See Full Story
It is sometimes interesting what people get excited about, and the Apple loyalists evidently got really excited about a question, which some thought I had asked, surrounding why there is no "Intel Inside" sticker on Apple Notebooks. I think the real answer to that question is actually kind of interesting, so we'll touch on that. We'll also spend some time looking back on SCO and the unintended positive impact it had on open source, and a belated "thank-you" from me to the open source leadership.
It's an easy question to answer. Apple does not share anything with anyone. The one exception being the iPhone and I am sure Steve & Company is not happy about that.
ďWhat many who aren't Apple people don't realize is that many Mac users base their opinions with regard to what Apple brings out on what Steve Jobs says.
In other words, if the CEO of Apple says it's great and promotes it, it must be! End of conversation.Ē
Your assumption is quite ludicrous. Do you think that the creative professionals who traditionally used Apples products operate on stupidity and blind faith? Have you even thought about the reasons for this loyalty?
Loyalty has been created because Apple created the best tools to get the job done and in doing so, went to the nth degree. They have moved forward with the intent to rationalise and improve, so often with great insight. The results have created a loyal user base who are impressed and inspired by the solutions offered by Apple. Often before they knew they needed it. Apple didnít just make empty promises. They made no promises, but they delivered again and again.
Apple have been a company who tried harder. As hard as they could. For the users. But no, not always does Apple get it right! However, do you kill the hen that has always laid the golden eggs when it fails to come up with the goods?
Loyalty exists when it is earned. Not because creative professionals are morons as you seem to want to make out. You undermine yourself with such mediocre reasoning.
If Apple did renege on a selling point. This would have been pre 97 when I got on board and that was a time that all were questioning if Apple could survive. Mr Dell, I think it was, came out in the press and suggested that Apple close their doors at the time of Steve Jobs return to the fold. That that was the only way for the share holders to get any value back, before the $6 billion in the bank diminished to nothing. He saw no future, but like others, he didnít use the products. The user base hoped it could survive, because they knew which side there bread had always been buttered. They had faithÖ
If you are going to have any authority in your articles, donít make blind guesses and silly, ill thought generalisations. Itís not what you are paid for. Try to fathom out some kind of reason to your thoughts. Try a little harder to look from two directions. If you do not have the perspective, acquire it. People, Windows users or Mac, are not stupid. There is of course always a desire to efficiently use your time and put up with what you know rather than learning something afresh and that, above other things, is the reason for inertia in converting people to something better.
However, Apple, now, can certainly stand some criticism and they are getting it from those who realise that the latest iMac is not optimised for any creative use. With a highly uneven, luminous screen with a black surround that kills simultaneous colour contrast - in other words it dominates over the subtle interplay of colours and therefore canít be used for colour work when you need to sense a colour balance to create that frisson or vibrancy. In this, Apple have sold short the visual designers and film makersÖ but did they realise this? I certainly hope they will learn, for their range of products are looking mighty thin and uncompelling at this moment. Despite the good points of the iMac, which everyone senses, as you might appreciate, this design is banal and lacking thought. Even if it paves the way for a touch screen, this product is not optimised.
Regarding Intel Inside. The reason Apple donít have to put an Intel sticker on their computers would have been sorted out in negotiations at the time of Apples adoption to Intel. Intel offer a better price for chips if the OEM is willing to put a sticker on the case, as you say. Now if this was just any old computer company, that would have been the deal, but I think you will find Apple have endorsed Intel by their move and that alone has created huge confidence in Intel. How do you buy or value that? This is what Intel had dreamed of and, you know, Apples chips will be as cheap as it is possible to procure! Look deeper at marketing value than a sticker!
My regards - Philip Grant
ahem -- SCO has no monopoly on Internet Protocol
>>I had a chat with one of the local CTO ex-Apple folks I know the other day, and he explained the following event to illustrate how Apple loyalists think: A few years ago Apple came out with a laptop that was promoted as having an upgradable processor. A lot of folks bought it thinking they could and would upgrade. However, it had a serious problem and Apple had to rush out a firmware update that permanently disabled the upgrade capability.<<
Could you name the specific laptop model you are referring to? Your contact may be feeding you bad information to make you look bad.
Name-calling ("Apple Loyalists" and talk about worshipping everything Jobs says etc.) in my view diminishes the force of what you are saying. I for instance agree that it is a worthwhile business case to pay a bit more and not get all the crap on your system (btw an argument that does not hold for the Intel Inside sticker). But your argument does not require any name-calling comments and the fact that this name-calling is part of your writing only distracts and makes it less authoritive. I would say, stick to the arguments and leave the name-calling to the adolescents.
It shouldn't be surprising that people get upset when an unscrupulous company like SCO games our dysfunctional legal system to get money and power they didn't earn at the expense of others.
It is never a good thing when people of zero ethics and morals run amuck.