Leopard and Apple's plan to take over the world.
OSWeekly.com - Top Secrets Revealed About Apple?s Leopard
OK, I'll bite. There is a lot of buzz about Apple's strategy, and it seems to be coming into focus. Cringely has said that Apple is going after Microsoft. So has Dvorak who has also said that "Microsoft is dead". Yet Apple still seems to be a boutique computer company to many and Steve Jobs himself has constantly compared Apple to high-end car maker Porsche. Perhaps strategically so. (Apple isn't like Porsche any more, it's growing much faster) So how would a "boutique" that makes high-end computers set itself up to take a bunch of market-share away from Microsoft?
-By letting Microsoft believe it's just a boutique computer maker and not necessarily a threat.
-By switching to Intel so that everyone can feel like their investment in a Macintosh is "safe".
-By continuing to be at the forefront of major technical developments, or at least the buzz about those developments.
-By keeping the press interested. Very interested.
-By doing what Sony has always claimed to do, but doing it better. That is, creating synergy between electronics and entertainment.
-By being consistent, on-message and by not letting Microsoft define the rules of the game. Zune is the clincher of this one, Microsoft, the company thought to be strategically superior to Apple is now trying to copy Apple's business Models.
-And, by going for the jugular and striking when Microsoft is most weak, ie. by announcing features for OS X Leopard that Microsoft had promised for Vista, but couldn't deliver.
According to the OS Weekly article, the timing is right. Apple said at the World Wide Developers Conference that they didn't want to announce all of OS X Leopard's new features for fear that Microsoft would copy them. Now that Vista's code is frozen, Apple is free to announce whatever they want.
I don't think Apple HAS to announce features that Microsoft promised for Vista and couldn't deliver, but it would be amazing if they did. Microsoft has deep pockets and it would be difficult to keep everything from them but Apple is the tightest ship in the industry.
One of the features that Apple held back is certainly the new look and feel. Another is likely the resolution independence of the Finder. With new Leopard developer kits circulating, I expect to see screenshots, both fake and real all over the net soon, along with comparisons to Vista.
What I would really like to see though, is the as-yet unneccessary, but go-for-the-jugular-cool feature of a database layer in the file system. Apple has been working on that for years and I would love to see them pull it out now. OSXFS to Microsoft's ditched WinFS. It would be full-frontal assault to Microsoft's technical ability that would demand coverage, and the attention of everyone. It would make it [more] un-deniably clear, that Apple is not only about good taste, but it's the go-to company for cutting-edge technology too.
Food for thought.
If you enjoy thinking about those possiblities, don't read this. ;)
OK, I'll bite. There is a lot of buzz about Apple's strategy, and it seems to be coming into focus. Cringely has said that Apple is going after Microsoft. So has Dvorak who has also said that "Microsoft is dead". Yet Apple still seems to be a boutique computer company to many and Steve Jobs himself has constantly compared Apple to high-end car maker Porsche. Perhaps strategically so. (Apple isn't like Porsche any more, it's growing much faster) So how would a "boutique" that makes high-end computers set itself up to take a bunch of market-share away from Microsoft?
-By letting Microsoft believe it's just a boutique computer maker and not necessarily a threat.
-By switching to Intel so that everyone can feel like their investment in a Macintosh is "safe".
-By continuing to be at the forefront of major technical developments, or at least the buzz about those developments.
-By keeping the press interested. Very interested.
-By doing what Sony has always claimed to do, but doing it better. That is, creating synergy between electronics and entertainment.
-By being consistent, on-message and by not letting Microsoft define the rules of the game. Zune is the clincher of this one, Microsoft, the company thought to be strategically superior to Apple is now trying to copy Apple's business Models.
-And, by going for the jugular and striking when Microsoft is most weak, ie. by announcing features for OS X Leopard that Microsoft had promised for Vista, but couldn't deliver.
According to the OS Weekly article, the timing is right. Apple said at the World Wide Developers Conference that they didn't want to announce all of OS X Leopard's new features for fear that Microsoft would copy them. Now that Vista's code is frozen, Apple is free to announce whatever they want.
I don't think Apple HAS to announce features that Microsoft promised for Vista and couldn't deliver, but it would be amazing if they did. Microsoft has deep pockets and it would be difficult to keep everything from them but Apple is the tightest ship in the industry.
