Main Menu

Rhapsody 5.6 what's the difference

Started by brams, October 16, 2006, 09:49:18 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

RacerX

From the people I talked to at Apple from before the Intel Macs release, after their release and finally after Boot Camp was finally released... Apple wanted no part of Windows running natively on Macs, and they only undid what they were using to stop Windows from installing after someone came up with a method that when done right would let you install Windows and when done wrong killed your system.

So no, running Windows natively wasn't part of Apple's original plan. Parallels is currently the system that Apple pushes as their preferred way of running Windows apps on Macs.

But lets run down the reasons why this is the worst thing Apple is currently facing (and why they tried to avoid it).

First, the switchers. As I've already pointed out, even with Apple's great sales numbers, Mac OS X has stopped increasing in its usage according to a number of surveys. Why is this? Because switchers aren't actually switching.

In a dual boot system, it is a pain to move back an forth between operating systems... and people are more likely to stick with what they know rather than what is better. Plus they'll be less incline to learn the new system. Windows on a Mac stops switchers from really switching.

Why is this a bad thing? Isn't Apple a hardware company?

It is bad because Apple depends on customer loyalty. And if you aren't hooked on Mac OS X, then there is nothing to stop you from buying some other PC in your next purchase.

Second, the developers. With Windows running on Macs, why port their apps to the Mac platform? Just tell people to install Windows and run the apps that way.

That is what is happening with games now... and normal apps will soon follow. Once applications start disappearing from the platform, users will follow. No apps, no users, no more Mac OS X.


The simple fact of the matter is that people are lazy. If they don't have to learn something new, they won't. If they don't have to support multiple platforms, they won't. With Windows running side by side with Mac OS X, switchers (and gamers) are spending most (if not all) of their time in Windows. And with Windows running side by side with Mac OS X, developers can tell people to just boot Windows.

What many people don't know is that what has been holding Linux back from becoming a great platform is the fact that it has been running on the same systems as Windows. They have a hard time getting people to make it their only platform, and they have a really hard time getting developers to take the platform seriously.

We Mac users are about to face the same thing... and Apple knows it.


We can even go back to the early days of Mac OS X... many people didn't boot into Mac OS X for one thing and back into Mac OS 9 for another... the stayed in one because it was too much trouble to keep rebooting. The point of Classic was to keep people in Mac OS X, same with Parallels. But with Boot Camp you don't have Mac OS X running while Windows is running.

Out of sight, out of mind.

You bring up games... I had a number of titles that were Mac OS 9 only, and for quite some time my iMac was always in Mac OS 9 because of that.

What eventually made me stop booting Mac OS 9? Ghost Recon (and ports of some of my other favorite games).



The problem is that the community isn't aware of the impending doom that is awaiting us. You are happy because you got what you wanted (games on your MacBook Pro) but you don't realize that by getting what you wanted you will also lose the Mac platform.

This is a true case of "careful what you wish for, you might just get it."

You're happy now, I wonder if you'll be feeling the same way five or so years from now. Your games are coming at a pretty steep price. :shock:

brams

Hmm you rise some very good points there, that I had not considered.

Quote from: "Soap Box Racer ;-)"Second, the developers. With Windows running on Macs, why port their apps to the Mac platform? Just tell people to install Windows and run the apps that way.

That is what is happening with games now... and normal apps will soon follow. Once applications start disappearing from the platform, users will follow. No apps, no users, no more Mac OS X.

That one had dawned on me, I'd also thought that perhaps conversely people would boot OS X, see it was better and on the their next SW purchase buy the OS X version but the thing about booting and rebooting into Windows and X is a pain.

For me I actually have Windows 2000 installed on my MacBook Pro and that is only for games, It's also handy to have for upgrading firmware for some of the stuff I own like Digi cams etc.  I also use it for some of the stuff I work with (training apps that kind of thing),  But I only boot it once a week.

Quote from: "RacerX"This is a true case of "careful what you wish for, you might just get it."

- Cue spooky music - I imagine visions of Pin Head from Hell Rasier, which is where I belive you got that line from?

Quote from: "RacerX"You're happy now, I wonder if you'll be feeling the same way five or so years from now. Your games are coming at a pretty steep price. Shocked

Are you suggesting that for Macs or even perhaps Apple Computer that in 5 years it will all be over 'cos they switched to Intel? are you saying we should all take Windows off our Macintels?

