iPhone

Sanity check: Is Apple's sway over the media and tech now complete?

For a company that owns less than ten percent of the computer market and isn't even in the top five among the biggest revenue generators in technology, Apple still attracts more attention from the media and the tech industry than any of its competitors. And, recent events have shown that its influence has reached a fevered pitch.

For a company that owns less than ten percent of the computer market and isn't even one of the top five revenue generators in the technology sector, Apple still attracts more attention from the media and the tech industry than any of its larger competitors. And, three stories in May have shown that Apple's puissance over the press is greater than ever.

1.) The mysterious ocean containers

On May 23, Fortune published a report about a major spike in ocean containers labeled "electric computers" for Apple. The source was ImportGenius, which tracks U.S. Customs records looking for information on the activities of businesses. They recorded the arrival of 188 of these containers since mid-March from two of Apple's primary Asian suppliers.

ImportGenius noted that Apple's "electric computers" label is a new one and that the arrival of these new containers did not correspond with a drop in other types of containers such as the ones labeled "desktop computers." Thus, the natural conclusion is that this is for a new product. The most likely candidate is a new 3G version of the iPhone, which is expected to be announced on June 9 when CEO Steve Jobs gives the opening keynote for Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC08).

Alternatively, some have speculated that Apple could soon release a tablet computer.

2.) Closure of the 24-hour Apple Store

On May 29, Apple closed down its New York City Apple Store on Fifth Avenue, which is famous for being open 24/7/365. MacRumor.com reported Apple Store employees were telling customers who approached the store that it was closed because a commercial was being shot, and according to the site's sources the commercial was for the 3G iPhone.

MacRumor.com also noted that the store had only closed on two previous occasions: the original iPhone launch and the Mac OS X Leopard launch.

3.) The AT&T vacation memo

On May 6, AT&T sent an internal e-mail to the sales employees of its stores to inform them that no one could take vacation between June 15 to July 15 because the company had "an exciting new promotion/product launch" during that time, as first revealed by The Boy Genius Report and later picked up by lots of other news outlets.

Since AT&T is the exclusive carrier for the iPhone and the company instituted a similar vacation black-out during last year's iPhone launch, the obvious speculation is that June 15 will be when Apple and AT&T officially release iPhone 2.0 into retail stores.

Why does Apple have us in a trance?

Whatever new product Apple announces on June 9, this type of speculation and news coverage is unique to Apple. Can you imagine the press and the blogosphere following Customs data to try to find information about Microsoft's next version of the Zune or Hewlett-Packard's newest Tablet PC?

So why does Apple have such a strong hold over the press and the tech industry? Here are four reasons:

  • Apple is notoriously tight-lipped and dramatic about its new products. It likes to build the suspense and surprise everyone in order to build excitement and product demand.
  • By contrast, other companies such as Microsoft tend to be more transparent and also tend to leak out lots of details and teases for the media.
  • Apple is on a roll, having delivered a string of terrific products from the iPod to the MacBook to the iPhone, and so they have a captive audience wondering "what's next?"
  • Steve Jobs is very charismatic and simply knows how to put on a good show.

Despite that fact that the members of the press are conscious of this, we continue to fuel Apple's fire by reporting on Customs containers and vacation schedules. After all, we know that users will click on stories about Apple. In spite of its small market share, Apple draws user interest even from those who don't have an iPhone or a Mac.

I'm following this story because the iPhone 2.0 includes a new move to enable Microsoft Exchange support and potentially a lot more business applications, which will make it a much stronger option for businesses and IT. But, if I'm honest with myself, I will admit that even if that weren't the case, I'd probably be covering the iPhone 2.0 story out of sheer curiosity to see what's next. In that way, I'm just as guilty as anyone in helping fuel the Apple hype machine, even though I severely dislike the thought of that.

About

Jason Hiner is the Global Editor in Chief of TechRepublic and Global Long Form Editor of ZDNet. He is an award-winning journalist who writes about the people, products, and ideas that are revolutionizing the ways we live and work in the 21st century.

