3 at least. I'm on 10.4, it's pretty
>> solid. 10.5 is sitting here, waiting to be installed when the decks clear
>> enough to get around to it.
>
> 10.3, correct me if I'm wrong, is another paid upgrade. For a machine I
> won't use over stability problems - no thanks.
Your call.
> XP service pack 1, 2 and the coming 3 are ALL FREE. And make no mistake,
> those are just as much an overhaul as the paid for upgrade Apple wants to
> soak you for.
> That sound ethical to you guys?
Apple puts out a paid upgrade every 18 months or so. The cost is about
$100 if you shop around. I'm not complaining that they upgrade the
software, and for a reasonable price. In between all updates are free.
I don't think Microsoft's record is better in this area.
>>> Nothing like plugging in a KVM and having your Mac reach an unrecoverable
>>> error and forced shutdown because it doesn't like the KVM. Every time.
>>> But not being the latest OS I can't get support for it w/o buying some
>>> more "apple care", and Belkin had no idea what would cause it, nor my
>>> vendor.
>> Bummer.
>
> Yeah, I was totally stoked that the G4 duallie liked my Dell keyboard/mouse
> just fine... but I have dual monitors at my day gig and having a 3rd in my
> limited desk space just ain't in the plan. So I bought a decent KVM that
> every PC, even 5 year old ones, seem to like just fine. Not the Mac, it goes
> into some corrupted
> we're-shutting-down-don't-care-if-you-have-saved-your-work mode within 5
> minutes or less. Total drag. I even had that machine playing somewhat nice
> with my MS server 2k3. Oh well, foot prop now.
Again, bummer, in that specific situation. Waste of that poor
unappreciated Mac though. Send me the Mac. :^)
>>> I had been considering a Mini for personal use (with boot camp of
>>> course), but that kinda gotcha rather cinched the "think I'll pass for
>>> now" for me. MacOS-x 10.29 on dual procs, and it's a foot prop under my
>>> desk now. At least it doesn't crash that way and it's more ergonomic for
>>> my peds, heh... I get a warm fuzzy and smirk when my feet hit it :>
>> I'll be happy to store it for you. Could probably put it to good use. The
>> quicksilvers were pretty loud, though. The G5 is much, much quieter, and
>> the current Intel boxes are also pretty quiet.
>
> Yeah, Hoover's got nothing on this box (dam or vacuum cleaner, LOL)
I put my dual G4 in a closet and closed the door and could still hear
it. For the G5 I don't bother to close the door.
>>> *(*)* Apple is so much faster, Apple is so much more interesting, Apple
>>> is so much better at.... er, ....
>> Those whacky marketing types...
>
> ....are lying. On Apple's behalf, and on Apple's dime. Funny yes, honest no.
> Not Ethical.
If you're going to hold that standard for advertising, and I could
support that, then you're going to have to take on almost all
advertising, including Microsoft's. But especially drugs, cars, oil
companies and political ads.
>>> hey, it's the new and improved Apple now with INTEL hardware (IE, that's
>>> called a PC Steve-O, and no amount of backpeddling will cover the fact
>>> that you were lying through your teeth about how much faster Motorola's
>>> I'd-rather-be-in-a-cell-phone chips were over INTEL)
>> For its time the G4 didn't suck. The G5 is still a mighty chip around
>> here. Keep in mind that the current core 2 duo stuff was not out when Jobs
>> announced the switch. He switched for the then upcoming processor road
>> map, which was more attractive from Intel at the time than from IBM.
>> Turned out to be an OK choice I think, although I have yet to get one of
>> the Intel Macs.
>
> Ditto, but I hear great things about Intel Mac boxes. And frankly, I think
> he made a huge mistake not going with AMD.
> However, back on topic: is Apple an ethical company..... :)
I think James' claim was merely that Apple is more ethical than
Microsoft. Not a hard claim to defend given how low Microsoft has sunk
at times, look at the criminal record.
>>> and it's so much better than , uh.. running windows (can't say PC anymore
>>> at this point)!
>> I think you could always say PC. "Personal computer" fits any of these
>> boxes.
>
> Then why are the Apple ads saying *hi, I'm a PC... and hi, I'm a Mac* ??
> Apple's making that distinction, not me.
True. IMO they are all personal computers.
>>> You talked about MS stealing the macOS software GUI. Ok, where did Apple
>>> get their code base from for OS-X? Can't see the worm in both apples,
>>> 'eh? <-yes, that was bad pun #2.... but I am a punny guy!>
>> The code base for OSX was derived largely from NeXT, the company Steve
>> Jobs started after been booted out of Apple. I used to work for a NeXT
>> developer doing documentation and testing. Had a cool NeXT cube. Good
>> times!
>
> So, you're saying it is not BSD? Interesting......
Look into it, it's an interesting history. Apple does build on BSD,
growing out of NeXT.
>> I haven't fallen for iPods or iPhones. Yet anyway.
>
> I bet you will. iPOD's rock, but I would steer clear of the cheap seats -
> like anything else in life. I think, however, that I will not buy another
> movie from them because I don't like being locked out of being able to make
> a DVD for backup/viewing outside my computer. That sucks.
> and iTUNES has turned into a fat piece of bloated code IMO as well. I'm
> about to jump to Media Monkey I think.
>
>>
>>> I also thought that the Cinema Display was about the most beautiful
>>> display ever as far back as 4~5 years ago. on the overall though, I
>>> didn't like Apple computer kool-aid any better than MS's kool-aid.
>> Having spent some time working in development environments on multiple
>> platforms (not just Apple and Microsoft), I think both of those flavors of
>> koolaid taste odd. But overall, for the reasons I spelled out in my other
>> post, Microsoft's koolaid is worse. Apple has actually gotten better than
>> they were in the 80s/90s, IMO. I was not a fan of OS9 and before.
>
> I didn't dig ANY os that could crash with unprotected memory. BAD juju man.
> Glad they got that one dealt with.
Indeed. OS9 and before had major limitations and no amount of marketing
could get me to overlook that. OSX is much, much better.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.cm
>>
>>
>>> You're ok in my book man, so don't take any of this all personal or
>>> anything, it's really not meant that way. I haven't forgotten when I had
>>> a problem with a Mac you are the first and only dude offered and followed
>>> through to help me out. Some day I'll get a chance to repay in kind.
>>> AA
>>> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com <mailto:nobody@ishere.com>> wrote in message
>>> news:47bf218e$1@linux...
>>> >
>>> > For the record, it was what Apple did to the cloners that drove me
>>> into the
>>> > ever welcoming arms of Redmond. I couldn't afford Apple hardware, but
>>> I could
>>> > afford a Power 603e machine that was my first experience with computer
>>> audio.
>>> > Less than a year after that Apple shut down the cloners and I
>>> realized, 'Hey,
>>> > these are greedy corporate bastards just like Microsoft. And Windows
>>> hardware
>>> > is cheap and I can build my own.' Which lead me to a 400 Mhz Celeron +
>>> Paris,
>>> > and the rest is (grim, money losing, book publishing) history.
