Cringely on Apple

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by -=rjh=-, Jun 10, 2005.

  1. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Y'all seen Cringely's column about Apple this week?

    The guy is speaking "ex recto"; he's lost the plot (worse than usual,
    that is).

    There's been some pretty uninformed and hasty comment on Apple's
    announcement, but Cringely's is way out there.

    Comments?
     
    -=rjh=-, Jun 10, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. In article <42a953ab$>, -=rjh=- <>
    wrote:

    >Y'all seen Cringely's column about Apple this week?


    The one where he thinks it's going to be acquired by Intel?

    I wonder if anyone else has thought of my idea that Apple is going to go
    a Shuttle-style route.
     
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Jun 10, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    > In article <42a953ab$>, -=rjh=- <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Y'all seen Cringely's column about Apple this week?

    >
    >
    > The one where he thinks it's going to be acquired by Intel?


    Yep,
    >
    > I wonder if anyone else has thought of my idea that Apple is going to go
    > a Shuttle-style route.


    You mean, Apple case+M/B+OSX, the buyer or vendor adds drives, cpu,
    memory etc?

    I don't think so - Shuttles are aimed at a very small market - and Apple
    will just want something that is an Apple, and well - just works OOB.
    And Shuttles approach is *very* expensive. Also, Apple have to consider
    their whole product line, which is quite diverse.

    Brand is very important to them (look at ipod) and with their move into
    direct retailing, they have to have Apple products to sell in their stores.

    But, I wouldn't be too surprised if they at some stage introduced a
    Shuttle form factor home multimedia system, sort of an Xbox360 without
    the games. If they built in the whole audio and amplifier system, they
    could have a very stylish and easy to use box that would complement the
    ipods and where they are going with media. It could be a totally
    integrated system with DRM and not even really behave like a PC. But I
    think they've got enough work ahead of them for now.
     
    -=rjh=-, Jun 10, 2005
    #3
  4. In article <42aa0540$>, -=rjh=- <>
    wrote:

    >You mean, Apple case+M/B+OSX, the buyer or vendor adds drives, cpu,
    >memory etc?
    >
    >I don't think so - Shuttles are aimed at a very small market - and Apple
    >will just want something that is an Apple, and well - just works OOB.
    >And Shuttles approach is *very* expensive.


    1) Shuttle isn't that expensive. After seeing my box, a client of mine
    bought two--one for his office and one for home.

    2) There are cheaper brands than Shuttle.And some clever alternative
    designs from Kloss etc.

    3) Apple isn't exactly known for cut-price gear either, so it would be a
    natural thing for it to compete at the higher--i.e. pricier--end of the
    market.

    The point is, where else is there for Apple to go? As Bruce Hoult
    pointed out in another posting, there are just two companies left making
    money from manufacturing their own built-up PCs--Apple and Dell. Dell
    may last a little bit longer, but I think Apple's days of making a
    profit from this sort of thing are numbered.
     
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Jun 11, 2005
    #4
  5. -=rjh=- wrote:
    > Y'all seen Cringely's column about Apple this week?
    >
    > The guy is speaking "ex recto"; he's lost the plot (worse than usual,
    > that is).
    >
    > There's been some pretty uninformed and hasty comment on Apple's
    > announcement, but Cringely's is way out there.
    >
    > Comments?


    I loved it, and within reason it could possibly happen... what is that
    saying... ah yes..."eventually all stories come true"
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Jun 12, 2005
    #5
  6. Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    > The point is, where else is there for Apple to go?


    Cell phones, PDAs... theres plenty of markets where flashy goods makes
    people buy it.
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Jun 12, 2005
    #6
  7. In article <>,
    "Dave - Dave.net.nz" <> wrote:

    >Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> The point is, where else is there for Apple to go?

    >
    >Cell phones, PDAs... theres plenty of markets where flashy goods makes
    >people buy it.


    PDAs are a dead end. And the cell phone market is already sewn up by
    trendy companies like Nokia and Sony-Ericsson. Apple would be coming in
    from way behind, into a market that it knows nothing about.
     
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Jun 13, 2005
    #7
  8. Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    >>>The point is, where else is there for Apple to go?


    >>Cell phones, PDAs... theres plenty of markets where flashy goods makes
    >>people buy it.


    > PDAs are a dead end. And the cell phone market is already sewn up by
    > trendy companies like Nokia and Sony-Ericsson. Apple would be coming in
    > from way behind, into a market that it knows nothing about.


    you mean like they did with the MP3 player market?
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Jun 13, 2005
    #8
  9. In article <>, "Dave - Dave.net.nz" <> wrote:
    >Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    >>>>The point is, where else is there for Apple to go?

    >
    >>>Cell phones, PDAs... theres plenty of markets where flashy goods makes
    >>>people buy it.