168 comments
$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$

[i]Do you think Apple gets press coverage disproportionate to its market share and its place in the tech industry?[/i] Given its place: the consistent manufacturer of quality that the segment of the market able to afford it deems worthy of a premium price, Apple gets as much attention as the market for news -- and commentary -- on Apple will bear.

jlafitte
jlafitte

Ha. A company I won't mention just spent a week hunting down the reason their Macintosh workstations and FileMaker were corrupting all records entered beyond retrievability. Scuttlebutt is that "virus proof" Macs... caught a virus. No speculation as to who or where the virus came from. Staying in the context of the Apple "Mr. Mac" vs. "Mr. PC" television ads, "Mr. Mac" at this branch office wasn't a cool, collected GenX guy with a cute Japanese girlfriend, he was a fry-brain doper doing nothing of economic value.

RealGem
RealGem

Switch the word Apple for Microsoft and then read your gut feelings. Howzat for a sanity check?

$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$

and unusual. But, you wouldn't say you were being [u]punished[/u], would you?

Bobby Dean
Bobby Dean

It is YOU they have in a trance not me ... YOU are one of the people helping to create the hype! ... personally I would never buy anything Apple! and I especially hate Quicktime ... how much are YOU getting paid to push Apple products?

jasonhiner
jasonhiner

Try it next time before you comment. It works much better.

Bobby Dean
Bobby Dean

And it is just another plug for Apple ... as I said before!

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

... to oppose them? Only somebody with a closed mind would oppose them as vehemently as you do.

Bobby Dean
Bobby Dean

I fail to see how the article is opposing them ... it is just another Apple plug!

jimstead
jimstead

Why would the media start trying to be neutral now? "Journalistic Ethics" is one of the best oxymorons there is. At least this time it's pursuing a quality act.

netjet02
netjet02

I love to see what techno-sheep buy. I have exactly what I need to have to work and what makes me feel happy (warm and fuzzy). Now if I was a techno-sheep the next iToy might make me happy and I would go buy it. The only upgrades I buy are ones that my applications need to run; and whatever else makes me feel happy. Mr. Jobs has to wean the next generation of iSheep on something; and who can blame him if people throw their money and attention at him every time he craps out another iWidget.

chaz15
chaz15

Or is that apple's away..... Sorry couldn't resist that one. Seriously, Apple may only have 10% of the market but much of that 10% is with wealthy people, probably hence the media interest. Journalists and TV reporters probably queue up for the latest iPhone etc or am I being cynical? .........

viruser
viruser

They have in trance because they have the best marketing strategies; including a CEO who's a hell of a speaker.

pavppz1
pavppz1

It is very interesting how apple is taking the attention of everyone with their very highly priced computer products. At the same time we are stuck with Microsoft Vista.. What will come of Vista, are we somehow going to start to like it a lot? www.computer-answers.com

owner
owner

I have been using Vista since it came out and I love it. Yeah, it uses more memory and processor than XP, but then Windows used more than DOS, Windows 3.1 used more than the previous version, Win XP used more than Windows 2000. That is part of progress. THe next bestthing will use more resources because it has more features and newer technologies that require more ram or more processor or more drive space. So why does everyone act like it is some big shocker that VIsta uses more. It's not like RAM or hard drives are very expensive. You can get motherboards and higher end processors as well as graphics cards a lot cheaper than they used to be. Putting together a system that will kick a** on vista is not that cost prohibitive. The cost of the OS is not that bad when you compare it to what other OS's cost (not including linux that is free). 10 years ofter OS/2 has gone away, Vista is still cheaper by a couple of hundred bucks. Yeah, it is more expensive than previous OS's, but then prior to XP, Windows was under $100 (US) and was like that for years. So yeah, if you try to run Vista on the computer you bought in the late 90's, yeah...its going to run like crap. Upgrade already man hehehe Eric

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

[i]So why does everyone act like it is some big shocker that VIsta uses more.[/i] Because you had to upgrade your hardware seriously just to use it! Even now, almost 2 years after introduction, a lot of off-the-shelf PCs are barely able to run it in it's graphical mode. Apple's Leopard OS X can run effectively on computers that were built years before Leopard came out. Why the complaints? To run Vista you almost have to buy a new machine; to run Leopard, you likely can use what you already have. I'll tell you now that a PC that I built a few years back, in 2002, and considered better-than- average when it was built can NOT run Vista. My first- generation G4 Mac Mini can run Leopard without a hitch. Yes, it's a shocker. Microsoft knew what they were doing and they were trying to drive hardware sales so they could sell more copies than they would if it just ran on the same old hardware. It didn't work.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

Ok, I admit I retired the old Mac Mini as my everyday user... it now serves as my DVR with full control of my satellite system. I even have full control over it remotely from other computers on my home network and can even program it from over a thousand miles away because of Leopard and the software I have installed on it. Yes, I upgraded my desktop for newer and faster, but that doesn't mean the older, slower machine has been retired or even relegated to "basic" services. Were it not for Leopard, the Mini might just have gone the way you suggest.