>>> >
>>> > Your story is one version. Another is that Power was a smart,
>>> talented, agile
>>> > hardware vendor who was beating the daylights out of Apple because
>>> they were
>>> > everything Apple had long since ceased to be--entrepreneurial and
>>> customer
>>> > oriented.
>>> >
>>> > TCB
>>> >
>>> > "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com <mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com>>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>"Deej" <noway@jose.net <mailto:noway@jose.net>> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com <mailto:excelsm@hotmail.com>>
>>> wrote in message
>>> >>>news:47bba823$1@linux...
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market
>>> share?
>>> >> I
>>> >>>
>>> >>>How about the time the pulled the OS licensing from PowerComputing
>>> and
>>> > UMaxx
>>> >>
>>> >>>and closed two entire companies and threw all those folks out of
>>> work.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>Deej since you mentioned PowerComputing,there are a few things that
>>> should
>>> >>be noted. As I've said, the cloners ate in to Apple's sales. The
>>> clones
>>> >>advertised mainly in Mac publications to Mac users, If they had
>>> advertised
>>> >>in PC publications and did other forms of advertising to non Mac users
>>> they
>>> >>would have grown the market. They didn't, they cherry picked Apple
>>> sales.
>>> >> One such famous incident was when PowerComputing was directly
>>> competing
>>> >>with Apple by selling 3000 clones to Apple's long time customer
>>> Lockheed
>>> >>Martin, that didn't go over to well. PowerComputing also worked a
>>> deal
>>> > with
>>> >>IBM to get the fastest PowerPC processors before Apple could, this
>>> further
>>> >>cost Apple sales.
>>> >>
>>> >>Steve Jobs went to all the cloners and tried to renegotiate the
>>> licensing
>>> >>prices, the cloners wouldn't hear of it, so Apple did not renew the
>>> licensing
>>> >>with Mac OS 8. Apple did not pull the licensing. The cloners could
>>> still
>>> >>build systems and ship them with Mac OS 7.6 installed, and bundled OS
>>> 8,
>>> >>they chose not to. PowerComputing announced after that, that they
>>> were
>>> > going
>>> >>to start building PCs, which I think they did for a short time. In
>>> the
>>> > end,
>>> >>Apple bought out PowerComputing for 100 million dollars in Apple
>>> stock.
>>> >
>>> >>I think that was pretty generous of Apple. I believe it was up to
>>> Kahng
>>> >>to take care of his workers from there.
>>> >>
>>> >>As far as UMAX, they continued on for years building scanners and
>>> other
>>> > products
>>> >>as they did before they made clones.
>>> >
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96237 is a reply to message #96217] |
Sat, 23 February 2008 08:51 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey James - now we're talking - yep, I'm with you on Gibson - pretty poor
leadership happening there in general, but that's a 3rd party developer, not
a computer/OS developer. The same is true with the other examples you cited
- they aren't the computer/OS developer with a primary motivation of selling
the computer system, and being in the position of developing, marketing and
selling the platform those apps run on to the advantage of their own
applications (MS was sued for requiring Explorer in Windows installs, but
Apple gets around this by allowing other apps, but giving preference to
their own - we've heard this from developers, not just users).
Steinberg's development on the Mac side is the same as the PC side - same
version of Nuendo and Cubase released at the same time - no lag in
development there. The fact that Nuendo and Cubase run faster on XP has to
do with the OS and how hardware drivers function on that OS as the computer
hardware is identical (in tests that are being posted now), and the core
code is identical. With v3 and 4, Steinberg went to a common base code so
there would only be minimal differences to implement for each platform, and
for each version. I guessed that many months ago and it was confirmed by
someone working with Steinberg.
PT plugins cost? Yep - it's ridiculous - it's a captive customer base so
they charge more.
Apogee: whether the stats listed by Apogee are really native latency, or
fudged for sake of marketing is an unknown I'm trying to track down, but
according to users I highly respect, they are real numbers - which is great
for users, but not so great when that's tied to Logic on the Mac only. I'm
pretty sure the only DSP happening on Apogee cards, is what RME and MOTU
implement as well - just a method of handling I/O more efficiently and
allowing routing/mixing on the card - but Logic is a native app - it isn't
mixing on the Apogee cards - it's still native, and that's where the true
driver/OS dependant latency numbers show up. If Apogee cards are running
significantly lower latency with core audio than RME or Lynx (which have
been the industry leaders for a long time), then there is something missing
for 3rd party developers.
So, as I said, Apple's moves are very much the same as Digidesign, and since
we seem to agree on Digidesign's practices not being in the best interest of
users, we should be able to agree the same on many of Apple's practices
(locking iPhone to AT&T only, etc).
You asked where these business practices functioned to the detriment of
users - that's always been my biggest beef with Apple. I really don't care
about whether business practices are viewed as "evil" by anyone as many
large companies have a dirty side to them, even if by nature of becoming
bigger than any one individual's ethics.
Dedric
On 2/23/08 1:28 AM, in article 47bfcb36$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
<excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey Gibson bought opcode and dropped PC development, what do you think about
> that? Hey where's the Mac versions of Cakewalk, sonar, Audition, Acid, Vegas,
> Sound forge, etc? What about the slow development of Steinberg products
> for Mac? Always a second class citizen.
>
> Did you ever notice that PT plugins cost more than native or VST? Hmmmm...I
> wonder why that is???
>
> One other thing I believe the apogee latency thing has to do with the DSP
> hardware on the apogee cards, not a special deal??? Not the same hardware.
>
> Someone said that Apple was evil, or just as evil as MS, I took issue with
> that.
>
> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>> On 2/22/08 11:22 PM, in article 47bfad7b$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> A lot of this is speculation, not fact. I will say over the years many
>>> companies
>>
>> Maybe, maybe not. So far we haven't found objective Mac users to report
>> anything scientifically yet. But I'm not the only one looking into this,
>> and not the only one proposing that Apple is holding back to make other
> OSX
>> apps and hardware appear inferior (and that was only one example - there
> are
>> others). Some pretty sharp and connected guys are saying this as well,
> so
>> there is more than speculation behind it - the numbers aren't adding up
>> (Nuendo/RME/Lynx aren't performing nearly as well on OSX as on XP, same
>> hardware - so either Apogee is lying about their 96k 1.6ms performance
>> stats, or Apple gave only them the keys to the kernel).
>>
>> Anyone want to loan me a dual quad G5? Seriously. I'm looking for a way
> to
>> make this testing happen objectively and accurately, and I know a few other
>> guys that are as well. If Apple is holding back, users need to know so
> they
>> don't go in expecting unrealistic performance, and why. If not, users need
>> to know which are the best performing software/hardware combos, regardless
>> of Apple/MS preferences. It's kind of a big deal to a lot of users right
>> now, where trying to prove/disprove if Microsoft is more or less evil,
>> really doesn't help us in the least.
