Why Apple Really Needs to Do Something Special Now
After exactly half a decade and almost three XP service packs later, Microsoft finally gets around to releasing Windows Vista.
As an ex-Windows user—I say ex because I no longer use Windows at home—I can honestly say that a stupid amount of people will be looking forward to this Windows upgrade, and I can’t blame them. Why should Windows users have to put up with rubbish graphics, a sorry excuse for searching through your computer, constant driver finding, error messages, and not forgetting a silly amount of security holes?
While many are saying Vista is purely XP in disguise, there are a few notable upgrades to Windows that any PC owner is going to be grateful for.
The disgusting graphics of XP have been replaced with translucent windows, beautiful shadows, and smooth “Exposé” like movements.
They finally have a decent search engine built right into the system, allowing them to quickly find photos, music, movies, and documents without waiting for two hours.
They finally have a more secure (so we’re told) system that promises to crack down on spyware and viruses, although I dare say we’ll hear of a virus being released for Vista next week.
They finally got their own gadgets (widgets), inspired by Konfabulator, allowing them to check up on weather, news, stock information, and other interesting tidbits with the click of a button.
They finally have decent software pre-installed on their system that allows them to do decent things, such as browsing photos and sending them to Kodak for real prints—no more of those trashy programs that they have to uninstall as soon as they get their computer.
Oh yes, things are looking up in the world of a Windows user, and I’m happy for them, honestly. I’m actually pleased Microsoft has finally gotten their rear ends into gear and released Windows Vista and given their users something Apple has given us for many years—a real computer.
But that’s just the thing: Apple has given us a lot of this stuff for years. Widgets, pretty operating system, Spotlight, iLife, decent security—we’ve got it all, so why the big fuss about Vista? Well, it’s no fuss to anyone who has used a Mac, but a fuss to those who haven’t. Now Apple has a challenge on its hands.
Microsoft has finally caught up with the game and Windows can do pretty much everything a Mac can do, give or take a couple of things (sure, a Mac doesn’t have all the fancy Media centre stuff just yet, but that’s what Apple TV is for.
While Microsoft may not be releasing another Windows operating system for a good 20 or 30 years (excuse my sarcasm), Apple will most likely continue releasing upgrades every year, the next one being OS X Leopard. The challenge for Apple is to continue to innovate, continue to push forward and make Vista look out of date with each release of a new Mac OS. Sure, Spaces and Time Machine are pretty fancy things, but it’s not going to be enough to convince a Windows user that a Mac is better, especially as Vista is now out and about. At present it’s probably only going to be a mixture of small things that make a Mac better, but Steve Jobs and co. need to find a way to bring these now-content Windows Vista users over to the Mac platform.
How about those gamers?
An argument I keep hearing time and time again appears to be that Macs don’t run many games, which is stopping an awful lot of hardcore PC gamers from making the switch. There have been a lot of arguments in the past and Apple seems to have rubbished them all off, but the gaming one still stands. When you think of PC gaming, you think of Microsoft: why? With each new game that comes out, it seems that users need to upgrade their processors, their memory, and their graphics card in order to run the game at full capability—something that can be easily done with a PC but not on a Mac. Yet with the Microsoft Xbox 360, this isn’t necessary, because everything is built in and games are designed with that console’s power in mind. I seriously believe that if Apple were to release a computer with some decent horse power behind it, enough to run decent games, it would attract a large number of users to the OS X platform. Perhaps this is just one of the ways Steve Jobs could make the Mac more enticing to new Vista users?
We could always go back to the talk of an Apple games console being released, but this wouldn’t really increase OS X market share, unless Apple is just going to concentrate on the phone and music market now.
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
The reason is pretty simple; people are seeing things simply work on a Mac. -Data
B.I.N.G.O.!
That’s all the excuse those Windows users need to switch to the Mac.
I know what you mean about Bungie, we need another like it! But I was really talking about Microsoft Game Studios (publish Age of Empires, Perfect Dark Zero, many many many others).
“Yet with the Microsoft Xbox 360, this isn’t necessary, because everything is built in and games are designed with that console’s power in mind. I seriously believe that if Apple were to release a computer with some decent horse power behind it, enough to run decent games, it would attract a large number of users to the OS X platform. Perhaps this is just one of the ways Steve Jobs could make the Mac more enticing to new Vista users”
Then Apple will have to get game developers on board, and if the majority of the big-name studios are all entrenched in DirectX, then that means Apple would have to license DirectX, which they probably aren’t too keen on doing.
