Skip to comments.Where were you when Apple declared war?
Posted on 07/12/2011 11:02:42 AM PDT by Swordmaker
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.computerworld.com ...
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
Apple has great design and makes great product. Shouldn’t that be enough? No, they have to shut down innovation elsewhere?
Send in the clowns......I mean lawyers.
It didn't save Apple in 1985 and it won't save Apple now. Even if there was merit to Apple's various cases (as before, there probably isn't) the legal system will render verdicts years after the marketplace does.
War? There’s a war?
Oh, yeah. I remember something about a “clone” war. Back in the 80’s or 90’s? How did that work out? :-)
Yep, thank goodness there are alternatives to Apple. Their closed nature always irks me.
No, by forcing competitors to find alternative or even better solutions, they are actually stimulating innovation. Well, that’s another way to look at it. ;-)
They are arrogant and pompous beyond belief.
They will loose, like they did with their “look and feel” lawsuits against Microsoft in the 90s.
Hopefully when they go down this time they take their sycophant fanboys with them.
I seem to recall them using the phrase “if you cant innovate, litigate” when Apple gets sued. Now it all happy “they are trying to protect their IP” nonsense.
idunno, but we’re all better off because they did.
Apple is trying to become the Righthaven, LLC of the tech world. They better watch out, Righthaven might sue them for copyright infringement for stealing its business model.
It’s the liberal way. Use the courts to shutdown your competition when you can’t dominate by having the best product. Some folks don’t want an Apple product. It may be price, features or objection to supporting a company that finances leftists causes.
I know you are being sarcastic but I’ve had an iPad for about 6 months, it is pretty good as a ebook reader but I alway set it aside and used the laptop if I wanted to do more.
I bought an Asus Transformer last week. It is great. I can use the tab for reading then attach the keyboard when I want to type. 2 USB ports, SD and micro SD slots, 16 hour battery life, tabbed multitasking, Google Maps with a very good GPS, I actually use it instead of the laptop most of the time now.
Whether or not you agree with the strategy, that's a ridiculous comparison. Apple is attempting to protect its own research and development, something that Righthaven couldn't even dream of ever doing. You know, producing something other than legal documents.
Now, we could have an interesting discussion on patents in general, but not if it's going to start with cheap, inaccurate, and irrelevant ad hominem attacks.
Besides, the so-called Righthaven model originated in the tech world in the first place, by SCO (note: not the original SCO, but a patent troll outfit using that name). They failed, just as Righthaven did.
The “clone war” of the ‘80s or ‘90s worked out by IBM, creator and definer of the standard, being utterly crushed by the competition after giving them the keys to the kingdom. The kingdom is now dominated by a symbiotic competitor, who struggles to keep the squatting rabble under some semblance of control in a decades-stagnating ecosystem.
I bought an original IBM PC. It came with complete electronic schematics and complete BIOS source code listing. Small wonder IBM lost all control.
You knew that -- but just had to find something to bitch about.
Get back under your bridge...
In case you haven't noticed, Apple is dominating by having the best product in its market. Nobody sells more high-end cell phones, nobody sells more tablets, nobody sells more high-end consumer computers. Although I do think Apple's lawyers tend to go overboard, Apple is about as far away from being a patent troll as you can get.
Now show me Dell suing someone, that would look like pure desperation.
to supporting a company that finances leftists causes.
Then you're left out of almost all tech purchases.
Rolls Royce makes arguably the best product in their market. How many they sell doesn't have anything to do with the quality of what they make, or how many lawyers they employ or how many patents they control.
I guess inside the "ecosystem", "quality" is whatever Apple is doing the best at today.
It really is hard to avoid patronizing companies that support leftist causes. The leftists have infiltrated corporate America.
"quality" is whatever Apple is doing the best at today.
No, Apple tends to actually have the highest quality products. Apple also consistently rates highest for consumer satisfaction and support. So Apple isn't one of these companies making cheap products on a slim margin, suing because they need to pad the balance books or slow down the competition so they can catch up.
And when their orders and stock prices were going up the buzz was all about that. Now that they’ve started to fall off, you never hear about it. It gets pretty transparent after awhile.
“Were” going up? Stock fluctuates of course, but have you seen the latest iPad numbers? There is the possibility of an iPhone slow down due to the imminent release of the next generation in a month or so, and because of that sales tend to be cyclic, a dip before release, a boom afterwards.
Let me know when somebody dies in the "war".
The simplest definition of "quality" is whatever the public is willing to pay the most for. Apple doesn't sell $300 laptops, but it makes more money selling laptops than anyone else does - meaning either that they sell devices on the basis of glitz, or that they sell devices which perform well and remain valuable when used. I didn't buy an expensive model of Mac, but years after I bought it, PC users who see it are struck by it.
Including Rush Limbaugh?
Rush doesn’t spend his time looking for articles trying to trash other platforms.