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

PC's these days aren't expected to stay cutting edge, or better than average after 2-3 years. And I consider replacing them within 5 and selling mine to someone who needs something basic. 2002? That's 6 years. Graphics cards, processor speeds, the number of cores on the processors and RAM speeds/sizes have all increased drastically since then. If you're going to be cheap and not want a new pc to run new games or graphics intensive programs then you'll be fine with an older box like that or an old g4. If you want to play with the new stuff or run the latest version of Windows you need to upgrade. That's been a problem with each version of Windows, nothing new there. That g4 with old pc100 memory and agp graphics may run leopard well, but the first time my kid pops in the latest game (if it's even available for an apple) he's not gonna be abnle to run it. You have to upgrade unless you use the same old apps, fact of life. You're gonna get something you'll be happy with if you buy a new mac or a new pc(spec'd similarly) with Vista....but you can't blame the OS for you not wanting to buy new hardware or hardware greater than the minumum specs. I'm as cheap as they come, and even I bulit a new pc to run Vista. Not to mention my graphics card was drastically outdated (agp like the g4) and wouldn't run any newer 3d applications or games decently. People like to run pc's into the ground and wonder why new stuff won't work with it. It's a pc...you need to upgrade at some point even if the machine still works. Are you going to drive around an 8 year old Honda Civic with 300,000 miles and complain about it even if it was a nice one when you bought it? Or are you going to accept that it's a beater and lucky to be running still? If you want the shiny new car paint and the new car smell you have to get a shiny new car.

victor.gutzler
victor.gutzler

The ways of Jobs and Apple is reminiscent of Wonka and his chocolate factory, with the iPhone being among the modern iCandies. But who plays the part of Slugworth? Will Jobs being looking for a Charlie to take over for him?

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

Aye. And I hope he finds one. Apple is run completely differently from any other business I know... and it works for them. Conventional corporate methods nearly drove them under until Jobs came back. Whoever replaces Jobs as head needs to think "out of the box" as much as Steve has to keep the company ahead.

hnmcc
hnmcc

Don't know if anyone has already mentioned this, but here in the UK the BBC (supposedly an impartial commentator on events, where business is concerned) gushes over each and every Apple launch - so much so, it's embarrassing. I have always assumed that this is because the BBC, like many other media organisations, is overwhelmingly staffed by people for whom image is all. You know the types I mean - idiotic facial hair, ridiculous glasses, etc. etc. For these people, the clean "minimalist" appearance of Apple's products more than makes up for whatever flaws they may have in use.

dcolbert
dcolbert

Refreshing honesty from a journalist on this topic. I've got to admit, I click through on Apple stuff too. I also have consistently owned an Apple through their models, starting with a Mac LC-2 with various models in between to my current G4 Silver. OS X is simply the most successful desktop *nix available. In a few short years they achieved what Ubuntu and Redhat and every other *nix variant had been chasing for a decade. The iPod revitilized them, the iPhone is uber-cool tech (even with its warts). Within the parameters of what they are, they're an incredible company (for marketing saavy, for innovative products, and for a reputation of generally higher than average quality products). They've always been adept at capturing the youth market, for illustrating an ability to make technology hip and something to be desired. Additionally, after messing around with other services and products (Napster-Legitimate, Creative Nomad, etc), by the time Apple had gotten to the 5G ipods it was clear that they were the way to go. iTunes has been called many things (even here), but it is probably the most user friendly online store and media management application readily accessible to the general public. I suppose you could write pages and pages about what Apple does do right, and espcially about Jobs' marketing sense (and I'm sure there are already a lot of authors who have). In the end I think Apple remains a precarious company that rapidly changing technology could disrupt tomorrow. But really, I don't think there is a tech organization exempt from this. Microsoft, Intel.. these companies thrive on paranoia and worrying not about their current market, but what they will be doing to grow and compete 2-12 years down the road. Apple would be the dark horse, to this day, simply in that although they are a dominant corporation, they exist in their own vacuum of sorts.