I just look at vista..I was surprise that it was so similar to XP ..it look like a better Xp..maybe the good stuff was deeper in the os like security or other thing..the graphic was almost too much ..so much is going on ..it is a beauutiful os but it’s like looking into the sun ...too much bling bling…I think it is problaby an improvement from XP but I stop using window for 4 years now and I’m very comfortable with the mac os…But for people who have window this a good upgrade..I don’t think Apple has anything to worry about.. they should just keep making thing better ....
While the ensuing FUD-tacular reality distortion responses drip down from above onto this post, I have to say that I admire the attempt, Aaron.
That said, I don’t agree that Apple needs to do anything in particular to respond in re: the Mac. There’s this weird perception in the Mac world that the two products overlap greater than they do, that there is a real competition in the operating system space. There isn’t (which is really too bad).
But while Mac fanatics are as obsessed with Microsoft and Windows as they are with Macs, the general public just doesn’t care.
While I would love to see more competition in this market, Apple should just keep doing what it’s doing. Let Leopard be Leopard. I’ll upgrade and so will almost everyone here.
The problem really is that OS X just isn’t THAT much better. You can run apps on it just like any other computer, it comes with some nice freebies, but for most people that’s about it.
Believe me, I would love nothing more than for OS X (or Windows) to be demonstrably, out-of-the-ballpark, better and more spectacular so that I could fall firmly in one camp or the other. But that simply isn’t the case. So I continue to recommend Macs or PCs based on what the user plans on doing and which system would be better for that particular use.
Apple has tried, intensively, to drag more game developers into offering titles for the Mac, ideally at the same time. With essentially no success.
All of the big developers have long since come to the conclusion that it’s not in the economic incentive is just not there for them. The Mac market, compared to Windows, and more importantly, the consoles, is far too small, and will continue to be too small into the forseeable future, to justify any further investment.
Short answer: Just not gonna happen.
Aqua on Linux:
Desirable as it may be for some people, Aqua on Linux or OS X on non-Apple hardware is just a bad idea and isn’t going to happen.
Apple is a hardware manufacturer. It is never going to make the kind of profit selling OS X alone as it does selling a whole computer with OS X installed.
Mac (and maybe iPod) sales pay for OS X development. Your $129 per copy doesn’t cover it.
If everyone one could have OS X on their generic PC, why would they bother to buy a Mac?
Mac sales would decrease.
The Mac would become unprofitable, then that division of Apple would die off and so would OS X
as a computer OS.
“1) Upgrades, after installed over XP VOID the XP license so it cannot be used again.”
Hello!! If you pay for an upograde of the license, after the upgrade you don’t get to keep using the old one, thats way its supposed to work.
If you want to keep using the old one, you should to buy a full license for the new one.
“3) You cannot make backup copies of your DVD movies. So after it’s scratched or warped you have to re-purchase it.”
You can’t do that with OS X alone either.
Third party sofware will be available for Vista to do that just as it is currently for XP and OS X.
I am no MS fan, but if your gonna pick on em, at least make valid points. You only degrade the impact of your other points by not doing so.
Apple is a hardware manufacturer.
They are also a software manufacturer.
The Mac would become unprofitable, then that division of Apple would die off and so would OS X
as a computer OS.
Yep. Just look at how Microsoft has completely killed off Windows because it only sells the OS and not the hardware.
I am no MS fan, but if your gonna pick on em, at least make valid points.
You do realize you’re on an Apple fansite, right?
Bashing MS requires no facts, no valid points, no logic, and the fact that some points also apply to OS X are to be ignored completely.
I don’t agree. Apple is playing middle of the road here. (Just like in politics, there’s more people there) With regards to the Mac ads the reason why it doesn’t matter that the Mac is seen as a gaming machine is that gaming is a niche market (on the computer side). That’s what consoles are for; that’s why Microsoft entered the consoles market.
If you are realy serious about gaming as a viable option for Apple, you’re looking at consoles. Ask Microsoft. It has 80%+ of the personal computer operating system market, yet it chose to make it’s own propriety gaming platform.
With regard to the gloss that Microsoft has just put on its operating system, it won’t mean a thing to many ordinary customers. The truth is the Mac is a resurgent platform. Many have become aquainted with it because of the iPod. Many in the 18-25 year group will like Vista simply because it is new. But then Microsoft is now competing for their interest with the iPod: i.e. Apple. (iPod generation, remember?)
Anyhow, your older generation, i.e. those buying computers for themselves and their children, won’t necessarily be wowed (according to Microsoft) by glossy graphics. They want simple, secure and functional. Oh, and they want to be able to just to “stuff” (i.e. pictures, web, movies, blogs, etc.)
