Apple a model for Wintel distributers?

[sbur]

I was reading an article at CNet.com (http://news.com.com/2100-1001-895349.html?tag=fd_lede) dealing with the Microsoft anti-trust trial. They were discussing what a "post microsoft-remedy" world would look like, and they mentioned that apple might be the model.

Apple Computer may be the model for the type of PC maker competition that could arise from the proliferation of multiple Windows versions, analysts say. Apple controls the operating system and the computers, allowing the company to offer more striking designs and software geared toward specific consumer trends--for example, the flat-panel iMac released in January and Apple's iDVD, iPhoto, iMovie and iTunes software for use with digital media and devices.

In the diversified Windows world, PC makers could add their own middleware and software components, allowing them more control over the operating system and the hardware the way Apple does.

"You could use the Apple metaphor," said IDC analyst Roger Kay. "In terms of user experience, a Gateway could certainly integrate the user experience on behalf of its users in their own unique way. What would really make it Apple-like is if over time, the Gateway PC becomes its own unique thing rather than all these pieces that appear glued together as they do today in the Windows environment."


What do you think? Will Dell, gateway, and others turn into real computer companies rather than just wintel distributers?

Anyway, I found that "metaphor" interesting and though I should pass it on.

[mervTormel]

i'm inclined to think that these behemoths have too much mass and momentum and will never be able to change direction and will eventually be crushed under their own weight. well, i can hope, can't i?

more and more we hear the whinging of wintel whores who have become slightly enlightened about how deeply they've been screwed over the years and how entrenched they are in a technology that hasn't improved in a decade.

i was a big fan of Digital Equipment Corporation's hardware and software. arguably, the best of many worlds. speed, networking, clustering and resource sharing unequalled by none, even to this day. but their model became so rigid, they couldn't change to meet consumer demands, let alone, figure out what they were.

Ken Olsen, founder of Digital Equipment Corporation, stated: "Why would anyone need a computer of their own?"

[ObStory] there are a couple thousand (?) tuning parameters for the OpenVMS operating system, since the first days of the VAX. over time, with new technology and 'abstraction' layers, some of these parameters became deprecated. but the code was so tightly coupled with the OS, that adding/changing these parameters became impossible without breaking the foundation. sound familiar?

the engineers were hog-tied to these structures. what they did was to recycle the names of the deprecated parameters. so param name bFlurm used to control some boot mechanism, now it has the same name, but controls some swap mechanism. this was the only way to move the OS forward without going down the crapper (at the time). documentation of bFlurm didn't always get updated. but the system still works.

eventually, these kinds of things toppled them. e.g., their marketing model hadn't changed in decades. it was the most onerous equipment to configure to buy. even if you had a million cash for them in a pillowcase!

anyhow, back to the topic at hand: the M$'s and GW's and Dell's of today have slick marketing and doltish customer-slugs who get boners for the most trite, lame, contrived junk. and that's what it is. junk. and too many junk choices.

smug PeeCee users think they're superior because they have two inch thick catalogs of products to choose from. who the hell wants to make a career of even thinking about approaching trying to decide? and most of it is junk. and most professionals, let alone users, don't spend much on the research end of the decision (because it becomes overwhelming/boring fast); usually it is based on some marketing hype (lie).

a good friend of mine, very smart, is always defending M$ and the hardware. always tooting some 'whoopdeedoo' (crappy) feature. the industry has made a good living for him and his loyalty sounds forced out of obligation. whenever a foible of the architecture is pointed out, the topic becomes "let's go BBQ some meat" with an unnecessary trill of his jedi mind-distortion field. he knows that meat is his only providence with me.

i hope the wintels are in the throes of desperation and attempt to change their horses mid-stream and stomp on their own johnsons and face-plant and let their oppressed slaves go free. ¡viva la revolution!

[Craig R. Arko]

Sorry, Merv, I didn't quite get where you stood on this issue. :D

My quick take on it is that the Wintel hardware vendors (with the glittering exception of IBM and maybe HP and really maybe Sony) just don't have the software expertise to do the kind of integration that Apple does. They'd have to raid the stalls in Redmond and see who gets lucky.

[mervTormel]

IBM and HP have a lot of brain power. used to be, once upon a time, you couldn't get a job pushing broom at HP without an MS degree (they had very complex detritus). but they have the momentum problem. very hard to sway from their present course. though IBM seems more flexible, less bound by gravity of their mass because they've almost dinosaured themselves several times. it's all up to management.

¿You really think Sony has any integration cojones?

i've contracted for Apple and their management had a huge God complex. they made fighter pilots cry. this was during Michael "The Diesel" Spindler's era.

-che

--
[ObSong] The Clash - The Magnificent Seven - Sandinista! - 1980

"Give me Honda, Give me Sony, so cheap and real phony."

[vonleigh]

Hello,

There's an interesting article that came out in Tidbits that I think is appropriate "Was bill gates lying?":

<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=06804>

If I hadn't read that I wouldn't of understood what MT (err... che) was talking about.

BTW, it's "viva la revolución!"


Vonleigh

[sbur]

This all brings up an interesting point. OS X has made things like pdf and quicktime integral parts of the OS. As an unfortunate user found out (see front page for a warning about package managers), it kills the system if you remove quicktime. Is this considered bundeling? It isn't "modular" anymore as the tidbits article describes it under OS 9. As a consumer, I find it beneficial, but isn't it the first step down the road on which Windows has been traveling?