Personally for me I think it was a step backwards going to x86, I've lived with the assertion rightly or wrongly (I'm easy to brainwash) that RISC is was better for various reasons, this can be seen from the likes of all the decent workstations and some degree various CRAY which used DEC Alpha AXP's.  I realised the Intel and AMD Hammer CPU's achieve what they due by brute force and little else, programming friends inform that PPC is better for some reason.

I was gutted when I read Intel CPU's where going to appear in Mac but I can understand why IBM threw in the towel (economies of scale/size of market) & Apple who needed better than what IBM had planned.  Thus I got over it.

The reason I can't believe that Apple did not plan to put Windows on the Macintel was that it was obvious it was going to happen one day with or without Apples blessing and probably sooner rather than later.

All these gaint corporations fail miserably when they try to lock things up, it throws down the gauntlet and people pick up the challenge just to show they're hacking prowess and just for the hell of it.  I can't imagine Apple thought they'd be able to lock Windows out of the equation.  Hollywood tried to lock DVD's up using CSS and that got hacked as you know by a 16 year old Finnish student.
NeXTcube Turbo Dimension, NeXTstation Turbo Color, MP2100, Q840av, Q650, WS G4 500, Pismo G4 550, SGI Octane R12K MXE, BeBox 133.

RacerX

Windows wasn't able to run on EFI based systems that weren't specifically set up to support it. Apple thought that people killing their systems while attempting to hack them would be enough of a deterrent... but they weren't expecting that people would start collecting prize money for successfully hacking the system.


But yes, Windows running side by side on Macs with Mac OS X could very well place Mac OS X in the same position as NEXTSTEP, OPENSTEP, Rhapsody, IRIX and the Be OS are in today... great operating systems without current applications.

The current hardware sales are mainly the iPod halo effect... Apple products are a fad right now. But that won't last, and Apple knows this. Their main goal was to hook people on Mac OS X... but most of the people they had hoped to hook aren't even using it now.


Frankly, if I was the head of Apple I would have locked down the platform much better. The reason for not doing a better job was Intel.

Apple is not (and will not be) Intel's biggest customer. What Apple brings to the table (and why Intel has wanted Apple as a customer for about 10 years now) is their ability to implement new technologies.

PC makers have to wait for Windows to support hardware, and Microsoft doesn't support hardware that isn't shipping on PCs... USB was caught in this trap for almost 4 years before Apple single handedly pushed it into being a standard. Intel gives Apple preferential treatment because Apple can showcase Intel technology that other PC makers won't.


But Apple never wanted to go head to head with Windows. And with Macs booting Windows now, that is exactly what has happened.

It may look really nice right now (Apple reporting record profits), but the slide has started... and it'll be interesting to see what Apple plans on doing to try to stop it.

As it stands, odds are that many of those people who bought Macs are not going to buy them again. They missed what makes Macs special, so they appeared to be little more than a luxury PC to most of them. Something to show off as a status symbol.

brams

Quote from: "RacerX"Windows wasn't able to run on EFI based systems that weren't specifically set up to support it. Apple thought that people killing their systems while attempting to hack them would be enough of a deterrent... but they weren't expecting that people would start collecting prize money for successfully hacking the system.


But yes, Windows running side by side on Macs with Mac OS X could very well place Mac OS X in the same position as NEXTSTEP, OPENSTEP, Rhapsody, IRIX and the Be OS are in today... great operating systems without current applications.

The current hardware sales are mainly the iPod halo effect... Apple products are a fad right now. But that won't last, and Apple knows this. Their main goal was to hook people on Mac OS X... but most of the people they had hoped to hook aren't even using it now.

Frankly, if I was the head of Apple I would have locked down the platform much better. The reason for not doing a better job was Intel.

Apple is not (and will not be) Intel's biggest customer. What Apple brings to the table (and why Intel has wanted Apple as a customer for about 10 years now) is their ability to implement new technologies.

PC makers have to wait for Windows to support hardware, and Microsoft doesn't support hardware that isn't shipping on PCs... USB was caught in this trap for almost 4 years before Apple single handedly pushed it into being a standard. Intel gives Apple preferential treatment because Apple can showcase Intel technology that other PC makers won't.