>>
>> Dedric
>>
>>> dropped support for the Mac platform, one example was when Parsons dropped
>>> Quick Books for Mac, luckily we got that one back. Mac users have had
> to
>>> deal with this for years.
>>>
>>> Why should Apple develop for another platform when it does not benefit
> them?
>>> They are trying to grow the Mac market not the PC market! I'll remind
> you
>>> that they offered PC users special pricing, including on hardware. PC
> users
>>> were not left out in the cold. If you haven't noticed, Apple unlike MS,
>>> sells integrated hardware and software, they have a different business
> model.
>>> Yes, they use Hardware and software to push each other.
>>>
>>> By the way, if you haven't heard, anti trust cases were brought against
>>> Microsoft,
>>> these cases were adjudicated and Microsoft was found guilty. Thanks to
> Bush
>>> and friends, MS has gotten a slap on the wrist instead of a break up.
> MS
>>> is back to their old tricks.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_v._Microsoft
>>>
>>>
>>> Think what you want!
>>>
>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>> On 2/22/08 8:36 PM, in article 47bf86b2$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> What I do expect you to share is the basic idea that NEITHER of them
>>> are
>>>>>> perfect and NEITHER of them are COMPLETELY evil. They are both a mix.
>>>>>> Sometimes
>>>>>> they see a competitor and use their power to club them over the head
>>> to
>>>>> the
>>>>>> detriment of all of us. Both of them do it. One has more ability to
> do
>>> it
>>>>>> than the other.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you give me an example of Apple doing this?
>>>>
>>>> How about more than one:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Shake is a $9900 application in 1999 ($3900 render only)
>>>> 2) Apply buys it, drops the price a couple of times (OSX version less
> than
>>>> other versions), offering free double licenses for users upgrading to
> OSX.
>>>> 3) Apple discontinues Windows support for it.
>>>> 4) Fast forward to 2003, Shake is still $2999 for both OSX and Linux.
>>>> 5) Apple drops the OSX version price to $499. Linux version remains
> $2999.
>>>>
>>>> See more here for the price change details and decide for yourself:
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shake_(software)
>>>>
>>>> Just my opinion, but anytime an app is dropped from $3k to $500, selling
>>>> software as a profitable product isn't the goal.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Next:
>>>> 1) Apple buys Emagic (there's a song in this one somewhere...;-)
>>>> 2) Drops PC support for Logic promptly.
>>>> 3) Slow development ensues...then finally core audio appears
>>>> 4) Apple signs exclusive deal with Apogee for Symphony, Ensemble, etc
> for
>>>> Logic/Mac only
>>>> 5) Symphony reports lower latency and better performance than other
> apps
>>>> under core audio
>>>> 6) Speculation (no, I can't prove it - yet) is that Apple gave Apogee
> lower
>>>> level access to core audio that isn't in the SDK, thereby giving the
>>>> Apogee/Logic combo a significant edge over Digital Performer,
>>>> Nuendo/Cubase,
>>>> RME, MOTU, Digidesign, etc.
>>>> 7) Apple drops the price of Logic to $500, with additional software/etc
>>>> thrown in (imho, this is below average market value for a DAW software
> and
>>>> most likely a loss leader).
>>>> 8) Why? To sell Macs and Apogee interfaces. Logic is priced too low
> to
>>> be
>>>> a profit center - it's just a marketing tool now to expand the Mac's
>>>> position in consumer, prosumer, hobby, and beginner, lower end musician
>>>> markets, to the detriment of other 3rd party companies also developing
> for
>>>> the platform.
>>>>
>>>> In both cases, Apple is using applications to push their hardware, even
>>>> though there are competing applications, and the Microsoft argument would
>>>> suggest that using applications and exclusivity of them, and hardware,
> is
>>> a
>>>> conflict of interest for an operating system developer, much less a
>>>> computer
>>>> builder.
>>>>
>>>> Just my .02 - can't prove it any more than anyone can *prove* Microsoft
>>> is
>>>> evil. I don't like MS, but Apple isn't making friends in my end of the
>>> pro
>>>> audio world - just putting this in perspective. Btw, I'm not the only
> one
>>>> with this supposition - there are some other well respected audio people
>>> in
>>>> agreement.
>>>>
>>>> Btw - didn't post this to get deeper into an argument - just since you
> asked
>>>> for an example, and I had read the same supposition of Apple's move with
>>>> core audio from another Nuendo user just today, so might as well pass
> it
>>> on
>>>> here.
>>>>
>>>> I don't hate Apple - but I do hate exclusive deals, and lock outs that
> do
>>>> nothing but hurt the consumer by limiting options. I have yet to verify
>>>> that core audio really is faster with Apogee interfaces, so take that
> with
>>> a
>>>> grain of salt - Apogee claims they are, of course. Point is, if to get
>>> the
>>>> most out of your Mac for audio, you not only have to buy and Apogee
>>>> interface (an Apple partner), but Logic as well, and don't have the option
>>>> of running a MOTU interface, RME, Lynx, M-Audio, etc with any other
>>>> software, your are sacrificing options.
>>>>
>>>> Sounds like a text book Digidesign move to me, but it's Apple doing the
>>>> price cuts and exclusive deals to undercut the market and sell more Macs
>>> and
>>>> other Apple-partner products. If there were no Mac support from other
>>>> companies (MOTU, RME, Lynx, etc), you could call it "their product, their
>>>> market", but we are comparing operating systems and computers here, so
> that
>>>> doesn't stand. It may not be illegal (but I believe it is close), but
> it
>>> is
>>>> hurting consumers.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96239 is a reply to message #96237] |
Sat, 23 February 2008 12:08 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>Hey James - now we're talking - yep, I'm with you on Gibson - pretty poor
>leadership happening there in general, but that's a 3rd party developer,
not
>a computer/OS developer. The same is true with the other examples you cited
>- they aren't the computer/OS developer with a primary motivation of selling
>the computer system, and being in the position of developing, marketing
and
>selling the platform those apps run on to the advantage of their own
>applications (MS was sued for requiring Explorer in Windows installs, but
>Apple gets around this by allowing other apps, but giving preference to
>their own - we've heard this from developers, not just users).
>
>Steinberg's development on the Mac side is the same as the PC side - same
>version of Nuendo and Cubase released at the same time - no lag in
>development there. The fact that Nuendo and Cubase run faster on XP has
to
>do with the OS and how hardware drivers function on that OS as the computer
>hardware is identical (in tests that are being posted now), and the core
>code is identical. With v3 and 4, Steinberg went to a common base code
so
>there would only be minimal differences to implement for each platform,
and
>for each version. I guessed that many months ago and it was confirmed by
>someone working with Steinberg.
>
There was a lag for a couple of years. I believe the Mac version used an
older audio engine for a while. Now Apple is on Intel, well...
>PT plugins cost? Yep - it's ridiculous - it's a captive customer base so
>they charge more.
>
I agree, also keep in mind that, that proprietary development does cost more
money.