One of the features that Apple held back is certainly the new look and feel. Another is likely the resolution independence of the Finder. With new Leopard developer kits circulating, I expect to see screenshots, both fake and real all over the net soon, along with comparisons to Vista.
What I would really like to see though, is the as-yet unneccessary, but go-for-the-jugular-cool feature of a database layer in the file system. Apple has been working on that for years and I would love to see them pull it out now. OSXFS to Microsoft's ditched WinFS. It would be full-frontal assault to Microsoft's technical ability that would demand coverage, and the attention of everyone. It would make it [more] un-deniably clear, that Apple is not only about good taste, but it's the go-to company for cutting-edge technology too.
Food for thought.
If you enjoy thinking about those possiblities, don't read this. ;)
11 Comments:
The Intel switch wasn't about making anyone feel safe, it was made necessary by IBM's failure to deliver G5s in sufficient quantity, and also their lack of commitment to making 64-bit CPUs that could go into laptops. Apple was leaving billions of dollars on the table every eyear due to supply issues.
You'll notice also, that Intel introduced a new processor generation before they had a product that was good enough for the Mac; the Pentium just wasn't going to cut it.
-jcr
IBM's failures were certainly part of the decision, but the fact that OS X had been under concurrent development for years leads me to believe that it was more strategic than that.
I'll also concede that it wasn't PRIMARILY about making people feel safe, but the net effect is that people now feel safe. Just like when people bought G4 towers instead of cubes because they COULD use the slots if they needed to. Intel makes it so you can use Windows if you need to. It's protecting your investment.
I also alluded to the fact that it was about timing. If Apple is going to go after Microsoft, like Cringely says they are, Intel was a forgone conclusion.
The fact that Steve had drunk the Intel Kool-aid clear back at NeXT didn't hurt either.
I didn't know this was an issue. It's a David and Goliath story, that I'm uncertain matters.
Do you think such a take-over is possible? A 3% beating a 90% market shareholder?
Besides winning the OS battle, there's the gaming platform, workplace apps, .NET and development side...the WebTV... lots Apple would need to do to take down the titan in Microsoft. As well as iPod and iTunes have done, and perhaps iPhone...all things considered, it take-over won't happen in our lifetime.
I think Apple's better off strengthening all their other areas, where ever they can do so with limited partnerships ? since they stink at working with partners. They, if they can, create increasingly greater integration with Window Users who overtime can use a Mac as easily as a PC in the office. Then and only then will they take an additional 5%, then 6%, and so forth.
They aren't into gaming. As the home entertainment center, they have to be. That is where they could get market share without tackling business/offices. Yet, SONY, NINTENDO and MS are heavily entrenched there...so not likely to do it.
Apple could take over cell phone, then cell-games, then SEGA, etc. That's more feasible...knocking off weaklings in various spaces until they have enough power to assault the big gamers or the office stuff.
Just my opinion.
One more food bite for thought.
I think Apple should give up on entering the office as the PC. PC's will never fulfill the promise they once had, of becoming the dominant computer people use. Mobile phone will. They already outnumber PC world wide 3:1, and in just 10 years time.
As mobile phones become more powerful, as with Moore's trajectory, Apple need not win in PC's ? so whould win this new and bigger and more splintered market.
Smart Phones are the key. They are simpler, more reliable, less expensive, more mobile...everything that makes them the first User experience in the billions of new customers that will emerge out of India, China, etc. That is where Apple has it's chance. Grow with the emerging countries, where you can amass market, then topple the U.S. market... if it matters at that point.
If Apple could keep pace with the poor in these areas, their rise through microfinance (microcredit), affording a cell phone or TV long before a PC, then keeping them loyal is what's left... and manageable. Make is so they won't need to have a PC, because their PDA is so darn functional, safe, fast, mobile, ubiquitous.
Be humanitarian at the same time!
I didn't mean to suggest that a literal take-over was imminent the title was mostly tongue-in-cheek. Dvorak is known to make blanket statements like "Microsoft is Dead" which simply cannot be taken seriously. They are, however, good fun.
That said, this year Apple will achieve a much larger market-share gains than most people expect.
"Do you think such a take-over is possible? A 3% beating a 90% market shareholder?"
