-
The Fog Thickens
-
[Chris Harlan] “The only thing that really bugs me about them still are their epically poor communication skills. “
I agree. A while back I posted that they seem to be an “autistic” company if one can anthropomorphize a communication model to a business model. It’s not even as if they have models for different markets such as one method of iOS devices and another for their computers, where purchases decisions are made very differently.
One example might be the recent dissemination of their FCPX roadmap which included important info about MXF support and audio improvements. Some companies would send out a media release. Apple, in effect, had a press conference with one person (although they apparently met with others individually as well). Certainly being able to interact with a person as they give information is better than a simple media release but that it was apparently one on one is the odd part.
I can speculate on why they did that (no greater or lesser value than any other speculation). It seems they do want to hear questions back. It seems they may not want people interacting with each other during that process. My guess is that they want to avoid the influence of “group think/group mindset” as they release this information.
-
[Herb Sevush] “So when Apple does it they are leveraging their strength. When Microsoft does it they are a monopoly strangling the industry. Got it.”
Big difference is that ultimately neither Intel or Apple control each other. It’s a relationship they entered into WILLINGLY. Microsoft did most everything through financial threat. It’s the difference between an arm wrestle and a gun pointed to your business head.
Neither Apple nor Intel can take down each other. Microsoft was capable of wiping companies they were doing business with, off the business map.
If you want to look at a more controversial Apple relationship you might look at Apple and Samsung for example. Even their neither company can take down the other.
-
[Craig Seeman] “t’s the difference between an arm wrestle and a gun pointed to your business head.”
In other words Apple would do it if it could, it just isn’t strong enough. Got it.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “In other words Apple would do it if it could, it just isn’t strong enough. Got it.”
Lots of companies would do it if they could. Hence the reason for regulatory agencies, federal and international business law.
Note that it was EU courts that nailed Microsoft.
Notice how all the lawsuits (most but not exclusively patent related) are popping up and being handled very differently in different countries.
Arguably some would say Apple can very much be like Microsoft when it comes to iOS devices. Maybe we should be appreciated of “opening up the field” they way they did with EOLing FCS.
-
[Craig Seeman] “My guess is that they want to avoid the influence of “group think/group mindset” as they release this information.”
I’m more cynical than you are. My guess is that they just don’t want to be pegged down about anything, ever. They kept Shake alive years even though they had internally killed it, simply to have that option. Mac Pro is the same thing.
-
[Craig Seeman] “HP has nixed Thunderbolt and Dell certainly hasn’t stepped forward there either. So even as Thunderbolt moves to Windows, Apple is the number one PC maker as far as far sales of Thunderbolt PCs are concerned (baring a radical jump in Lenovo, Acer, Asus sales).”
Or take EFI, Intel’s modern boot architecture. Intel Macs have all used it since there have been Intel Macs, over six years now. (Wow, has it really been that long?) Microsoft didn’t support it until Windows 7 and it’s still not widely used in the Wintel world.
Intel clearly values Apple as a partner with whom new technologies can be rolled out without waiting on Microsoft’s often sluggish Windows release cycle or dealing with the Wintel OEMs’ extreme price sensitivity.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
Hi
From the UK the late 90s buzz that I remember hearing was that with the replacement of the 6 PCI-slot 9600 PowerMacs with the 3-slot G3 ranges Avid and ProTools hardware wouldn’t fit in the new Macs.So initially they thought they’d sort that by moving to 6-slot Win NT boxes, but the uproar from (as Tim W stated) ALL the user base brought about a rethink and the necessary re-engineering to shoehorn the video/audio hardware and SCSI card into the Macs Apple were producing.
-
Like Paul, I am UK based and remember Avid dropping Mac for a short time, I would guess it was for around a year or so.
We happened to be buying a couple of media composers at the time and were told PC only.
It was around the time of the G3/G4 boxes and Avid had to resort to using Expansion Chassis to house the Avid hardware, as the lack of slots in the Macs meant Avid could not run all it needed hardware-wise.
It was certainly just about that time Mac was fairy briefly dropped.
I also remember that when Macs were re-supported, I think there was a disparity in features between the Mac and PC versions for a while until the Mac version “caught up” again.
At least thats how I remeber it – its a little fuzzy now.best wishes
Neil
http://www.patience.tv -
[Chris Harlan] “I’m more cynical than you are. My guess is that they just don’t want to be pegged down about anything, ever. They kept Shake alive years even though they had internally killed it, simply to have that option. Mac Pro is the same thing.”
The Sandy Bridge E5 Xeons are new enough that Apple’s lack of a Mac Pro update doesn’t really mean anything either way yet. Especially since Intel sometimes formally “ships” a processor well before it’s actually available in quantities useful to OEMs.
I’d put the odds of there being at least one more Mac Pro revision at 80%. After that, who knows. If the next Xeon update after this one isn’t for another two years, the number of customers who still need Mac Pros at that point — with on-board GPUs on iMacs and Minis being that much more powerful and a much more mature ecosystem around Thunderbolt — will probably be substantially smaller than it is today. And it’s already pretty small.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Chris Harlan] “They kept Shake alive years even though they had internally killed it”
Some would have wished they had allowed FCS legacy to go down that path as well.
[Chris Harlan] “My guess is that they just don’t want to be pegged down about anything, ever. “
The could remain completely silent and have chosen not to. Larry’s posted info spread everywhere. Hardly a method to avoid being pegged IMHO. From what I understand Larry wasn’t the only one they talked to so there’d be corroboration. I just think Apple feels more control in one on one situations. Sort of like the direct antithesis of the 2011 Supermeet. Apple wants complete control which not quite the same as complete silence.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up