People that just like it are not the same as fanboys who just flame for kicks and to prop up their self-esteem.
Anybody who tries just glitz without underlying value fails. Remember most PC users trying to pimp-up their PCs with plastic in the face of Apple's design successes? Remember Apple's own Mac Cube? It was very nice and glitzy, but it cost far more than equivalent Mac hardware. Not many people have that much money to shell out for looks.
I look at the G4 Cube as a step on the way to the Mac Mini. For years, a lot of folks were clamoring for a "headless iMac," so they could save some money by using the monitor they already had. The Cube wasn't it. The Mini was.
The Cube, the 20th Anniversary Mac, and (I would argue) the first iteration of the MacBook Air were what Apple-bashers claim all Macs are -- machines that charged a hefty premium for aesthetics. There is a limited market for such machines. On the other hand, machines with smart, functional, and yes, aesthetically appealing design, like the iMac, the MacBook Pro, and the current-generation MacBook Air, iPhone and iPad sell quite well.
I take it that you work for the Lame Stream Media.....
First, nobody remains the big dog forever. Second, that's one hell of a ten-year bubble. How long does a bubble have to last before it simply becomes the state of things? Apple has had to face fierce competition to every single product by the biggest players in industry for a decade, and is still having success.
I bought an original Apple II, one of the first ones. Same thing, Apple published the schematics and BIOS code. Soon there were hundreds of cheap clones and Apple lost control. Apple learned their lesson with subsequent inventions (except for handing over the Mac GUI code to Microsoft, which they cloned as Windows).
I remember when the Russians announced their first home-developed personal computer at some world electronics exhibition, touted as totally designed by Russians. Except when westerners took a peek at the BIOS, it was identical to the Apple code right down to the embedded Apple copyright notices.
When did market dominance in pocket toys like iPods become the benchmark of dominance in the computer industry?
You've heard of the "blue screen of death" for MS. Well, Apple iDads have the equivalent; the "cracked screen" of "you're-gonna-pay-an-assload" to repair/replace. In both cases, my employer paid for replacement/repair. I'd have given up both if I would have to have paid.
Agree, except part of the Air's aesthetics was its extreme portability, an actually useful feature. The problem was then it was far too slow to be even a main road warrior machine. But it was a technological feat just to get it that small in the first place, much less worry about performance.
In fact, the Cube even had some high technology behind the looks. The kind of molding technology to make that case was invented by Apple, and the system was carefully designed to allow chimney cooling without fans. It's not like the standard, stick a fancy plastic faceplate on a box and call it "design."
And, yes, the 20th Anniversary Mac was just for show, a "here's what we can do" vision thing. I was surprised Apple didn't make it a limited edition in the first place.
I suspect that may also be somewhat responsible for the demise of the XServe. Nobody wants to pay a premium for a glitzy machine that spends it's life in a dark room.
The XServe got rave reviews from admins. It was very well designed, easy to do anything without tools (that wasn't as common when the XServe was introduced). And compared to Windows servers, the licensing made them much less expensive.
You keep your server room dark when you're in there? Do you keep night vision goggles in the man trap? I like walking into the server room and seeing all those nice Sun systems racked up, or the cool looks of the EMC and NetApp racks, rather than the ugly hodgepodge of the x86 server racks. It makes the server room look neater, and I'm a server neat freak (channel and label that cabling!). I'm not alone in this.
People buy servers and operating systems to run applications. What good is a free OS that won't run the apps you need?
If you're that impressed with Mac servers, why did you buy Sun?
Apple is moving away from high-powered local servers and into providing cloud services. Note the recent billions of dollars of investment in the infrastructure to support them. The XServe is simply not on the strategic roadmap, not worth the R&D and support investment for the small role Apple sees it playing. Whether this approach is a good one is debatable.
There is rumor that for those people who absolutely have to have a rack-mounted Mac, the next Mac Pro may be rackable.
I didn't buy it. This particular enterprise actually has little use for what Apple offers in the server room. There is no Oracle 11g or MSSQL 2008 equivalent on the Mac. Horses for courses.
That isn't all you can't get the equivalent of on a Mac, and you aren't the only one the didn't need what Mac was offering, by a long shot.
Mac doesn't want to deal with the back end, they want to own the front end, make you figure out how to make the integration work in the middle, and convince you it's worth it because it looks cool.
They did, just not limited enough. They made 12,000, and had to cut the price from $9K to $2K before they finally unloaded all of them.
I have to disagree with your slowness characterization of the Macbook Air. When the Macbook Air came out on January 15, 2008, at 2.9 pounds and .76 inch thick, it was far faster than any other sub-notebook on the market at 1.6GHz... and it would run Windows XP, Vista, and later Windows 7. The offerings from the other companies at the time in the same class were generally 1Ghz or slower. Although not a speed demon, with 667MHz DDR2 RAM, and a Intel P7500 Core 2 Duo processor, it easily competed with main stream notebook computers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.