    >
    >> PDAs are a dead end. And the cell phone market is already sewn up by
    >> trendy companies like Nokia and Sony-Ericsson. Apple would be coming in
    >> from way behind, into a market that it knows nothing about.

    >
    >you mean like they did with the MP3 player market?


    Yep. There is something to be said for approaching something with an open
    mind ... lack of tradition can be a good thing :)

    Bruce


    -------------------------------------
    The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it.
    - George Bernard Shaw
    Cynic, n: a blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be.
    - Ambrose Bierce

    Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
    (if there were any)
     
    Bruce Sinclair, Jun 13, 2005
    #9
  10. In <> Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:

    > Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:


    >> PDAs are a dead end. And the cell phone market is already sewn up by
    >> trendy companies like Nokia and Sony-Ericsson. Apple would be coming
    >> in from way behind, into a market that it knows nothing about.


    > you mean like they did with the MP3 player market?


    Before the iPod, digital music players were little more than a geek toy
    and Apple's role was to bring them into the mass market. A phone, on the
    other hand, is something that almost everyone already owns and growth in
    this market will continue to be dominated by the existing mainstream
    manufacturers.

    Most people accept that iPods won't be a must-have forever, because we
    are gradually starting to see the merging of phones, PDAs, cameras, and
    music players into single devices. Apple will need to decide whether
    they want a slice of this market or not, and the next revolution in the
    iPod product line will be indicative of this.

    Many of us will remember that Apple used to produce digital cameras, but
    they pulled out of this market as soon as the mainstream Japanese camera
    manufacturers started to overtake them. Will the same happen to the iPod?
    Only time will tell.

    --
    Regards, Alastair.
    Wellington, New Zealand
    www.alastair.geek.nz

    My supplied email address is fake. Any views expressed in this posting
    are personal and its content remains the property of Alastair. Alastair
    accepts no responsibility for any misinformation resulting from this
    posting.
     
    Alastair McAllister, Jun 14, 2005
    #10
  11. In article <>,
    Alastair McAllister <> wrote:

    >In <> Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    >
    >> Lawrence D1Oliveiro wrote:

    >
    >>> PDAs are a dead end. And the cell phone market is already sewn up by
    >>> trendy companies like Nokia and Sony-Ericsson. Apple would be coming
    >>> in from way behind, into a market that it knows nothing about.

    >
    >> you mean like they did with the MP3 player market?

    >
    >Before the iPod, digital music players were little more than a geek toy
    >and Apple's role was to bring them into the mass market. A phone, on the
    >other hand, is something that almost everyone already owns and growth in
    >this market will continue to be dominated by the existing mainstream
    >manufacturers.


    Actually, there is one possibility, and that is what's called "smart
    phones". These are cellphones with PDA-type functions built-in, without
    compromising the cellphone form factor. It's a helluva challenge
    designing them as you can well imagine, but they're selling well enough
    to make it worth expending the effort.

    If Apple has some magic technological tricks up its sleeve in this area,
    as it did with MP3 players, it could come into this relatively young
    market segment and really make a big impact.
     
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Jun 14, 2005
    #11
  12. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > "Dave - Dave.net.nz" <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>The point is, where else is there for Apple to go?

    >>
    >>Cell phones, PDAs... theres plenty of markets where flashy goods makes
    >>people buy it.

    >
    >
    > PDAs are a dead end.


    PDAs in the strict meaning of the name might be a dead end*, but similar
    more powerful and diverse palmtop devices are going to be a huge market.

    Apple would not pursue any form of PDA anyway as after dropping the
    Newton, they wouldn't want to get involved in the market again.

    And the cell phone market is already sewn up by
    > trendy companies like Nokia and Sony-Ericsson. Apple would be coming in
    > from way behind, into a market that it knows nothing about.


    Fine, that's cellphones. But there are going to be a range of palmtop
    devices that have barely been developed yet.

    ebook readers probably will start to take off, even Amazon have decided
    to get directly involved; reading on a laptop or desktop is less than
    ideal, and there are dedicated readers available now. Even if people
    just start using dedicated electronic versions of the Bible the market
    for such dedicated devices could be huge. One of the largest sections of
    Palm usage in the US is for reading the Bible, sermon notes, prayers, etc.

    What about portable, dedicated IM client - could be small, and people
    would be very happy to move that activity away from their PC. Knowing
    teenagers who will simultaneously be talking on the landline, txting on
    their cellphone and chatting on MSN, I'd say they'd buy a dedicated IM
    client if it was trendy enough, for sure.

    Portable game consoles have got some great technology built into them at
    very low prices. Communication is almost becoming a commodity, and
    that will change the shape of palmtop devices alone.