>Apogee: whether the stats listed by Apogee are really native latency, or
>fudged for sake of marketing is an unknown I'm trying to track down, but
>according to users I highly respect, they are real numbers - which is great
>for users, but not so great when that's tied to Logic on the Mac only.
I'm
>pretty sure the only DSP happening on Apogee cards, is what RME and MOTU
>implement as well - just a method of handling I/O more efficiently and
>allowing routing/mixing on the card - but Logic is a native app - it isn't
>mixing on the Apogee cards - it's still native, and that's where the true
>driver/OS dependant latency numbers show up. If Apogee cards are running
>significantly lower latency with core audio than RME or Lynx (which have
>been the industry leaders for a long time), then there is something missing
>for 3rd party developers.
Your making assumptions about Apple and Apogee, you don't know, and neither
do I, but it is likely the hardware. Not all hardware is created equal.
>
>So, as I said, Apple's moves are very much the same as Digidesign, and since
>we seem to agree on Digidesign's practices not being in the best interest
of
>users, we should be able to agree the same on many of Apple's practices
>(locking iPhone to AT&T only, etc).
Apple wasn't in the telecommunications business, they needed a partner to
get in the game, AT&T was the biggest in the US. There exclusive deal is
temporary, I think you might find this out tuesday???
>
>You asked where these business practices functioned to the detriment of
>users - that's always been my biggest beef with Apple. I really don't care
>about whether business practices are viewed as "evil" by anyone as many
>large companies have a dirty side to them, even if by nature of becoming
>bigger than any one individual's ethics.
>
>Dedric
Again, your making assumptions about Apple, you don't know. No I don't agree,
you can't tie Apple to Digidesign, they're not the same. Apple does support
it's other developers. Who's to say this pile isn't being leaked covertly
by Apogee's competitors? Anybody can make blind accusations.
Apple supports it's customers generally speaking. They continue to develop
their products like Logic and FCP. Generally speaking, Apple makes great
products that work with out a bunch of hassle, there is value in that, even
at what you guys consider a premium price.
>
>On 2/23/08 1:28 AM, in article 47bfcb36$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
><excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey Gibson bought opcode and dropped PC development, what do you think
about
>> that? Hey where's the Mac versions of Cakewalk, sonar, Audition, Acid,
Vegas,
>> Sound forge, etc? What about the slow development of Steinberg products
>> for Mac? Always a second class citizen.
>>
>> Did you ever notice that PT plugins cost more than native or VST? Hmmmm...I
>> wonder why that is???
>>
>> One other thing I believe the apogee latency thing has to do with the
DSP
>> hardware on the apogee cards, not a special deal??? Not the same hardware.
>>
>> Someone said that Apple was evil, or just as evil as MS, I took issue
with
>> that.
>>
>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>> On 2/22/08 11:22 PM, in article 47bfad7b$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> A lot of this is speculation, not fact. I will say over the years many
>>>> companies
>>>
>>> Maybe, maybe not. So far we haven't found objective Mac users to report
>>> anything scientifically yet. But I'm not the only one looking into this,
>>> and not the only one proposing that Apple is holding back to make other
>> OSX
>>> apps and hardware appear inferior (and that was only one example - there
>> are
>>> others). Some pretty sharp and connected guys are saying this as well,
>> so
>>> there is more than speculation behind it - the numbers aren't adding
up
>>> (Nuendo/RME/Lynx aren't performing nearly as well on OSX as on XP, same
>>> hardware - so either Apogee is lying about their 96k 1.6ms performance
>>> stats, or Apple gave only them the keys to the kernel).
>>>
>>> Anyone want to loan me a dual quad G5? Seriously. I'm looking for a
way
>> to
>>> make this testing happen objectively and accurately, and I know a few
other
>>> guys that are as well. If Apple is holding back, users need to know
so
>> they
>>> don't go in expecting unrealistic performance, and why. If not, users
need
>>> to know which are the best performing software/hardware combos, regardless
>>> of Apple/MS preferences. It's kind of a big deal to a lot of users right
>>> now, where trying to prove/disprove if Microsoft is more or less evil,
>>> really doesn't help us in the least.
>>>
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>>> dropped support for the Mac platform, one example was when Parsons dropped
>>>> Quick Books for Mac, luckily we got that one back. Mac users have had
>> to
>>>> deal with this for years.
>>>>
>>>> Why should Apple develop for another platform when it does not benefit
>> them?
>>>> They are trying to grow the Mac market not the PC market! I'll remind
>> you
>>>> that they offered PC users special pricing, including on hardware.
PC
>> users
>>>> were not left out in the cold. If you haven't noticed, Apple unlike
MS,
>>>> sells integrated hardware and software, they have a different business
>> model.
>>>> Yes, they use Hardware and software to push each other.
>>>>
>>>> By the way, if you haven't heard, anti trust cases were brought against
>>>> Microsoft,
>>>> these cases were adjudicated and Microsoft was found guilty. Thanks
to
>> Bush
>>>> and friends, MS has gotten a slap on the wrist instead of a break up.
>> MS
>>>> is back to their old tricks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_v._Microsoft
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Think what you want!
>>>>
>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 2/22/08 8:36 PM, in article 47bf86b2$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>>>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> What I do expect you to share is the basic idea that NEITHER of them
>>>> are
>>>>>>> perfect and NEITHER of them are COMPLETELY evil. They are both a
mix.
>>>>>>> Sometimes
>>>>>>> they see a competitor and use their power to club them over the head
>>>> to
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> detriment of all of us. Both of them do it. One has more ability
to
>> do
>>>> it
>>>>>>> than the other.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you give me an example of Apple doing this?
>>>>>
>>>>> How about more than one:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Shake is a $9900 application in 1999 ($3900 render only)
>>>>> 2) Apply buys it, drops the price a couple of times (OSX version less
>> than
>>>>> other versions), offering free double licenses for users upgrading
to
>> OSX.
>>>>> 3) Apple discontinues Windows support for it.
>>>>> 4) Fast forward to 2003, Shake is still $2999 for both OSX and Linux.
>>>>> 5) Apple drops the OSX version price to $499. Linux version remains
>> $2999.
>>>>>
>>>>> See more here for the price change details and decide for yourself:
>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shake_(software)
>>>>>
>>>>> Just my opinion, but anytime an app is dropped from $3k to $500, selling
>>>>> software as a profitable product isn't the goal.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Next:
>>>>> 1) Apple buys Emagic (there's a song in this one somewhere...;-)
>>>>> 2) Drops PC support for Logic promptly.
>>>>> 3) Slow development ensues...then finally core audio appears
>>>>> 4) Apple signs exclusive deal with Apogee for Symphony, Ensemble,
etc
>> for
>>>>> Logic/Mac only
>>>>> 5) Symphony reports lower latency and better performance than other
>> apps
>>>>> under core audio
>>>>> 6) Speculation (no, I can't prove it - yet) is that Apple gave Apogee
>> lower
>>>>> level access to core audio that isn't in the SDK, thereby giving the
>>>>> Apogee/Logic combo a significant edge over Digital Performer,
>>>>> Nuendo/Cubase,
>>>>> RME, MOTU, Digidesign, etc.
