“Apple is the prospector, the trailblazer. Microsoft is the Borg. Apple’s technology tends to work extremely well and is intuitive. Microsoft’s works with everything, eventually. Microsoft will never, ever, ever come up with a piece of functional engineering as breathtakingly beautiful as the iMac. Still, Apple [supposedly] lost the operating system war. So it went elsewhere,” Bill Mann writes for The Motley Fool.
“Its jiujitsu moves are paying off. First and foremost, the smashing success of the iPod digital music players, where Apple has managed to introduce product lines in succession without cannibalizing itself. This was an extremely smart move, since music management has turned out to be a killer app. Apple’s iPod and iTunes have become the default as the company has exploited two elements: its design and usability prowess and a marketplace fractured with standard and interoperability issues. If you don’t know what operates with what, your default is to go with the one you know works well, and that’s the iPod,” Mann writes.
“You can see how prevalent this tool is by regarding the actions of Apple’s competition: Napster has essentially ceded the pay-per-download market to Apple by focusing its marketing on monthly subscriptions — in my opinion a strategy that is a loser, since Napster doesn’t work with, you guessed it, iPods,” Mann writes. “What the iPod has managed to do is kick-start and revive the operating system war. If your most cherished technological possession (besides the portable electronic I-Ching, of course) is your iPod, and you’re at the point of replacement for your computer, why not consider a Mac? Moreover, Microsoft has helped here with its consistently-under-viral-Spyware-and-adware bombardment Internet browser and email client. People who primarily use their computers for browsing, communications, and music management have a new low-cost, hassle-free, typically awesome product for these purposes, the Mac Mini.”
“Essentially, Apple has reinvigorated the operating system battle with Microsoft by focusing on everything but operating systems. Given its low level of penetration, it doesn’t have to take much of the market in order to make a huge difference to its bottom line,” Mann writes.
Read the full article for context here.
You can also vote for either Apple or Microsoft in The Motley Fool’s Stock Madness 2005 poll here. Microsoft currently leads Apple 66% to 34%. You know what to do.
Actually there was a recent article about Revenge of the Sith being rendered on Windows 64, but they do use Macs for all their animatics.
Plus Macs are the computer of choice for most of their staff (including the head effects guy John Knoll, co-creator of Photoshop!)
According to Bill Mann:
AAPL 52-week low-high: $12.61-$45.44
Might have merited a note that there was this little thing called a Stock Split in there, don’t you think? Makes all the Microsoft arguments quite a bit softer.
Hm. I’m listening to music on my toshiba m2 at work, and I empty the trash… what happens? Music stops playing while the disk is spinning. I go home and do the same on my ibook G4… what happens? Music keeps playing as if nothing happened. Supposedly a faster and better machine (1.8 Cetrino 1GB vs. 1.33 G4 1.25GB), and that’s what I get. I’m glad I have my mac.
Does anyone know of the reason why the Mac Business Unit over at Microsoft can’t make a Direct X type layer for the Mac to help with the porting of games? I read that Microsoft Japan has taken on porting some games over to the Mac. Also, why can’t they make a decent as in full version of Windows Media Player with DRM included? Apple was kind enough not to skimp on QuickTime features for Windows.
Perhaps Apple needs something along with Open GL that would support fast and furious gaming on Macs. It’s hard to believe that with the AltiVec and the various graphic cards that it should be so hard to make great games.
All that BS about giving choices. What would Microsoft loose making some of their technologies fully cross platform. They’re a software company first so they shouldn’t have such biases over hardware.
I wasnt talking PORTING games, im talking making the OS or whatever that runs the Next consoles to be made by Apple (based on OS X) since they ALL will be running on PowerPCs, and NOT make game companies PORT to mac, but be naturally compatible, basically a giving people 2 options for gaming. A Mac mini (with better grafx) rebranded as a Nintendo console. Talk about saving on development costs.
Can someone who knows tell me is there is a big difference in the way games are written for PC vs console? especially now when console games will start giving HiDef options.
RE: MACKJACK.
I have a friend who has been working on all the last 3 starwars films and I called him yesterday to confirm and he said ILM have totally gone over to macs.
He also said that he was chatting with George (lucas) earlier yesterday and he said he was viewing edits on his 17″ G4 PowerBook while chatting to him.
“Essentially, Apple has reinvigorated the operating system battle with Microsoft by focusing on everything but operating systems.”
huh?
He must be talking about marketing. The engineering effort put into the iPod pales in comparison to the engineering effort put into OSX.
That is why the halo effect is working.
There is substance behind the halo.