    Stand alone wireless digital picture frames - we've seen these before,
    but the technology has improved vastly, and these could be built at very
    low prices now. The trick is to make things simple, and not add
    features; people don't want features and clutter, they want something
    like the ipod.

    Look at the upcoming Nokia 770, OQO, Cybook and Sony Librie; people
    don't want a device that does everything, but they will by multiple
    devices to do different things, which is why the market is going to be
    large, an it has barely started. Plenty of room for Apple.

    *Personally, my own experience of the PDA situation is that it has never
    been better, and there is a continual improvement in the capabilities
    of PDAs and the software to run on them. Even for a 2 year old Palm T3,
    there is so much new software being released it is hard to keep up; at
    the same time, the capabilities of the T3 are hugely improved over what
    it was capable of when it was released, as developers figure out
    software ways to make it do things that Palm never envisaged.

    (All IMHO, YMMV, etc) :)
     
    -=rjh=-, Jun 14, 2005
    #12
  13. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > Alastair McAllister <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>In <> Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Lawrence D1Oliveiro wrote:

    >>
    >>>>PDAs are a dead end. And the cell phone market is already sewn up by
    >>>>trendy companies like Nokia and Sony-Ericsson. Apple would be coming
    >>>>in from way behind, into a market that it knows nothing about.

    >>
    >>>you mean like they did with the MP3 player market?

    >>
    >>Before the iPod, digital music players were little more than a geek toy
    >>and Apple's role was to bring them into the mass market. A phone, on the
    >>other hand, is something that almost everyone already owns and growth in
    >>this market will continue to be dominated by the existing mainstream
    >>manufacturers.

    >
    >
    > Actually, there is one possibility, and that is what's called "smart
    > phones". These are cellphones with PDA-type functions built-in, without
    > compromising the cellphone form factor. It's a helluva challenge
    > designing them as you can well imagine, but they're selling well enough
    > to make it worth expending the effort.
    >
    > If Apple has some magic technological tricks up its sleeve in this area,
    > as it did with MP3 players, it could come into this relatively young
    > market segment and really make a big impact.


    Not gonna happen. Apple looks more like a media company; to get into
    cellphones they have to deal with new gatekeepers - who are already
    running the phone networks. They've tried this before, and it hasn't
    worked (for Apple, that is). Apple will go play somewhere else.

    Look outside of devices that are already mature and popular; the best
    opportunities will be in areas that are new and not yet mass market -
    that is where the interesting advances will happen.

    I certainly agree with your comment about smartphones. My partner has a
    Harrier, and for a non technical user, it is an appalling piece of crap.

    IMHO, again.
     
    -=rjh=-, Jun 14, 2005
    #13
  14. -=rjh=-

    Bruce Hoult Guest

    In article <>,
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro <_zealand> wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > Alastair McAllister <> wrote:
    >
    > >In <> Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    > >
    > >> Lawrence D1Oliveiro wrote:

    > >
    > >>> PDAs are a dead end. And the cell phone market is already sewn up by
    > >>> trendy companies like Nokia and Sony-Ericsson. Apple would be coming
    > >>> in from way behind, into a market that it knows nothing about.

    > >
    > >> you mean like they did with the MP3 player market?

    > >
    > >Before the iPod, digital music players were little more than a geek toy
    > >and Apple's role was to bring them into the mass market. A phone, on the
    > >other hand, is something that almost everyone already owns and growth in
    > >this market will continue to be dominated by the existing mainstream
    > >manufacturers.

    >
    > Actually, there is one possibility, and that is what's called "smart
    > phones". These are cellphones with PDA-type functions built-in, without
    > compromising the cellphone form factor. It's a helluva challenge
    > designing them as you can well imagine, but they're selling well enough
    > to make it worth expending the effort.
    >
    > If Apple has some magic technological tricks up its sleeve in this area,
    > as it did with MP3 players, it could come into this relatively young
    > market segment and really make a big impact.


    D'ya reckon that supplying, say, a web browser to one of the existing
    big cellphone companies (Nokia, say) might be a foot in the door?

    --
    Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
    Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------
     
    Bruce Hoult, Jun 14, 2005
    #14
  15. In article <>,
    Bruce Hoult <> wrote:

    >D'ya reckon that supplying, say, a web browser to one of the existing
    >big cellphone companies (Nokia, say) might be a foot in the door?


    I don't see why. What does Apple have in browser technology that nobody
    else has?
     
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Jun 15, 2005
    #15
  16. In <> Lawrence D¹Oliveiro
    wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > Bruce Hoult <> wrote:


    >>D'ya reckon that supplying, say, a web browser to one of the existing
    >>big cellphone companies (Nokia, say) might be a foot in the door?


    > I don't see why. What does Apple have in browser technology that
    > nobody else has?