dcolbert
dcolbert

Because I love to respond to myself... Reading through the rest of the article... the passion and opinion that people have for this issue is *bound* to draw media attention. I've got a XV6800 (HTC) smart phone. It does everything that an iPhone does, pretty much, and a lot that the iPhone doesn't do. But it doesn't do it as elegently (as far as the general user interface), and it doesn't look as sexy just sitting there doing nothing. In fact, it looks pretty much like the PC guy from the Commercial standing next to the Hip Mac guy, if you look at the two side by side. Someone else mentioned the recent "Mac on the IT Enterprise" thread (written by the same author as this story, I think). The conclusion there, Apple products work for some people, with narrow but specific needs or desires. So does a Ferrari. But you wouldn't want to use it to pull your boat down to the lake. For the vast majority of my tasks, I need the electronic alternative to a full-sized truck. I may see someone else out there on the Information Highway whizzing by on their iPhone, or iBook and think to myself, "That sure is a pretty ride and I wish I had a reason to own one"... but ultimately, I don't, and I wouldn't be happy with the quirks and limitations of one of these devices.

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

At my workplace (and home) I have a few applications that are the only justification I have for even needing a smart phone. But since I have the phone I've grown accustomed to using vpn to get back to the office while "on call" and correcting minor issues. These tasks (vpn/GIS applications that work geospatial databases and sql/RDP/a few others...) can't be done on the iPhone. But apple has ignored the GIS market for a long, long time so that's nothing new. Like I said in a previous post, if Microsoft released something like the iPhone and it was as locked down as the iPhone is, only allowing whatever Jobs and his developers deem acceptable, people would be up in arms. Apple locks the phone down in order to maintain a prettly interface and it's "intuitive, thoughtful and innovative." Whatever they're paying the marketing department, it's worth it! I mean really, it's not much more than a slick looking internet appliance/phone/iPod and it's all of a sudden the hottest "smart" phone on the planet.

dcolbert
dcolbert

I think the distinction is how you use a "business smart phone". If it is to connect to Microsoft services and applications, then no, the iPhone generally isn't very smart. But for what it is capable of, it is far smarter than a regular phone, and in many ways superior to a Palm or Windows Mobile based phone (with the obvious limitations). But I have an HTC, as well. For all the same reasons you state. And opening the API will help, but I don't think it will close the gap. Apply finds itself once again in a place where a Windows OS has a significant lead in developing a compelling library, one that includes apps that end-users have come to rely on, and that includes apps that integrate very well if not seamlessly with other Microsoft OS and app products. You'll have a lot more apps when Apple opens the API... but ClarisWorks never really made that much of a difference for Apple, now did it? Seems like this will be a repeat of THAT battle, to me. I could be wrong. Me, I've got WinCE apps I've been using since my first Casiopeia 115. There is a comfort level in being able to move familiar apps along, for free, when you move to the next device - and that leads to consumer lock-in. Microsoft just has too much of a lead here. It would have to be real compelling in order to convince me to switch and give this up.

Neon Samurai
Neon Samurai

.. the iPhone could very quickly become a contender. My preferences are elsewhere so I don't gain by it but I can see a huge developer following stepping into the light if Apple opens the platform to third parties. All the current iPhone hackers become endorsed over night and the waiting developers with interest have the green light. On the up side, the libre source may easily cross platforms unless the iPhone folk stick to cacoa (er.. spelling?).

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

That I actually like the iPhone even though I am sort of an anti-Mac guy. As an IT guy though, unless a phone gives me tools to manage my network remotely or perform business tasks (microsoft office tasks/pdf viewing) I just don't consider it a smart phone IMO. I love the iPhones fluid interface and mp3 player capabilities, but for me the HTC touch makes a better choice. One reason, I need it for work. It's Exchange interface is nice, the calendar is great, it syncs my contacts perfectly and I can incorporate it into my domain security. It also allows me to use vpn and occasionaly handle situations while I'm on call and not sitting at home on my rump. I'd love to carry an iPhone but I won't be "that guy" that's carrying a business smart phone and a big honking iPhone on his hip. :) The HTC does everything I want well, just doesn't look as nice as the iPhone's interface. I'm not knocking the iPhone when I don't refer to it as a smart phone, I just don't see it as a bonafide business tool. It has many wonderful features, but in the end it is held back to keep that slick interface running smoothly. My HTC may be buggy at times, but anything that provides that much end user customization and allows you to install whatever you want will be.