But Apple never wanted to go head to head with Windows. And with Macs booting Windows now, that is exactly what has happened.

It may look really nice right now (Apple reporting record profits), but the slide has started... and it'll be interesting to see what Apple plans on doing to try to stop it.

As it stands, odds are that many of those people who bought Macs are not going to buy them again. They missed what makes Macs special, so they appeared to be little more than a luxury PC to most of them. Something to show off as a status symbol.

Damn, you're right on every single count, however no matter how hard you try you could not lock out Windows,  not unless you shipped OS X burned onto roms on the motherboard that is.

If it's got an x86 CPU, that means the biggest hurdle is overcome, even if they had used a custom ASIC for the Northbridge or Southbridge or whatever some clever person is gonna have to gumption to reverse engineer it and write drivers for it for Windows.  In anycase sadly, Apple's volumes are that small as they basically do not matter, sure it's great to have Apple as your customer because they are "cool" and that halo make you cooler I guess, but if they vanished of the face of the Earth tomorrow we'd be gutted but the world would carry on without Apple.

I think they where stuck between a rock and a hard place, where would they have got CPU's that mattered outside of Intel or AMD?, everything is is gone except SPARC as far as I know, and AMD Hammer blows SPARC out of the water, iirc is there even a SPARC that can be used in portables.

I do hope you are wrong, but when I think about the points you've raised it does make me think this could be the last stand.

Don Estridge and Bill Gates have got a lot to answer for  :evil:
NeXTcube Turbo Dimension, NeXTstation Turbo Color, MP2100, Q840av, Q650, WS G4 500, Pismo G4 550, SGI Octane R12K MXE, BeBox 133.

nextchef

Quote from: "Nightengale"Cool RacerX is spun up! I don't mean that in the children's way, I mean that we can learn more and I mean that most sincerely. Glad it wasn't me that spun him up though :shock:

Yea, I am getting pretty good at getting him "spun up" lately ;)

Chef

nextchef

Ok .. puttin on the flame retardent suit for this one ... everyone hold on.

Now hear me out before pulling out the BFG's.

Apple is a consumer electronic and content delivery company now, not a computer company.
 
Apple sees the eventual demise of its computer hardware business, and is trying to get out of it.  iPOD, iTV and the iTUNES Store is the future of apple, and Steve knows it. Computers currently are a necessary evil, in order to further their consumer electronics and media aspirations.  By switching to the x86 architecture it allowed them to basically outsource their hardware development to Intel.  No more need for apple to design or contract for special north/southbridge or memory controllers, just let intel do it.  They can still spend ther time on the design and outward appearance of the systems, since it still is a Mac after all, and that is what people expect.  As others have stated, if they really cared about keeping OSX contained, they would have stayed with the PowerPC architecture, and their proprietary hardware.  They did not, and that speaks volumes about the priority of things inside Apple.

Look at the last few keynotes, and what do you see .. iPOD .. iPOD .. iTV, and oh by the way we still have our Computers over here to connect your iPOD to, and run the ITUNES store to buy content with.  But if you have a windows pc, that is ok to, as long as you buy our new iPOD.  Apple wants to position itself as the defacto content distribution mechanism for the world.  You want a song, go to iTUNES, you missed last nights episode of lost, go to iTUNES, you feel like watching a movie, go to iTUNES.  And what are you going to listen/watch that content on??? An iPOD or iTV, since you have no other choice with the current "FairPlay" DRM.

The iTV device just re-inforces both points even more.  It is a way to get content onto your living room tv, which means by definition that a person will no longer be sitting in front of the computer, be it a Mac or Wintel.  The computer becomes just a "bit bucket" to store content that will be consumed on the iTV or iPOD.  Yes you may have to sit down at it currently to purchase the content, but I would bet that future versions of the iTV device will even remove that restriction and allow you to purchase content directly from your couch.  And since you are not sitting in front of your computer to consume content, it does not matter what kind it is, as long as it can run iTUNES in order to serve content.  The speculation that the iTV device will allow one to connect an iSIGHT camera to it, is another powerful nail in the computer coffin.  This would allow you to use iCHAT to converse with family and friends in your living room, and not need to go to your computer.  "Bob Cringley" brings up these points, and a few others like the Apple "iPLASMA" tv, in his column, and I believe it is a powerful argument on the future direction of Apple.