    Bruce was referring to the fact that Nokia has recently opted to use
    some of the technology behind Safari in their latest phone-based browser.

    --
    Regards, Alastair.
    Wellington, New Zealand
    www.alastair.geek.nz

    My supplied email address is fake. Any views expressed in this posting
    are personal and its content remains the property of Alastair. Alastair
    accepts no responsibility for any misinformation resulting from this
    posting.
     
    Alastair McAllister, Jun 15, 2005
    #16
  17. In article <>,
    Alastair McAllister <> wrote:

    >In <> Lawrence D1Oliveiro
    >wrote:
    >
    >> In article <>,
    >> Bruce Hoult <> wrote:

    >
    >>>D'ya reckon that supplying, say, a web browser to one of the existing
    >>>big cellphone companies (Nokia, say) might be a foot in the door?

    >
    >> I don't see why. What does Apple have in browser technology that
    >> nobody else has?

    >
    >Bruce was referring to the fact that Nokia has recently opted to use
    >some of the technology behind Safari in their latest phone-based browser.


    What technology? Its core is KHTML, which is open source.
     
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Jun 15, 2005
    #17
  18. In <> Lawrence D¹Oliveiro
    wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > Alastair McAllister <> wrote:


    >>Bruce was referring to the fact that Nokia has recently opted to use
    >>some of the technology behind Safari in their latest phone-based
    >>browser.


    > What technology? Its core is KHTML, which is open source.


    That was my gut reaction, because I had always believed that Safari is
    essentially just a re-packaged version of Firefox/Mozilla.

    If you're really interested in the nitty gritty, then you might want to
    have a look at this discussion:
    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=132065

    --
    Regards, Alastair.
    Wellington, New Zealand
    www.alastair.geek.nz

    My supplied email address is fake. Any views expressed in this posting
    are personal and its content remains the property of Alastair. Alastair
    accepts no responsibility for any misinformation resulting from this
    posting.
     
    Alastair McAllister, Jun 15, 2005
    #18
  19. -=rjh=-

    Bruce Hoult Guest

    In article <>,
    Alastair McAllister <> wrote:

    > In <> Lawrence D1Oliveiro
    > wrote:
    >
    > > In article <>,
    > > Alastair McAllister <> wrote:

    >
    > >>Bruce was referring to the fact that Nokia has recently opted to use
    > >>some of the technology behind Safari in their latest phone-based
    > >>browser.

    >
    > > What technology? Its core is KHTML, which is open source.

    >
    > That was my gut reaction, because I had always believed that Safari is
    > essentially just a re-packaged version of Firefox/Mozilla.


    Sarfari is nothing at all to do with Firefox/Mozilla. It's a totally
    different engine, based on the KDE project's Konqueror engine (KHTML).

    KHTML was a pretty basic but well-written engine when Apple found it.
    Webcore (Safari) is now much much faster than KHTML was and is also now
    probably the most standards compliant browser there is.

    This should all find its way back into KDE, but it hasn't yet -- Apple
    has recently released the source code to Webcore but the KDE people
    haven't decided how to deal with merging all of Apple's changes back
    into KHTML (probably they'll end up adopting Apple's codebase, I think,
    and instead merge some KDE-specific things back into it, rather than the
    other way around).

    --
    Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
    Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------
     
    Bruce Hoult, Jun 15, 2005
    #19
  20. -=rjh=-

    shannon Guest

    Alastair McAllister wrote:

    > In <> Lawrence D¹Oliveiro
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>In article <>,
    >> Alastair McAllister <> wrote:

    >
    >
    >>>Bruce was referring to the fact that Nokia has recently opted to use
    >>>some of the technology behind Safari in their latest phone-based
    >>>browser.

    >
    >
    >>What technology? Its core is KHTML, which is open source.

    >
    >
    > That was my gut reaction, because I had always believed that Safari is
    > essentially just a re-packaged version of Firefox/Mozilla.
    >


    mozilla uses the gecko rendering engine, not khtml
    khtml is the rendering engine from the KDE Konqueror browser
     
    shannon, Jun 15, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Silverstrand

    Apple introduces the Mighty Mouse

    Silverstrand, Aug 2, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    716
    PUTALE
    Aug 7, 2005
  2. Silverstrand

    HEXUS.beans :: Apple Announces Video iPod

    Silverstrand, Oct 13, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    1,063
    XhArD
    Oct 15, 2005
  3. Rich
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    1,132
  4. GraB

    Apple sues Apple over iPod

    GraB, Mar 29, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    699
    shannon
    Mar 29, 2006
  5. Have A Nice Cup of Tea

    I Cringely: A Whole New Ball Game

    Have A Nice Cup of Tea, Apr 8, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    307
    Have A Nice Cup of Tea
    Apr 8, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page