dcolbert
dcolbert

Grocery getter or street legal racecar... what do you WANT and what do you NEED. Even the Corvette versus Ferrari argument relates. No matter how nice you make the Vette, it is always going to be a domestic, GM product - at some point, that Italian cachet plays some part in the "value", as certainly as having the Apple logo somewhere on your phone/pc/mp3 player does. Trying to dissolve this into "rational justifications" for one choice or the other is always going to be an exercise in futility. I'm a BMW guy... a lot of people will swear by other rides - Audi, Pontiac, Lexus, Saab. I've been "beat" by Cameros and Mustangs in little street races. But for my needs and personal prefences, BMWs seem to generally hit the sweet spot. There is a certain amount of status-consciousness in there, as well. A Camero, faster or not, better handling or not, does not fit my self-image and the image I want to project. I'd also argue that the build quality and trim level of a Camero would never satisfy me. So there are practical, rational parts of the decision and irrational, impractical parts, too. Same thing goes here. The iPhone is not a toy. To me, an LG EnV (which is still a real nice, feature packed phone), is more of a "toy". the iPhone is a smart-phone. Smart is subjective here, too. The HTC Windows Mobile phones are generally more FLEXIBLE and easier to customize with a larger library of applications available. But they're also clunkier, not as asthetically designed - more or less, we see the same dividing philosophy here as we see between Macs and PCs, and it is no surprise that we see the users divide into the same two predictable camps, as well.

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

But internet an email do not a smartphone make. "Smart"phones do many tasks outside of internet access, ipod capabilities and regular phone tasks. Smart phones have office suites (with limited editing ability granted), pdf viewing abilities, vpn ability, the ability to join networks and have central management capabilites. The iPhone is no doubt awesome at what it does, it just doesn't do much. It's a toy, albeit a well executed toy.

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

Most people don't WANT a phone that can VPN. They want a phone to be a phone... with some web browsing capability built in. If you want to VPN, buy a computer.

pavppz1
pavppz1

well, I guess thats about as realistic a response as I could put together. Except, I wouldnt compare a Ferrari to an Iphone, after all, there is nothing that you can ever say against a Ferarri, an Iphone/Mac.. there is much to be said.. anyway good point, and I would agree that this same idea can be applied towards desktops and laptops, not just the phones.. www.computer-answers.com

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

The low end ones cost the same as my house. :( But once you hear one singing at 7000 rpms the price almost seems worth it! Nothing like a relatively low displacement v10 or v12. I rode in a Ferrari Mranello and a Lambo Murcielago once at a huge car show...couple of short (1/4 mile full throttle runs). I always pictured them as "pretty boy toys" since you could easily build a vette to out run them. No...not at all, they are pure bred race horces that are a borderline orgasmic experience. The sights, sounds and smells are indescribable. I would sell my house to purchase one if they only had room for a car seat. :)

blazing-biz
blazing-biz

We all know the Mac devotees, preaching the gospel of Steve Jobs latest marketing scheme - Macs aren't really better than PCs but Mac lovers won't hear it, I have not gotten an iPod or iPhone I happen to wake up every morning despite that fact, go figure. There's nothing worth groveling on the floor about in regard to Macs and paying twice as much for software and peripherals. But the genius of Apple is in marketing and sucking the gullible Mac lovers dry and having them praise Apple for it and beg for more. It's just a computer, if you're in love with it enjoy it, kind of silly I think but it's a free country. One reason the media just loves Mac is that Apple computers have been heavily used in media jobs since the beginning of main stream PCs, and media people tend to be very group think motivated. The thing about Macs is that they are self fulfilling prophecies, the people who adore them seek to put Macs on a pedestal and find every excuse to do so while scorning it's competitors. With this mindset how can anything go wrong with Macs? The way the Mac cult fawns over Steve Jobs every anouncement shows you where all the power of the Mac comes from, it exists in the heads of those who subcribe to the hype and they in turn push it forward like a never ending cycle. And a Mac devotee will screech at the mention of any of this howling at us non-believers. There's nothing that can be done for them, they pay twice as much for computering power and software, getting nothing in return but the self-fulfilling prophecy played out in their head and set up for the next Mac command for the next thing they HAVE TO have and love every minute of it. Again the genius is in the how Jobs got into these people's heads in the first place, much like designer coffee paying $6 for a cup of Joe because of the label on the cup - same thing.