Lets look into the future when products like fiber to the home give users 10Mbit connections, and speculate a little.  In this environment, streaming of video content becomes a viable option, and then what becomes of the computer.  With the ability to stream and watch content directly from the network on your iTV/iPLASMA/iLCD, the computer is bypassed.  This has powerful benefits for Apple and the content creators.  No content would be permanently stored on your computer, so no pesky problems with ripping off the DRM and sharing the files.  Lets further extend this and add in your music to the mix.  With this high speed connectivity, apple could "store" all your iTUNES library on "their" servers, and just send it to your iPOD as necessary.  You want the new Rush album, hook up your iPOD to the iTV, fire up the store and purchase it all from your couch.  The content is added to your "virtual library" at Apple, and sent to your connected ipod.  Add in a small bluetooth keyboard, and this becomes even easier, along with email and web surfing as well.  Once Apple adds true cellphone technology to the iPOD, then one could just buy the content directly on the device and either download it then, or wait untill later to get it at home when you connect to your dock.

I could go on further with this, but you get the point.  The traditional computer becomes less and less necessary for the majority of things one does in your "digital" life.  You still would need some sort of station to do typing intensive tasks, like writing a book or something else longer than a simple email, preparing a keynote or powerpoint presentation, etc.  This would probably be some sort of larger portable device, similar to a notebook computer today, that you could place on your desk when required, and taken out with you when you go.

Steve Jobs is known for being very foreward thinking, usually farther than the technology can currently provide, which is one of his biggest strengths.  He is a passionate visionary that has glimpsed the "post computer/PC" world, and is positioning Apple to be the center of it.

OK, the flaming may commence now .. ;)

Chef

nextchef

Quote from: "RacerX"Windows wasn't able to run on EFI based systems that weren't specifically set up to support it. Apple thought that people killing their systems while attempting to hack them would be enough of a deterrent... but they weren't expecting that people would start collecting prize money for successfully hacking the system.

Apple has stated publically on many ocasions that they did not care if people ran windows.  They were not going to go out of their way to support it, but they certainly did not try very hard to stop it from happening.  Leaving out the legacy bios extensions in their EFI implementation was really just a small bump in the road, and not a true deterrent.

Chef

PowerPC

My problem with this unfortunate development is that i'm a "child" of the computer age. I don't want an iWorld full of "gadgets" (nextchef your opinin's pretty much what the guys at arstechnica foretold when the "switch"  :evil:  was announced) but a most perfected real computer. Back in the good old days i "believed"  :D  that Apple with its superior hardwaredesing would someday built such a machine but now no one's left to try.

Anyway i whined for some time, got me the last real PowerBook (17 inch  :D  ) and that'll do for a very long time since for my allday needs G4@1Ghz performs just fine. Perhaps i should be thankfull - the x86 switch healed me from beeing a fanboy and now i've got free resources to get the real great computers like the NeXT  :D

PowerPC

Quote from: "brams"..., iirc is there even a SPARC that can be used in portables...

Never heard of Tadpole http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ i'd love to have one of those (ok the bullfrog is actually not a real notebook  :P  )

Quote from: "brams"..., where would they have got CPU's that mattered outside of Intel or AMD?

The ppc based chips for the new game consoles tell just one thing - if your'e paying for it, IBM will built it.

Quote from: "brams"...everything is is gone except SPARC...

That's fortunatly not true: Everything's pretty much arround except they all've gone embedded or elswere. IBM's still got the real POWER (to exspensive for me  :cry:  ) - MIPS (as in SGI long ago  :cry:  ) you'll have for e.g. in the PSP &c. Only ALPHA 's gone (thank you Intel  :evil:  ) and i expect PA-RISC is the very next to die since they're not used elswhere.

nextchef

Quote from: "PowerPC"My problem with this unfortunate development is that i'm a "child" of the computer age. I don't want an iWorld full of "gadgets" (nextchef your opinin's pretty much what the guys at arstechnica foretold when the "switch"  :evil:  was announced) but a most perfected real computer. Back in the good old days i "believed"  :D  that Apple with its superior hardwaredesing would someday built such a machine but now no one's left to try.