>>>>> 7) Apple drops the price of Logic to $500, with additional software/etc
>>>>> thrown in (imho, this is below average market value for a DAW software
>> and
>>>>> most likely a loss leader).
>>>>> 8) Why? To sell Macs and Apogee interfaces. Logic is priced too
low
>> to
>>>> be
>>>>> a profit center - it's just a marketing tool now to expand the Mac's
>>>>> position in consumer, prosumer, hobby, and beginner, lower end musician
>>>>> markets, to the detriment of other 3rd party companies also developing
>> for
>>>>> the platform.
>>>>>
>>>>> In both cases, Apple is using applications to push their hardware,
even
>>>>> though there are competing applications, and the Microsoft argument
would
>>>>> suggest that using applications and exclusivity of them, and hardware,
>> is
>>>> a
>>>>> conflict of interest for an operating system developer, much less a
>>>>> computer
>>>>> builder.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just my .02 - can't prove it any more than anyone can *prove* Microsoft
>>>> is
>>>>> evil. I don't like MS, but Apple isn't making friends in my end of
the
>>>> pro
>>>>> audio world - just putting this in perspective. Btw, I'm not the only
>> one
>>>>> with this supposition - there are some other well respected audio people
>>>> in
>>>>> agreement.
>>>>>
>>>>> Btw - didn't post this to get deeper into an argument - just since
you
>> asked
>>>>> for an example, and I had read the same supposition of Apple's move
with
>>>>> core audio from another Nuendo user just today, so might as well pass
>> it
>>>> on
>>>>> here.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't hate Apple - but I do hate exclusive deals, and lock outs that
>> do
>>>>> nothing but hurt the consumer by limiting options. I have yet to verify
>>>>> that core audio really is faster with Apogee interfaces, so take that
>> with
>>>> a
>>>>> grain of salt - Apogee claims they are, of course. Point is, if to
get
>>>> the
>>>>> most out of your Mac for audio, you not only have to buy and Apogee
>>>>> interface (an Apple partner), but Logic as well, and don't have the
option
>>>>> of running a MOTU interface, RME, Lynx, M-Audio, etc with any other
>>>>> software, your are sacrificing options.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds like a text book Digidesign move to me, but it's Apple doing
the
>>>>> price cuts and exclusive deals to undercut the market and sell more
Macs
>>>> and
>>>>> other Apple-partner products. If there were no Mac support from other
>>>>> companies (MOTU, RME, Lynx, etc), you could call it "their product,
their
>>>>> market", but we are comparing operating systems and computers here,
so
>> that
>>>>> doesn't stand. It may not be illegal (but I believe it is close),
but
>> it
>>>> is
>>>>> hurting consumers.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96243 is a reply to message #96239] |
Sat, 23 February 2008 11:25 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:47c06f32$1@linux...
>>PT plugins cost? Yep - it's ridiculous - it's a captive customer base so
>>they charge more.
>>
> I agree, also keep in mind that, that proprietary development does cost
> more
> money.
That's what Digi claims, but in truth it doesn't cost more money - it costs
the same. The
dsp design is the significant portion of any plugin, not the interface to
the processor.
Digi is just using it as an excuse. It's not a new one though - that's been
the case in the tech
industry for years - proprietary formats (although the Motorola dsps Digi
uses are as commonplace
and bland as it gets), do garner higher prices, regardless of development
time.
> Your making assumptions about Apple and Apogee, you don't know, and
> neither
> do I, but it is likely the hardware. Not all hardware is created equal.
Not as much of an assumption as you are guessing. No, Apogee's hardware
isn't going to offload
native mixing, plugin dsp or disk streaming from Logic any more than any
other audio interface. I do know that for a fact.
And that is what we are talking about: latency to VSTi's, plugins, mixing
load, etc - round trip in and out of the native app. Even TDM doesn't do
that for "native" plugins - only for TDM plugins that run on the hardware
(as Paris' EQ, comps, etc did). Apogee's hardware doesn't do any offloading
of native mixing and plugin processing. AU plugins still run native to the
Mac cpu. Apogee's system is just an I/O card like any other (a good one no
doubt, but no different in terms of native interface to drivers, and the
native app than RME, MOTU, etc).
Check the plugin reports here:
http://www.apogeedigital.com/products/symphony_performance.p hp
These are native plugins. If anyone has more details, I'm all ears. The
reason claimed that Apogee is getting higher plugin counts with Symphony
than other hardware would be it's implementation with core audio (I would
like to know what they compared to, but it's probably RME or MOTU). Since
Apogee is new to the interface driver game, and initial performance was
quite poor compared to RME, etc, it isn't much of an assumption that they
most likely got help from Apple to boost their performance past hardware
they weren't competing with before (and probably hired some more savvy
programmers too - but remember, RME (and Lynx on the PC side) have led the
performance marks for years - it isn't likely Apogee would just jump into
the game and all of a sudden deliver a much faster core audio implementation
when RME has had more time with it and much more driver experience in
general, unless RME etc didn't know something about core audio that Apogee
does.
No, this isn't coming from Apogee's competitors. It's coming from guys who
build DAWs, run high end systems, etc.
You might be surprised at how little stake in this these guys have, and I
have (I'm personally just trying to find out if I would be wasting my time
moving to a Mac down the road, or if performance really is comparable to a
WinXP system). It's also coming from my own knowledge of this industry
after being involved in it for close to 20 years now, and having been a
former hardware/software developer, with a strong background in digital
audio, dsp, etc. To the outside observer, Apple (and many manufacturers)
make their products appear to function almost "magically", and that's fine,
but it isn't the real technical story. The latter is what gains us the last
10-15% performance and reliability when comparing hardware and software.
The former is just fun to talk about.
Regards,
Dedric
>
>
>>
>>So, as I said, Apple's moves are very much the same as Digidesign, and
>>since
>>we seem to agree on Digidesign's practices not being in the best interest
> of
>>users, we should be able to agree the same on many of Apple's practices
>>(locking iPhone to AT&T only, etc).
>
> Apple wasn't in the telecommunications business, they needed a partner to
> get in the game, AT&T was the biggest in the US. There exclusive deal is
> temporary, I think you might find this out tuesday???
>>
>>You asked where these business practices functioned to the detriment of
>>users - that's always been my biggest beef with Apple. I really don't
>>care
>>about whether business practices are viewed as "evil" by anyone as many
>>large companies have a dirty side to them, even if by nature of becoming
>>bigger than any one individual's ethics.
>>
>>Dedric
>
> Again, your making assumptions about Apple, you don't know. No I don't
> agree,
> you can't tie Apple to Digidesign, they're not the same. Apple does
> support
> it's other developers. Who's to say this pile isn't being leaked covertly
> by Apogee's competitors? Anybody can make blind accusations.