Matt Henderson
Matt Henderson

Apple Macbook Pro $2,899 2.5 Ghz Intel Core Duo 2.0 Gb 667 DDR2 SDRAM (2x1Gb) 250 Gb SATA drive 17" WUXGA LED backlit display 8x DVD+R/DVD+RW/CD-RW optical drive AirPort Extreme 802.11a/b/g/n Backlit keyboard multitouch touchpad Mac OS 10.5 Dell Precision M6300 $3,106 2.5 Ghz Intel Core Duo 2.0 Gb 667 DDR2 SDRAM (2x1Gb) 250 Gb SATA drive 17" WUXGA display 8X DVD+/-RW optical drive Intel? 4965 802.11a/g/n Dual-Band Mini Card standard keyboard standard touchpad Genuine Windows Vista? Ultimate 64 Edition Downgrade, XP 64 Installed Better display (LED backlit), better touchpad (multitouch), better OS, and $207 less...

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

... since you stated yourself that you have never used any? How can you know that they are "no different?" How can you know that the "Apple Evangelists" are brainwashed? Without Experience, you only have Opinion. Perfectly your right to express your opinion; but don't try to pass it off as Fact.

John Quillen
John Quillen

It fascinates me how people who complain about zealots often have formed their opinions about where the zeal comes from based purely on conjecture. I suspect they're probably zealots in their own right about the 'opposite' technology or whatever. I've long-suffered Windows in working environments. I much prefer Macs for many reasons. For me, personally, the extra cost is worth it because they _work_ and the user experience is far better. YMMV, but I've formed my opinion based on extensive use of both not based on being mesmerized by marketing. I don't understand Mac zealots or Windows zealots. I don't think either is worth being religious about.

dcolbert
dcolbert

Despite the fact that we both seem to fall at different ends of the spectrum on opinion (I prefer Win32 for many reasons), at least we can agree on the most important point. It is your choice in a computer OS. It doesn't define who you are. I think the problem happens when people make subjective comments about their prefered OS and present them as universal truths... "extra cost is worth it because they _work_ and the user experience is far better". Leave off the YMMV and the "my opinion", and that becomes a challenge to the Win32 guy. It also gets under my skin when people attack perceived Win flaws and claim that their OS of choice is exempt. It used to be about Win32 bloat. Ever seen the recent minimum requirements to run a loaded version of Ubuntu? Before that it was that Win was just a shell over DOS. Really, what is GIMP or KDE but a Graphic Windows Manager over a Graphic Subsystem over a CLI OS? I also remember the "Windows, update and reboot" claims. How many times do you get done with an OS X update that it says, "your system must be restarted now". The more the OSes become alike, the more their issues are the same. The Apple ads are pretty bad at this "calling the kettle black" approach to deriding PC liabilities that Mac is not immune to, itself. The BSOD is more famous than the Mac Bomb because there have always been WAY MORE Windows systems out there. Everyone who has been using Mac for any real length of time has seen a bomb or two in their life (and probably the occasional, dreaded sadmac and dischord of death). I think it all comes down to personal preference and what you need to do (and with whom you need to collaborate to do it).

paul
paul

Sorry ..but bollocks.... first of there are not a lot of Apple users in the world compared to Windows users...less than 10 percent... More and more of my clients are saying, as they know no better..is "I love Apples ..but I need to run Windows".."why?", I ask.. "well I love the design of the Mac, but what I need to do doesnt work on apples"... ok... I say...lets take it from there... that about sums it up ..I couldn't care less that may PC looks like a piece of dogshit , as long as it is fast and does what it is supposed to, which is why when Apple said "Apple G5, the fastest PC on the planet" ...I proved mine was faster, and those lying idiots at Apple had to take it off British TV...and at the time I am sure many more people had even faster kit than I had...