In many ways, Apple has already beat Microsoft. They get more press, and more respect from consumers. Microsoft has never been able to create a compelling retail experience, yet Apple stores are always mobbed. Zune is only the latest example.
Yes, there is the X-Box. That's the wildcard. The epic battle will begin with iTV.
The PC is dead, long live the PC. Yes, in third-world countries, phones can take the place of PCs, but not in developed countries. Desktop and laptop PCs will be a part of our workflow for many years to come. It's possible that we will continue to see other types of PC adjuncts like Wifi tablets or even digital paper, but PCs are not going away.
Apple knows this and has a strong evolutionary strategy in place.
As much as I like the idea that they could put Microsoft in their place by sneaking out a feature like a database backed file system, they are only slightly more nimble than Microsoft. Operating systems are complex beasts. Apple has the advantage of controlling the hardware which gives them some flexibility, but ultimately, huge featured cannot be dropped in.
But I can dream, and I can blog, and when I want a reality check, I'll go read John Siracusa.
I'd like to see Apple use the iPhone to gain share in the rest of the world too. It would be great if they created something so unbelievably compelling that it took the third world by storm, and it's not inconceivable that the iPhone could do just that. Expecially if, in fact, it runs a mini OS X like Kevin Rose said it would.
If appealing to areas where cell-phones replace computers is part of Apple's strategy, it dovetails nicely with their strategy to make OS X the OS of choice.
A UI redesign is a possibility but give what Apple has shown the public of Leopard it isn't too likely. As for resolution independence, it's not a secret feature. In fact there's been screenshots of it for quite a while and Apple has even announced it on their site:
http://developer.apple.com/leopard/overview/
An OS X equivalent to WinFS is a nice sounding thing but honestly there's no reason to go for this. Storing all your data in a large database is a very very big mistake. WinFS is your classic Microsoft project: something to do everything. It doesn't fit into the way the Mac works, which is lots of smaller applications that do their job well, but integrate well together. This is why you don't get apps like iMovie and iDVD merged together or iTunes and Garageband. This is why Mail.app, iCal and Address Book are all separate.
We've already seen two features of Leopard that rank in the most significant OS X features (in fact I'd put them together with Exposé as the top 3): Time Machine and iChat 4 (iChat Theatre and Screen Sharing are far more significant than any other features added to iChat). I'd be willing to put money on Apple having at least one secret feature that tops these.
The other secret feature to contemplate is this: The Complete Package. Jobs listed Boot Camp, Front Row and Photo Booth but then said "these are just 3 examples of how we are going to ship the complete package of the applications we have with Leopard". Now to me that sounds like a possibility of iLife being re-integrated with OS X, which would make sense not to pre-announce as it would cannibalise iLife 06 sales up until MWSF. It also makes sense to do as Apple wouldn't have to keep up the same pace of yearly updates to iLife.
Pilky,
I can see your point about storing everything in a central database not being ideal. Apple has moved away from that idea somewhat with iPhoto. They also seem to be adding most of the benefits that database would offer by using indexing and Spotlight.
I was mostly just musing about how cool it would be if Apple delivered somehing that Microsoft promised to deliver and then couldn't. I also said that it ultimately didn't matter. Apple has enough momentum as it is, and in a sense, moving to a WinFS-like system would be letting Microsoft set the agenda, and Apple just isn't doing that these days. Apple is doing what Apple does and pretty much ignoring Microsoft. Microsoft is not ignoring Apple though. Microsoft is copying Apple on levels that I never expected. They are ditching their own agenda of "openness" ie. "plays anywhere" and trying to copy Apple's business model. Zune anyone? I didn't think so.
Your thoughts about "The Complete Package" are very intriguing. I'd like to see that line of thought developed even further.
A big revenue stream for MSFT is their server OS. Why? Because IT idiots are addicted to Outlook/Exchange, which happens to be a POS from a user point of view. This is what Apple should probably attack next; deliver a semi-open-sourced Email server that blows Exchange out of the water. It should be about an afternoon's work for them, I should think.
Apple is certainly rumored to be working on some type of "team-ware." Exchange is the 90 lb gorilla, and making in-roads to that market won't be easy due to the addiction you mentioned. I'd love to see it happen though.
Post a Comment
<< Home