>
> Apple supports it's customers generally speaking. They continue to
> develop
> their products like Logic and FCP. Generally speaking, Apple makes great
> products that work with out a bunch of hassle, there is value in that,
> even
> at what you guys consider a premium price.
>
>>
>>On 2/23/08 1:28 AM, in article 47bfcb36$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>><excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hey Gibson bought opcode and dropped PC development, what do you think
> about
>>> that? Hey where's the Mac versions of Cakewalk, sonar, Audition, Acid,
> Vegas,
>>> Sound forge, etc? What about the slow development of Steinberg products
>>> for Mac? Always a second class citizen.
>>>
>>> Did you ever notice that PT plugins cost more than native or VST?
>>> Hmmmm...I
>>> wonder why that is???
>>>
>>> One other thing I believe the apogee latency thing has to do with the
> DSP
>>> hardware on the apogee cards, not a special deal??? Not the same
>>> hardware.
>>>
>>> Someone said that Apple was evil, or just as evil as MS, I took issue
> with
>>> that.
>>>
>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>> On 2/22/08 11:22 PM, in article 47bfad7b$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A lot of this is speculation, not fact. I will say over the years
>>>>> many
>>>>> companies
>>>>
>>>> Maybe, maybe not. So far we haven't found objective Mac users to
>>>> report
>>>> anything scientifically yet. But I'm not the only one looking into
>>>> this,
>>>> and not the only one proposing that Apple is holding back to make other
>>> OSX
>>>> apps and hardware appear inferior (and that was only one example -
>>>> there
>>> are
>>>> others). Some pretty sharp and connected guys are saying this as well,
>>> so
>>>> there is more than speculation behind it - the numbers aren't adding
> up
>>>> (Nuendo/RME/Lynx aren't performing nearly as well on OSX as on XP, same
>>>> hardware - so either Apogee is lying about their 96k 1.6ms performance
>>>> stats, or Apple gave only them the keys to the kernel).
>>>>
>>>> Anyone want to loan me a dual quad G5? Seriously. I'm looking for a
> way
>>> to
>>>> make this testing happen objectively and accurately, and I know a few
> other
>>>> guys that are as well. If Apple is holding back, users need to know
> so
>>> they
>>>> don't go in expecting unrealistic performance, and why. If not, users
> need
>>>> to know which are the best performing software/hardware combos,
>>>> regardless
>>>> of Apple/MS preferences. It's kind of a big deal to a lot of users
>>>> right
>>>> now, where trying to prove/disprove if Microsoft is more or less evil,
>>>> really doesn't help us in the least.
>>>>
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>>> dropped support for the Mac platform, one example was when Parsons
>>>>> dropped
>>>>> Quick Books for Mac, luckily we got that one back. Mac users have had
>>> to
>>>>> deal with this for years.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why should Apple develop for another platform when it does not benefit
>>> them?
>>>>> They are trying to grow the Mac market not the PC market! I'll remind
>>> you
>>>>> that they offered PC users special pricing, including on hardware.
> PC
>>> users
>>>>> were not left out in the cold. If you haven't noticed, Apple unlike
> MS,
>>>>> sells integrated hardware and software, they have a different business
>>> model.
>>>>> Yes, they use Hardware and software to push each other.
>>>>>
>>>>> By the way, if you haven't heard, anti trust cases were brought
>>>>> against
>>>>> Microsoft,
>>>>> these cases were adjudicated and Microsoft was found guilty. Thanks
> to
>>> Bush
>>>>> and friends, MS has gotten a slap on the wrist instead of a break up.
>>> MS
>>>>> is back to their old tricks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft
>>>>>
>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_v._Microsoft
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Think what you want!
>>>>>
>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/22/08 8:36 PM, in article 47bf86b2$1@linux, "James McCloskey"
>>>>>> <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> What I do expect you to share is the basic idea that NEITHER of
>>>>>>>> them
>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> perfect and NEITHER of them are COMPLETELY evil. They are both a
> mix.
>>>>>>>> Sometimes
>>>>>>>> they see a competitor and use their power to club them over the
>>>>>>>> head
>>>>> to
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> detriment of all of us. Both of them do it. One has more ability
> to
>>> do
>>>>> it
>>>>>>>> than the other.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you give me an example of Apple doing this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about more than one:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Shake is a $9900 application in 1999 ($3900 render only)
>>>>>> 2) Apply buys it, drops the price a couple of times (OSX version
>>>>>> less
>>> than
>>>>>> other versions), offering free double licenses for users upgrading
> to
>>> OSX.
>>>>>> 3) Apple discontinues Windows support for it.
>>>>>> 4) Fast forward to 2003, Shake is still $2999 for both OSX and
>>>>>> Linux.
>>>>>> 5) Apple drops the OSX version price to $499. Linux version remains
>>> $2999.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See more here for the price change details and decide for yourself:
>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shake_(software)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just my opinion, but anytime an app is dropped from $3k to $500,
>>>>>> selling
>>>>>> software as a profitable product isn't the goal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Next:
>>>>>> 1) Apple buys Emagic (there's a song in this one somewhere...;-)
>>>>>> 2) Drops PC support for Logic promptly.
>>>>>> 3) Slow development ensues...then finally core audio appears
>>>>>> 4) Apple signs exclusive deal with Apogee for Symphony, Ensemble,
> etc
>>> for
>>>>>> Logic/Mac only
>>>>>> 5) Symphony reports lower latency and better performance than other
>>> apps
>>>>>> under core audio
>>>>>> 6) Speculation (no, I can't prove it - yet) is that Apple gave
>>>>>> Apogee
>>> lower
>>>>>> level access to core audio that isn't in the SDK, thereby giving the
>>>>>> Apogee/Logic combo a significant edge over Digital Performer,
>>>>>> Nuendo/Cubase,
>>>>>> RME, MOTU, Digidesign, etc.
>>>>>> 7) Apple drops the price of Logic to $500, with additional
>>>>>> software/etc
>>>>>> thrown in (imho, this is below average market value for a DAW
>>>>>> software
>>> and
>>>>>> most likely a loss leader).