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

In general I agree with most of what you say; the more the two operating systems advance, they more alike they become in many ways. Partially that's due to them both trying to work in the same playing field, which requires them to be able to do the same things. However, the "bomb" went out with OS 9. True, Apples still have their own issues, but with OS X the dialog window has changed and you get a dimmed screen with a "Kernel Panic" dialog instead. The method is different even if the intent is the same. However, despite all of this, a lot of people who used to be Windows-Only users are switching to Macs. It's not just the marketing. http://www.davidalison.com/ The site listed is a blog by a Windows developer who became curious about the Mac and decided to try one. Read the blog from the oldest post and see what you think.

dcolbert
dcolbert

Despite the fact that we both seem to fall at different ends of the spectrum on opinion (I prefer Win32 for many reasons), at least we can agree on the most important point. It is your choice in a computer OS. It doesn't define who you are.

jayshadee
jayshadee

Wow , I could have never said better myself. This is exactly what i tell a coworker of mine that swears by Apple and the gospel of Jobs.

dcolbert
dcolbert

This isn't entirely true. Mac used Sony Trinitron monitors when they were the most desirable CRTs on the market. Mac has used FAST SCSI solutions since the beginning. Mac build quality has consistently been very good since the 80s. I mean, a Sony VAIO comes at a steep premium for the "same" PC components compared to the competition. Apple hasn't always hit the target, of course. They've put out turkeys and lemons too - but in general, there are compelling advantages to the architecture and design of Apple products. Apple GigE on a 2001 PowerPC G4 has higher sustained rates on transfer and linespeed ceiling than most modern DIY PCs with integrated GigE nic, as just one example. Of course, a 2001 G4 with GigE has a PATA EIDE bus that can never support that higher possible linespeed. The quality is there, but often Apple is so far ahead, the advantage may be questionable.

foulger
foulger

The one sour apple, if you will pardon the pun is the way in which they treat their oldest & loyal supporters, the small resellers & the small Service organisations. Its so easy to forget your friends when the good times roll. I am and always will be a long time Apple Evangelist and supporter and will continue to hope that the Body Corporate will remember who it was that kept them going when the times were tough. Hopefully Faith can still move mountains.

akaralia
akaralia

And does the BUGGATI VEYRON super car gets its fair media share? Apple is on a roll, having delivered a string of terrific products from the iPod to the MacBook to the iPhone, and so they have a captive audience wondering "what's next"? That I believe is the reason. Innovation will drive us all. I do own a Mac and an iphone and trust me I will not return back to windows or Sony-erricson or NOKIA easily.

clivec
clivec

I'm not into iPods or iPhones having been a PC user for over 25 years until 18 months ago when I purchased an 20" iMac. This particular computer came with just about all the programs that I needed. I unpacked it, plugged it in, loaded the operating system and bingo, it worked. No trojans, bugs or viruses, what a relief. They maybe a little more expensive than a PC but they don't crash like a PC might, the program your running might crash but the computer doesn't. Apple, is increasing their market share because they have good management and marketing skills, also very clever innovations which keep the public interested.

david
david

I just got a list of red alert urgencies about what was allegedly done wrong by adding to this "What do you think? column.

constantinosavgoustides
constantinosavgoustides

Personally I agree that Apple's marketing tactics are ingenious. They have us all spinning and guessing what their next movie might be. I don't have an iphone or ipod or ever even owned a mac. But i guarantee you with all the fuss, I will be rushing to the stores when the 2nd one comes out. It is just amazing what the right marketing can do to a product.

owner
owner

US? you have a mouse in your pocket? I personally fing thier marking tactics to be distasteful and snobby...not to mention very misinformational. I have to agree with the earlier poster. The only reasons MacOSXis any good is because it is based on linux. Prior to that the OS sucked badly. Eric

Vulpinemac
Vulpinemac

A) Apple's commercials play on what too many computer users are complaining about in Windows... even Windows users themselves. B) Apple OS X is NOT based on Linux; not now, not ever. OS X is based on BSD UNIX, created by AT&T back in the 1950s and has never had a successful virus written against it. Yet. OS 9, its predecessor, admittedly had ONE successful virus written against it in over 15 years of that particular Apple GUI platform; against thousands written against Win 95/98/etc. in less than 7 years. An OS, by the way, that allowed me to teach some of the first Win95 adopters how to use their "new" operating system.

Nori Sarel
Nori Sarel

I could so see apple doing that... Who knows maybe they have already..

---TK---
---TK---

Please, anyone who read that, knew what he was talking about.... Most Linux distro's are based off unix... Leave it up to the next generation of kids, you know some 16 year old kid is going to take down the MAC... All it is, is a matter of time. And when the kid does it, apple will pay him/her to keep their mouth shut, and give them a job.

Editor's Picks