Anyway i whined for some time, got me the last real PowerBook (17 inch  :D  ) and that'll do for a very long time since for my allday needs G4@1Ghz performs just fine. Perhaps i should be thankfull - the x86 switch healed me from beeing a fanboy and now i've got free resources to get the real great computers like the NeXT  :D

I still hold out hope that Apple may suprise everyone.  I am a big proponent of the whole tablet pc concep, and was really excited to see Apples patent filings in the area a few years ago.  I have even started using my newton again for note taking, because it is still the best executed example to be found.  The handwriting recognintion is still amazing even today.  The screen needs to be a little bigger, and color would be nice.  A higher resolution would not hurt also.  All these issues have been resolved in todays technology market.  My idea of the perfect tablet would be a device about 6inx9in or so, with a high res color screen/digitizer (since I tend to write sloppy and use fine tip pens) with wireless capability.  It does not have to be a full-blown  PC/notebook, but a more specialized device.  It could be used to take down notes, read email, surf the web, control your tv/iTV in the living room at home, and other general use stuff.  I cant take notes using a notebook, as I grew up using a pen and paper, not like todays kids.  Writing takes more time than just typing like a court stenographer, so you have to learn to collect your thoughts quickly and figure out what the person is trying to say, not just grab every word they say.  If i want that, I'd bring a digital recorder or stenographer.

This is an area that is ready for some real innovation, and apple is the company that normally fills that role, so I still hold out against hope that my prayers will be answered.

Chef

nextchef

Quote from: "RacerX"As it stands, odds are that many of those people who bought Macs are not going to buy them again. They missed what makes Macs special, so they appeared to be little more than a luxury PC to most of them. Something to show off as a status symbol.

Sorry to break it to you, but for a long time buying a Mac has been exactly that,  a "status symbol".  Up untill OSX and some of the "i-apps", there really was not much you could do on a mac that you could not do on a Wintel machine.  Apps like iMOVIE and iDVD are just so damn easy to use for a normal person, which was something lacking on the pc side.

A Timex tells time as good as a Rolex, but it is certainly not as "cool" or as nice looking.

Chef

brams

Quote from: "PowerPC"Never heard of Tadpole http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/ i'd love to have one of those (ok the bullfrog is actually not a real notebook  :P  )

Yeah I've heard of them, unfortunately I had something a bit more portable than that in mind.  I wasn't aware General Dynamics had bought Tadpole, they are the people that make tanks if my memory serves, the laptops certainly look tank like, In wonder if they share technologies, an armoured laptop, that would be cool.

QuoteThe ppc based chips for the new game consoles tell just one thing - if your'e paying for it, IBM will built it.

I think you should have said if you paying enough for it they'll build it.  The market for PS3 and XBOX II is much bigger than the Mac market, thus they can afford to fund the R&D of the CELL processors.

QuoteThat's fortunatly not true: Everything's pretty much arround except they all've gone embedded or elswere. IBM's still got the real POWER (to exspensive for me  :cry:  ) - MIPS (as in SGI long ago  :cry:  ) you'll have for e.g. in the PSP &c. Only ALPHA 's gone (thank you Intel  :evil:  ) and i expect PA-RISC is the very next to die since they're not used elswhere.

Yeah, well same thing happend to the Arm CPU, that was one of the first RISC CPU's on the market (in fact i think it was the first), I had an Acorn Archimedes that had an 8mhz Arm 2 back in 1988, and we English know all too well what happend to Acorn Computer (R.I.P) and today you find the once great Arm CPU's powering everything from PDA's, Firewire/ATA bridges and Cellphones.

My point is, sure loads of people are still making embedded CPU's, MIPS, NEC, Hitachi SuperH RISC engine etc.  But I'm talking about a general purpose CPU's like you find in laptops, workstations and servers.  I would imagine that most embeded CPU's are optimised for a particular function for example does a car engine management system need an FPU or SIMD unit.  Thus if you where to make a workstation using a SuperH for example, would it be any good?.
NeXTcube Turbo Dimension, NeXTstation Turbo Color, MP2100, Q840av, Q650, WS G4 500, Pismo G4 550, SGI Octane R12K MXE, BeBox 133.

brams

Quote from: "nextchef"
Quote from: "RacerX"As it stands, odds are that many of those people who bought Macs are not going to buy them again. They missed what makes Macs special, so they appeared to be little more than a luxury PC to most of them. Something to show off as a status symbol.