>>>>>> 8) Why? To sell Macs and Apogee interfaces. Logic is priced too
> low
>>> to
>>>>> be
>>>>>> a profit center - it's just a marketing tool now to expand the Mac's
>>>>>> position in consumer, prosumer, hobby, and beginner, lower end
>>>>>> musician
>>>>>> markets, to the detriment of other 3rd party companies also
>>>>>> developing
>>> for
>>>>>> the platform.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In both cases, Apple is using applications to push their hardware,
> even
>>>>>> though there are competing applications, and the Microsoft argument
> would
>>>>>> suggest that using applications and exclusivity of them, and
>>>>>> hardware,
>>> is
>>>>> a
>>>>>> conflict of interest for an operating system developer, much less a
>>>>>> computer
>>>>>> builder.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just my .02 - can't prove it any more than anyone can *prove*
>>>>>> Microsoft
>>>>> is
>>>>>> evil. I don't like MS, but Apple isn't making friends in my end of
> the
>>>>> pro
>>>>>> audio world - just putting this in perspective. Btw, I'm not the
>>>>>> only
>>> one
>>>>>> with this supposition - there are some other well respected audio
>>>>>> people
>>>>> in
>>>>>> agreement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Btw - didn't post this to get deeper into an argument - just since
> you
>>> asked
>>>>>> for an example, and I had read the same supposition of Apple's move
> with
>>>>>> core audio from another Nuendo user just today, so might as well pass
>>> it
>>>>> on
>>>>>> here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't hate Apple - but I do hate exclusive deals, and lock outs
>>>>>> that
>>> do
>>>>>> nothing but hurt the consumer by limiting options. I have yet to
>>>>>> verify
>>>>>> that core audio really is faster with Apogee interfaces, so take that
>>> with
>>>>> a
>>>>>> grain of salt - Apogee claims they are, of course. Point is, if to
> get
>>>>> the
>>>>>> most out of your Mac for audio, you not only have to buy and Apogee
>>>>>> interface (an Apple partner), but Logic as well, and don't have the
> option
>>>>>> of running a MOTU interface, RME, Lynx, M-Audio, etc with any other
>>>>>> software, your are sacrificing options.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds like a text book Digidesign move to me, but it's Apple doing
> the
>>>>>> price cuts and exclusive deals to undercut the market and sell more
> Macs
>>>>> and
>>>>>> other Apple-partner products. If there were no Mac support from
>>>>>> other
>>>>>> companies (MOTU, RME, Lynx, etc), you could call it "their product,
> their
>>>>>> market", but we are comparing operating systems and computers here,
> so
>>> that
>>>>>> doesn't stand. It may not be illegal (but I believe it is close),
> but
>>> it
>>>>> is
>>>>>> hurting consumers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96250 is a reply to message #96097] |
Sat, 23 February 2008 14:05 |
Bill L
Messages: 766
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
What the hell is evil about giving away product to gain market share. I
bet if you were on the receiving end you wouldn't call it evil. It's
just business. Ever been at a cosmetic counter with your gal? The shit
they give away is unbelievable - I wish to hell Apple or MS would pile
it on like that to me. 'Course the markup on cosmetics, man, that's true
evil, but the ladies don't complain, so suck it up. This kind of ranting
is juvenile. They're just computers, right?
Kim wrote:
> Dude, all I'm saying is that we have two evil companies, and one has more
> money, hence power, than the other. Hence the one with more power obviously
> is in a better position to do all this evil stuff. Apple have less examples
> of questionable business practises, yes, but they have a smaller budget so
> what do you expect?
>
> Why does M$ need yahoo? Why did Apple need any of a number of companies they
> have absorbed? Why does society think we need to grow all the time when the
> size of the planet has been fairly stable since its existence? Got me stuffed.
>
> Like I said I don't really want to get into this.
>
> Cheers,
> Kim.
>
> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market share?
> I
>> have seen Apple do some things strait out of the MS play book, but it's
> not
>> vary often.
>>
>> Somebody vary close to me was an executive at a software company (N) and
>> was over their HR department. MS was hiring away (N) top software engineers
>> by giving them 1 to 3 million dollar starting bonuses, (bribes). They hired
>> way (N) intellectual technology to work on IE, and they gave IE away for
>> free to drive (N) out of business. How many times have you heard of Apple
>> stomping their competition to death? How many times have you heard of Apple
>> coming in to a market and giving products away for free in order to drive
>> their competition out of business? How many times have you heard of Apple
>> threatening to pull all products from a VAR for installing a competing software
>> product on a system? To say that they are the same is not true. MS copies
>> from, steals from or buys out from their competition at their price, and
>> if that doesn't work they crush their competition, they almost never play
>> ethically. When it comes to ethics and business practices these companies
>> are not even close.
>>
>> Why does MS need Yahoo so bad? Isn't MSN and all their products good enough?
>> Why must they do a hostile take over of Yahoo? It will be interesting
> to
>> see how many products MS gives away for free if they get Yahoo. It's not
>> about competition, it's about conquering. MS must control all. It's an
>> ego trip for them.
>>
>> http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080220/D8UTN3800.html
>>
>>
>> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bottom line, MS Vista sucks and so do their business practices.
>>> Dude, I don't really want to get into this, but the fine print reads that
>>> pretty much everybody agrees with you on that. What they don't agree on
>> is
>>> your claim that Apple aren't similar.
>>>
>>> Yes, the latest OSX is much nicer than Vista. It's plausible that Apple's
>>> business practices are not quite as bad as M$. It's very highly plausible
>>> that this is because they don't have a monopoly with which to exercise
> that
>>> power.
>>>
>>> Most people I know agrees that M$ and Apple both act extremely suspiciously
>>> whenever they get the chance, with M$ having the upper hand because they
>>> have the upper hand in muscle. How you can claim Apple have never tried
>> to
>>> buy market share I just don't get.
>>>
>>> Just because one company is very evil doesn't mean you are forced to become
>>> blind to the evils of the other. Most people on this group see evils in
>> both.
>>> I have seen you criticise Apple, but it's very very rare. They do a long
>>> more wrong IMHO than you give them credit for, and claiming they don't
> buy
>>> market share, well...
>>>
>>> <rant off>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Kim.
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96255 is a reply to message #96250] |
Sun, 24 February 2008 01:52 |
dc[3]
Messages: 895
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I think what they were getting at is using one's market share and
financial resources to give things away that smaller companies
simply cannot afford to match.
Imagine you are Vendor A and you negotiated a contract to supply 200
vehicles to a school district. You give them a great price, they like
the cars, everything looks good.
One problem: GM comes in an gives the vehicles away to your client
for PR and to drive you out of business. Vendor A goes BK.
Think there will be any more free cars? Why exactly did all the
owners and employees of Vendor A deserve to lose their jobs?
I would say this is evil and anyone who falls for it is cutting off
their nose to spite their face.
DC
Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>What the hell is evil about giving away product to gain market share. I
>bet if you were on the receiving end you wouldn't call it evil. It's
>just business. Ever been at a cosmetic counter with your gal? The shit
>they give away is unbelievable - I wish to hell Apple or MS would pile
>it on like that to me. 'Course the markup on cosmetics, man, that's true
>evil, but the ladies don't complain, so suck it up. This kind of ranting
>is juvenile. They're just computers, right?
>
>Kim wrote:
>> Dude, all I'm saying is that we have two evil companies, and one has more
>> money, hence power, than the other. Hence the one with more power obviously
>> is in a better position to do all this evil stuff. Apple have less examples
>> of questionable business practises, yes, but they have a smaller budget
so
>> what do you expect?
>>
>> Why does M$ need yahoo? Why did Apple need any of a number of companies
they
>> have absorbed? Why does society think we need to grow all the time when
the
>> size of the planet has been fairly stable since its existence? Got me
stuffed.