I was in PCWorld the other day and was getting a demo of Vista. Unimpressed. Anyway, lady comes in. She’s looking to buy a system. Know what she says to the sales rep, “I’m between buying an Apple or getting Vista.” She actually sees Apple as an option. I tell her I’m a Mac man myself, and that if she gets the right Mac, she has both options and won’t have to worry. She tells me that that just makes so much sense, she’s always wanted a Mac. She tells me give her directions to the nearest Apple Store. Those are the customers Apple want.
“They are also a software manufacturer.”
They only produce software for Macs (except for iTunes)
Software development which is subsidised by Mac and iPod sales. If there wasn’t a hardware sale to go with it, OS X would be much more expensive.
“Yep. Just look at how Microsoft has completely killed off Windows because it only sells the OS and not the hardware.”
MS survives on software sales alone because they have a captive market. They have locked in PC manufacturers with OEM Windows licensing deals. It is almost impossible to buy a brand name PC without Windows. Except for a Mac.
Mr and Mrs Joe Public are not going to go out and buy another OS when the PC they just bought has an adequate, seemingly free, one already.
Linux is free and it has barely made an impression in the desktop OS segment. Server-side is a different story however.
If PCs came without an OS we would have a vibrant and diverse OS marketplace where software producers would be vying for our OS dollar. People would choose their OS according to their needs. Operating Systems would be far more advanced due to increased competition.
Unfortunately that is not the case, MS does have a stranglehold on the OS marketplace and that isn’t going to change anytime soon.
Further to the Aqua on Linux discussion, another problem is that Linux is GPL. Were Apple to develop Aqua for Linux they would have to release the source code into the public domain. It is highly unlikley that they would be able to develop anything for Linux without some GPL dependency.
Where’s the profit in that?
The real magic of the OS X is that old thing where “everything just works”. The reason for that is the fact that it is developed for a closed hardware platform. Mac hardware is a known quantity and OS X is optimised to take advantage of it. If some other hardware is introduced, stability will suffer. Just like Windows.
She tells me give her directions to the nearest Apple Store. Those are the customers Apple want. -nb
Exactly the point and thank you, Nerdbrain. OBTW did you get her phone number?
Only joking…
And you’re absolutely correct on the iPod “rub-off” phenomena. The iPod, after all, swallows 75% of the market and exploding. That is a lot of Windows fanboys and gals. Those same customers that now enjoy all there is to enjoy from their Shuffles, Nanos, or vPods have become accustomed to finely refined gadgets from Apple that they will expect their computers, OS, and apps to be the same and will now consider the Mac, the iPhone, or the new Apple TV console as viable options.
Apple mindshare among the largest demographic of all consumers (20-50 year olds) is at an unprecedented levels due to the iPod. The iPhone will only increase that.
They only produce software for Macs (except for iTunes)
In what way does that make them NOT a manufacturer of software?
And btw, I think they’d do well to spread both their software and OS X to the PC.
If PCs came without an OS we would have a vibrant and diverse OS marketplace where software producers would be vying for our OS dollar.
Michael Dell has said point-blank that he would put OS X on a Dell in a heartbeat if it were available. It isn’t.
That means that the scenario you describe is a Steve Jobs decision away. But you’re advocating against that very system while wishing it would happen, and arguing that OS X would wither away and die if it did. That’s about six different contradictory arguments there.
But how would OS X do in a truly open and competitive market? Could it survive and compete toe to toe with Windows? I think it could. Whether it would dominate the market, I don’t know, but I think it would survive and thrive for sure much as it does now.
If some other hardware is introduced, stability will suffer. Just like Windows.
I find it interesting that Mac defenders have so little confidence in OS X when it comes down to it. They don’t want Apple to really compete, not really, because they don’t think it would hold up to the true light of day with Joe Public.
Frankly, I think Windows is just fine. It’s stable despite a myriad of hardware configurations. Heck, I run it on my iMac, hardware for which it is hardly intended and no problems.
“In what way does that make them NOT a manufacturer of software?”
Apple produces software only for the purpose of enriching the Mac user experience. Not directly as a profit making exercise.
The profits are indirect via hardware sales. It is not their core business.
” I think they’d do well to spread both their software and OS X to the PC”
If software was their core biuseinss I’d agree with you.
“But you’re advocating against that very system while wishing it would happen”
I am not advocating against anything. I am telling it how it is.
“But how would OS X do in a truly open and competitive market? Could it survive and compete toe to toe with Windows? I think it could”
I do too.
The problem is that that world doesn’t exist. What Micheal Dell says in public and what really would happen are two very different things.
Lets face it, the Mac just a very stylish PC now that the switch to Intel has happened. Its unique ability to run OS X, legally, is its defining feature. Without that the Mac would go into decline and OS X with its purpose gone would too.
“They don’t want Apple to really compete”
Apple doesn’t need to compete. They have their own market, its us.