Sorry to break it to you, but for a long time buying a Mac has been exactly that,  a "status symbol".  Up untill OSX and some of the "i-apps", there really was not much you could do on a mac that you could not do on a Wintel machine.  Apps like iMOVIE and iDVD are just so damn easy to use for a normal person, which was something lacking on the pc side.

A Timex tells time as good as a Rolex, but it is certainly not as "cool" or as nice looking.

Chef

Macs just work, PC's are a pile of shit to use in comparision, I corrupted the BIOS (yes really I could not believe it too) of my PC 2 times whilst compressing a DV stream onto DVD using Pinnicle Studio 8.  Random times it would just restart for no apparent reason, No PC I have ever used is nearly as funtional to use as a Mac.  My Pismo can do it with a fraction of the processing power and that's 6 years old with a fraction of the ram the PC had.

I have a 12 year old Macintosh 840av with SpiggotPower AV and that does not crash when I play about with video on that, actually given enough time and if it where possible to get an 040 version of Quicktime that worked with the SPAV that did DV I'm quite confident the 840av would do a DVD, it might take it a couple of months to compress the DV stream, but I'm sure it would not crash, that to me it what makes Macs special, you can tell that they where made to use and thought out and executed properly.

BTW, have you ever used Windows 98?
NeXTcube Turbo Dimension, NeXTstation Turbo Color, MP2100, Q840av, Q650, WS G4 500, Pismo G4 550, SGI Octane R12K MXE, BeBox 133.

nextchef

Quote from: "brams"
Quote from: "nextchef"
Quote from: "RacerX"As it stands, odds are that many of those people who bought Macs are not going to buy them again. They missed what makes Macs special, so they appeared to be little more than a luxury PC to most of them. Something to show off as a status symbol.

Sorry to break it to you, but for a long time buying a Mac has been exactly that,  a "status symbol".  Up untill OSX and some of the "i-apps", there really was not much you could do on a mac that you could not do on a Wintel machine.  Apps like iMOVIE and iDVD are just so damn easy to use for a normal person, which was something lacking on the pc side.

A Timex tells time as good as a Rolex, but it is certainly not as "cool" or as nice looking.

Chef

Macs just work, PC's are a pile of shit to use in comparision, I corrupted the BIOS (yes really I could not believe it too) of my PC 2 times whilst compressing a DV stream onto DVD using Pinnicle Studio 8.  Random times it would just restart for no apparent reason, No PC I have ever used is nearly as funtional to use as a Mac.  My Pismo can do it with a fraction of the processing power and that's 6 years old with a fraction of the ram the PC had.

I have a 12 year old Macintosh 840av with SpiggotPower AV and that does not crash when I play about with video on that, actually given enough time and if it where possible to get an 040 version of Quicktime that worked with the SPAV that did DV I'm quite confident the 840av would do a DVD, it might take it a couple of months to compress the DV stream, but I'm sure it would not crash, that to me it what makes Macs special, you can tell that they where made to use and thought out and executed properly.

BTW, have you ever used Windows 98?

The fact that Apple controlled the hardware/software environment made it much easier to create a stable computing environment.  The "PC" crashing has more to do with windows than it does with the hardware, in my experience.  That is why re-installing windows can make a crash happy pc "well" again.

Unfortunately I have been forced to use Windows 98, and to support people who were as well.  That is why I started using linux allmost exclusively back in 1998 or so, whenever mandrake became popular.  It was not much more difficult to use gui wise, but it was rock solid stable.  My main machine at work ran it, and I ran Win95 in vmware in order to get access to the windows only corporate apps like act and groupwise mail.

You want a pc to work well, dump win9x and install w2k, or better yet install linux and not have to worry about it again ( or just buy a Mac :))

Chef

RacerX

Quote from: "brams"Damn, you're right on every single count, however no matter how hard you try you could not lock out Windows, not unless you shipped OS X burned onto roms on the motherboard that is.
Actually that would lock Mac OS X onto the hardware, but not Windows off of it.

No, what they needed to do was something more nonstandard... something that would have required a hardware work around. That would have been enough of a deterrent to keep people from easily running Windows on their Macs.