>>
>> Like I said I don't really want to get into this.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Kim.
>>
>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market share?
>> I
>>> have seen Apple do some things strait out of the MS play book, but it's
>> not
>>> vary often.
>>>
>>> Somebody vary close to me was an executive at a software company (N)
and
>>> was over their HR department. MS was hiring away (N) top software engineers
>>> by giving them 1 to 3 million dollar starting bonuses, (bribes). They
hired
>>> way (N) intellectual technology to work on IE, and they gave IE away
for
>>> free to drive (N) out of business. How many times have you heard of
Apple
>>> stomping their competition to death? How many times have you heard of
Apple
>>> coming in to a market and giving products away for free in order to drive
>>> their competition out of business? How many times have you heard of
Apple
>>> threatening to pull all products from a VAR for installing a competing
software
>>> product on a system? To say that they are the same is not true. MS
copies
>>> from, steals from or buys out from their competition at their price,
and
>>> if that doesn't work they crush their competition, they almost never
play
>>> ethically. When it comes to ethics and business practices these companies
>>> are not even close.
>>>
>>> Why does MS need Yahoo so bad? Isn't MSN and all their products good
enough?
>>> Why must they do a hostile take over of Yahoo? It will be interesting
>> to
>>> see how many products MS gives away for free if they get Yahoo. It's
not
>>> about competition, it's about conquering. MS must control all. It's
an
>>> ego trip for them.
>>>
>>> http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080220/D8UTN3800.html
>>>
>>>
>>> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Bottom line, MS Vista sucks and so do their business practices.
>>>> Dude, I don't really want to get into this, but the fine print reads
that
>>>> pretty much everybody agrees with you on that. What they don't agree
on
>>> is
>>>> your claim that Apple aren't similar.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, the latest OSX is much nicer than Vista. It's plausible that Apple's
>>>> business practices are not quite as bad as M$. It's very highly plausible
>>>> that this is because they don't have a monopoly with which to exercise
>> that
>>>> power.
>>>>
>>>> Most people I know agrees that M$ and Apple both act extremely suspiciously
>>>> whenever they get the chance, with M$ having the upper hand because
they
>>>> have the upper hand in muscle. How you can claim Apple have never tried
>>> to
>>>> buy market share I just don't get.
>>>>
>>>> Just because one company is very evil doesn't mean you are forced to
become
>>>> blind to the evils of the other. Most people on this group see evils
in
>>> both.
>>>> I have seen you criticise Apple, but it's very very rare. They do a
long
>>>> more wrong IMHO than you give them credit for, and claiming they don't
>> buy
>>>> market share, well...
>>>>
>>>> <rant off>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Kim.
>>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: vista where are we now ? [message #96278 is a reply to message #96250] |
Mon, 25 February 2008 12:43 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>What the hell is evil about giving away product to gain market share. I
>bet if you were on the receiving end you wouldn't call it evil. It's
>just business. Ever been at a cosmetic counter with your gal? The shit
>they give away is unbelievable - I wish to hell Apple or MS would pile
>it on like that to me. 'Course the markup on cosmetics, man, that's true
>evil, but the ladies don't complain, so suck it up. This kind of ranting
>is juvenile. They're just computers, right?
>
This is an over-simplification of the situation. MS did not give away a
IE as a promotion, they gave IE away to put Netscape out of business. They
also threaten to pull MS products and licensing from any builder that stripped
out IE and Installed Netscape. MS also tried to imbed IE in to the OEM version
of Windows so that it would be hard to strip out. This is only one example
of MS tactics with one company.
There is nothing wrong with giving away something for free with a purchase
or giving something away for a time as a promotion.
This thread is on the general NG.
>Kim wrote:
>> Dude, all I'm saying is that we have two evil companies, and one has more
>> money, hence power, than the other. Hence the one with more power obviously
>> is in a better position to do all this evil stuff. Apple have less examples
>> of questionable business practises, yes, but they have a smaller budget
so
>> what do you expect?
>>
>> Why does M$ need yahoo? Why did Apple need any of a number of companies
they
>> have absorbed? Why does society think we need to grow all the time when
the
>> size of the planet has been fairly stable since its existence? Got me
stuffed.
>>
>> Like I said I don't really want to get into this.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Kim.
>>
>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Ok, can you give me a legitimate example of Apple buying market share?
>> I
>>> have seen Apple do some things strait out of the MS play book, but it's
>> not
>>> vary often.
>>>
>>> Somebody vary close to me was an executive at a software company (N)
and
>>> was over their HR department. MS was hiring away (N) top software engineers
>>> by giving them 1 to 3 million dollar starting bonuses, (bribes). They
hired
>>> way (N) intellectual technology to work on IE, and they gave IE away
for
>>> free to drive (N) out of business. How many times have you heard of
Apple
>>> stomping their competition to death? How many times have you heard of
Apple
>>> coming in to a market and giving products away for free in order to drive
>>> their competition out of business? How many times have you heard of
Apple
>>> threatening to pull all products from a VAR for installing a competing
software
>>> product on a system? To say that they are the same is not true. MS
copies
>>> from, steals from or buys out from their competition at their price,
and
>>> if that doesn't work they crush their competition, they almost never
play
>>> ethically. When it comes to ethics and business practices these companies
>>> are not even close.
>>>
>>> Why does MS need Yahoo so bad? Isn't MSN and all their products good
enough?
>>> Why must they do a hostile take over of Yahoo? It will be interesting
>> to
>>> see how many products MS gives away for free if they get Yahoo. It's
not
>>> about competition, it's about conquering. MS must control all. It's
an
>>> ego trip for them.
>>>
>>> http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080220/D8UTN3800.html
>>>
>>>
>>> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Bottom line, MS Vista sucks and so do their business practices.
>>>> Dude, I don't really want to get into this, but the fine print reads
that
>>>> pretty much everybody agrees with you on that. What they don't agree
on
>>> is
>>>> your claim that Apple aren't similar.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, the latest OSX is much nicer than Vista. It's plausible that Apple's
>>>> business practices are not quite as bad as M$. It's very highly plausible
>>>> that this is because they don't have a monopoly with which to exercise
>> that
>>>> power.
>>>>
>>>> Most people I know agrees that M$ and Apple both act extremely suspiciously
>>>> whenever they get the chance, with M$ having the upper hand because
they
>>>> have the upper hand in muscle. How you can claim Apple have never tried
>>> to
>>>> buy market share I just don't get.
>>>>
>>>> Just because one company is very evil doesn't mean you are forced to
become
>>>> blind to the evils of the other. Most people on this group see evils
in
>>> both.
>>>> I have seen you criticise Apple, but it's very very rare. They do a
long
>>>> more wrong IMHO than you give them credit for, and claiming they don't
>> buy
>>>> market share, well...
>>>>
>>>> <rant off>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Kim.
>>
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Dec 21 00:03:53 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01686 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