And that is the main point... to keep them from easily doing it. If it wasn't easy, then they'd be more likely to stick with Mac OS X.


Quote from: "nextchef"Ok .. puttin on the flame retardent suit for this one ... everyone hold on...

OK, the flaming may commence now .. ;)
First, Apple doesn't make money on iTunes content... they make money on iPods. Second, Apple still makes much of their money on computer hardware which (at least was) a stable business.

Third... Apple isn't Microsoft.

The third point is important because you are projecting Microsoft thinking onto Apple.

Apple wants you to have the songs, Apple wants you to have the movies... Microsoft has been single-mindedly pushing for any version of "subscription" since 2000.  Remember, Microsoft is in the software business, and software shouldn't ever ware out... Apple is in the hardware business... hardware always needs replacing.

Absolutely Apple will do what they can to keep you using their hardware... but your content lock down theory shows that you've been living in the Microsoft world too long.

Microsoft couldn't get the software subscription stuff to fly (their first attempt was Office 2000 in Australia back in 2000-2001) and Napster is going to show the failure of it in the online music content arena.

Remember... Microsoft makes their money on software so they need you to need new software to make money. They would rather you just subscribe to them for the use of their software, so they wouldn't have to think up new ways to make the software better.

Apple makes it's money on hardware, and hardware is always improving and older hardware is always waring out.

If you are going to attempt to get into the minds of corporations... make sure you really know the corporation first. They all have personalities, and those differ (greatly) from one corporation to the next.

Quote from: "nextchef"Apple has stated publically on many ocasions that they did not care if people ran windows.
No, they didn't.

Go back an read what they said... not what you think you heard, but what they actually said.

Apple said that they wouldn't stop people from trying to run Windows on their Macs.

And they haven't... they were just under the impression (fostered by what Intel told them) that a workaround would have been much harder than it turned out to be.

Quote from: "nextchef"Sorry to break it to you, but for a long time buying a Mac has been exactly that, a "status symbol". Up untill OSX and some of the "i-apps", there really was not much you could do on a mac that you could not do on a Wintel machine. Apps like iMOVIE and iDVD are just so damn easy to use for a normal person, which was something lacking on the pc side.
How would you know what a Mac could do?

Didn't you already tell us that you went PC way back when (wasn't it back in the era of the 486).

Prior to Windows 95/98 there wasn't much that a PC was able to do that a Mac could.

Macs were doing video editing long before Windows, Macs were doing 3D long before Windows... in fact, Macs could do everything long before Windows.

Do you even know when iMovie and iDVD were released?


Up until between 1998 and 2001 PCs weren't comparable to Timex in your analogy... they were more like sun dials. You could tell the time, but you had to do a lot of work to figure it out and it still wasn't that accurate.

The only difference is that most PCs worked at night... sun dials don't.


And there are still things that I can do on Mac OS 8.6 that you can't do on Windows systems today.

And since Windows NT 4.0, Windows has been going backwards in it's usability, not forwards.

And least we forget, the last version of Windows came out in 2001... Microsoft has been bailing water and plugging holes for most of the last 5 years. They didn't want to make Vista... they want their customers to subscribe so they can just collect revenue. Vista has been a half hearted corporate attempt at a new OS.

And further, Microsoft doesn't get computing. They are the singularly most uninnovative technology company in existence today.


Answer me this... what could you do with your PCs back between 1996 and 2001?

I had free video editing software back in 1998 that let me capture and edit video on my 1995 Mac which had built-in video (in and out, composite and s-video) support.

When did you capture and edit your first video on a PC? And what PC could you have captured and edited video on without additional hardware.

Including my SGI Indy, I own six systems (five of them Macs) that have the built-in ability to work with video... all of them are from before 1998.

And I'm able to do more than most PC people I know (which I'd be willing to bet include you) with my non-Windows systems... and I don't even own a computer from the 21st century!


You've spent way to much time with PCs... you've become PC complacent. Which, in turn, makes you Microsoft's wet dream. You believe every other alternative is no better than Microsoft's offerings, and that no other technology company would have motivations different from Microsoft's... so you'll (in the end) always go back to Microsoft.

Basically... why fight it. You really should just keep using a PC. :shock: