SandynJosh
Apr 7, 03:51 PM
I'd rather have Apple ( or ANY company for that matter ) compete rather than having it throttle its competition.
Do you really want Apple to have no competition? Oh, I wouldn't be surprised if this starts affecting a lot of Apple's competitors, for a prolonged period of time - various countries would start to look at Apple regarding its competition laws.
Apple didn't buy up the production to throttle the competition. They had the balls to bet on the iPad being a run-away winner. Think about it. Months into marketing a brand new product category, Apple acted to secure future capacity at levels no one else anticipated. Had Apple been wrong, it would have hurt them terribly. As it is now, Apple is barely meeting sales demand levels.
Apple's competitors want a piece of the market but don't have the confidence in their product to put their money down in advance. RIM had their chance to buy production ahead, they didn't.
Do you really want Apple to have no competition? Oh, I wouldn't be surprised if this starts affecting a lot of Apple's competitors, for a prolonged period of time - various countries would start to look at Apple regarding its competition laws.
Apple didn't buy up the production to throttle the competition. They had the balls to bet on the iPad being a run-away winner. Think about it. Months into marketing a brand new product category, Apple acted to secure future capacity at levels no one else anticipated. Had Apple been wrong, it would have hurt them terribly. As it is now, Apple is barely meeting sales demand levels.
Apple's competitors want a piece of the market but don't have the confidence in their product to put their money down in advance. RIM had their chance to buy production ahead, they didn't.
iApples
Apr 10, 02:21 AM
Here
280594
Try using a calculator that uses the "/" instead of the divided by sign. You'll get 288. I tried it the way you did it on an old calculator and I got 2. But that's not the way it is in the OP. It's 48/2(9+3)
280594
Try using a calculator that uses the "/" instead of the divided by sign. You'll get 288. I tried it the way you did it on an old calculator and I got 2. But that's not the way it is in the OP. It's 48/2(9+3)
holycat
Sep 15, 09:18 PM
What u All expect for the new mAcbook pro?
mAybe something unexpected??suprise??
is that possible to have blue-ray ROM??hehehe..:eek: :eek:
mAybe something unexpected??suprise??
is that possible to have blue-ray ROM??hehehe..:eek: :eek:
Bengt77
Aug 4, 06:55 PM
Sounds like someone wants an iMac Ultra! (Really final Propaganda)
All for under AU$4 Grand.
Yay! I'll take one the minute it comes out! How much is one AU$ in €? Let's see... AU$4000 is about €2400. Sounds reasonable to me. But I'm all for stretching it a bit. Let's say €2100/AU$3530. That's €400 more expensive than the current top model, which is €400 more expensive than the low-end iMac. Seems logical to me, maybe not so reasonable, but reason is soooo overrated these days! :D
Anyone else here interested in an iMac Ultra?
Anyone else have an extreme and probably unwarrented hatred of the Pentium moniker?
Yes! (And yes to c.q. about that Pentium name, too, by the way.)
All for under AU$4 Grand.
Yay! I'll take one the minute it comes out! How much is one AU$ in €? Let's see... AU$4000 is about €2400. Sounds reasonable to me. But I'm all for stretching it a bit. Let's say €2100/AU$3530. That's €400 more expensive than the current top model, which is €400 more expensive than the low-end iMac. Seems logical to me, maybe not so reasonable, but reason is soooo overrated these days! :D
Anyone else here interested in an iMac Ultra?
Anyone else have an extreme and probably unwarrented hatred of the Pentium moniker?
Yes! (And yes to c.q. about that Pentium name, too, by the way.)
Winni
Apr 6, 03:44 AM
In other words, you couldn't port Linux to the iPhone if you wanted to.
I'm sorry to rain on your parade, but they already have ported it:
http://www.idroidproject.org/
Android is just another customized Linux, and the iDroid project ports Android to Apple's iGadgets.
I'm sorry to rain on your parade, but they already have ported it:
http://www.idroidproject.org/
Android is just another customized Linux, and the iDroid project ports Android to Apple's iGadgets.
kalsta
May 3, 09:41 PM
No, once again, it's not about comfort; it's about experience. I learned mostly SI units when I was in college, I'm quite comfortable with using those units - but the industry doesn't use those units. I learned, and became an expert in, the units used by the industry. You would ask millions of engineers, technicians, etc. to throw away years or even decades of experience simply to change a system that isn't broken.
Yes, it's a system that has its roots in the past, but the system still works. There's no compelling reason to change it. There's no efficiency to be gained.
When the Mac first came out, with it's GUI and mouse, it wasn't a runaway success, although to those in the know it was vastly superior to PCs running DOS. The arguments for staying with DOS were no doubt similar to yours… 'I spent years becoming an expert in DOS. I am comfortable with it. It works just fine. There is no need to change. Besides, it would be too costly to change.'
When you say there is 'no compelling reason to change', you're ignoring all the point already made. Base-10. Derived units. Consistent prefixes. This makes for much simpler calculations and formula in practice. It might be harder for an old fella like you to have to relearn things, but for the next generation of children learning from scratch, the metric system simplifies things so much. Not only that, but the USA is increasingly out of step with the rest of the world in this regard. So not only is this generation of Americans making it more difficult for future generations of Americans, but it's really complicating things for everyone in this age of global communication.
Okay, imagine for a moment that one of the US states wasn't using the decimal system for counting. Instead, they had a system where letters were used to designate certain amounts, similar to Roman numerals, but instead of having a base of 10, it varied. So perhaps A is equal to 12. Then three As is equal to B. Two Bs is equal to C. 22 Bs is equal to a D, and so on with this kind of inconsistency. You have a friend living in this state who claims that the system works just fine — he spent many years studying this system and even more using it in his line of work and can't see why he or anyone else in the state should have to learn this dangfangled decimal system. What would you say to your friend?
Yes, it's a system that has its roots in the past, but the system still works. There's no compelling reason to change it. There's no efficiency to be gained.
When the Mac first came out, with it's GUI and mouse, it wasn't a runaway success, although to those in the know it was vastly superior to PCs running DOS. The arguments for staying with DOS were no doubt similar to yours… 'I spent years becoming an expert in DOS. I am comfortable with it. It works just fine. There is no need to change. Besides, it would be too costly to change.'
When you say there is 'no compelling reason to change', you're ignoring all the point already made. Base-10. Derived units. Consistent prefixes. This makes for much simpler calculations and formula in practice. It might be harder for an old fella like you to have to relearn things, but for the next generation of children learning from scratch, the metric system simplifies things so much. Not only that, but the USA is increasingly out of step with the rest of the world in this regard. So not only is this generation of Americans making it more difficult for future generations of Americans, but it's really complicating things for everyone in this age of global communication.
Okay, imagine for a moment that one of the US states wasn't using the decimal system for counting. Instead, they had a system where letters were used to designate certain amounts, similar to Roman numerals, but instead of having a base of 10, it varied. So perhaps A is equal to 12. Then three As is equal to B. Two Bs is equal to C. 22 Bs is equal to a D, and so on with this kind of inconsistency. You have a friend living in this state who claims that the system works just fine — he spent many years studying this system and even more using it in his line of work and can't see why he or anyone else in the state should have to learn this dangfangled decimal system. What would you say to your friend?
rdowns
Apr 5, 01:17 PM
Honestly, I hope Toyota tells Apple to stuff it.
Lame. You can be sure Toyota will capitulate to the Apple strong arm.
Not surprised! Toyota should not take it!
+++
I love Apple for many reasons, but I also have a hard time with some of their ideology.
Don't give in Toyota!
Its our devices, and if we want to modify them for our own use, so be it.
Does anyone read the stories before commenting on them anymore? :rolleyes:
You didn't even need to click to read the full story.
Toyota had agreed to do so to "maintain their good relationship with Apple," our Velti contact told me on the phone.
Lame. You can be sure Toyota will capitulate to the Apple strong arm.
Not surprised! Toyota should not take it!
+++
I love Apple for many reasons, but I also have a hard time with some of their ideology.
Don't give in Toyota!
Its our devices, and if we want to modify them for our own use, so be it.
Does anyone read the stories before commenting on them anymore? :rolleyes:
You didn't even need to click to read the full story.
Toyota had agreed to do so to "maintain their good relationship with Apple," our Velti contact told me on the phone.
Detlev
Jul 30, 06:23 AM
Nor, methinks this iPhone shall ever happen. What would Apple gain in becoming a cell phone provider? Its a nasty market with no concensus between camps.
I stated this exactly in a previous thread but I could change my stance if I could be convinced of one or more of the following were possible.
1. Could Apple improve their iChat to compete with the likes of skype, etc?
2. Could Apple provide such a service?
3. Could Apple create an iPod tele without removing what is already available in an iPod?
4. Could there be a iTel AV to connect to iChat AV.
Even if the photographer's visit was legit from the sound of it, it is an entirely new product so I'd have to assume that it was just another phone. Whomever they jump into bed with (service provider) would have to be big, really big. Another thing detracting from the story is that the telephone companies are notoriously slow getting product into their stores whereas when Apple releases something it is in store (Apple store that is) rather quickly. AND I don't see Apple selling another company's cell phone service in-store.
I stated this exactly in a previous thread but I could change my stance if I could be convinced of one or more of the following were possible.
1. Could Apple improve their iChat to compete with the likes of skype, etc?
2. Could Apple provide such a service?
3. Could Apple create an iPod tele without removing what is already available in an iPod?
4. Could there be a iTel AV to connect to iChat AV.
Even if the photographer's visit was legit from the sound of it, it is an entirely new product so I'd have to assume that it was just another phone. Whomever they jump into bed with (service provider) would have to be big, really big. Another thing detracting from the story is that the telephone companies are notoriously slow getting product into their stores whereas when Apple releases something it is in store (Apple store that is) rather quickly. AND I don't see Apple selling another company's cell phone service in-store.
shelterpaw
Aug 7, 03:13 PM
My house is not wired for ethernet. Which means, I would have to snake a wire through 3 floors, drill holes in the ceiling, etc etc. Its sooo much easier just to have airport. I have 3meg internet service and I cannot tell a difference between wired and wifi. My wireless will hit ~10mb/s transfer if I'm moving a large file from one computer to another. Obviously, that 10mb/s is faster then my 3meg internet service. My internet service is the bottleneck, not the wireless. Therefore....no difference in speed.
Second, I have BT keyboard, mouse, and phone. I use BT all the time. Sure, I can just order the option. However, that means I cant just run to my local apple store and pick up a Mac Pro. Its absolute crap that a ~$600 Macmini has these options standard, and yet Apples $4000 top of the line machine doesnt. Unacceptable.
I couldn't agree with you more. I'm almost in the exact same situation you're in and it doesn't make sense to me either. I've always felt the pro machine should incorporate everything a consumer model carries, plus pro features.
However, they're still pretty slick machines and I'm looking forward to getting one.
Second, I have BT keyboard, mouse, and phone. I use BT all the time. Sure, I can just order the option. However, that means I cant just run to my local apple store and pick up a Mac Pro. Its absolute crap that a ~$600 Macmini has these options standard, and yet Apples $4000 top of the line machine doesnt. Unacceptable.
I couldn't agree with you more. I'm almost in the exact same situation you're in and it doesn't make sense to me either. I've always felt the pro machine should incorporate everything a consumer model carries, plus pro features.
However, they're still pretty slick machines and I'm looking forward to getting one.
citizenzen
Apr 18, 09:20 PM
You clause is a great idea, but we all know that taxes never go away.
You might need to question that notion, considering that Americans today are taxed at the lowest level in over 50 years.
From the Orange County Register, April 17, 2011 ...
Taxes reach historic low (http://www.ocregister.com/news/-117079-ocprint--.html)
For the past two years, a family of four earning the median income has paid less in federal income taxes than at any time since at least 1955, according to the Tax Policy Center. All federal, state and local taxes combined are a lower percentage of per-capita income than at any time since the 1960s, according to the Tax Foundation. The highest income-tax bracket is its lowest since 1992. At 35 percent, it's well below the 50 percent mark of much of the 1980s and the 70 percent bracket of the 1970s.
So let me recommend something. It's basically a reversal of your clause. The clause would allow a taxation adjustment (which would be predetermined) once 20% of spending has been cut (or some other amount).
I could go for something along those lines too.
You might need to question that notion, considering that Americans today are taxed at the lowest level in over 50 years.
From the Orange County Register, April 17, 2011 ...
Taxes reach historic low (http://www.ocregister.com/news/-117079-ocprint--.html)
For the past two years, a family of four earning the median income has paid less in federal income taxes than at any time since at least 1955, according to the Tax Policy Center. All federal, state and local taxes combined are a lower percentage of per-capita income than at any time since the 1960s, according to the Tax Foundation. The highest income-tax bracket is its lowest since 1992. At 35 percent, it's well below the 50 percent mark of much of the 1980s and the 70 percent bracket of the 1970s.
So let me recommend something. It's basically a reversal of your clause. The clause would allow a taxation adjustment (which would be predetermined) once 20% of spending has been cut (or some other amount).
I could go for something along those lines too.
danpass
May 7, 01:49 PM
hmmm ............. iWork.com is free.
maybe some combined functionality setup soon?
maybe some combined functionality setup soon?
BRLawyer
Sep 16, 07:09 AM
Now THAT's what I would like:
"Since the release of the 15 inch MacBook Pro in January, speculation on the forthcoming Apple laptops is spreading throughout the net. Meanwhile, MacosXrumors has received a very unexpected report, providing information about one of the forthcoming MacBook Pros.
The sources that can be qualified as �very reliable� (yes you read it well), are claiming that Apple plans to keep similar display size for its entry level Mac Book Pro by releasing what sources called an �ultra-thin 12 inch Mac Book Pro�."
Source: www.macosxrumors.com
I would buy one on the same day.
"Since the release of the 15 inch MacBook Pro in January, speculation on the forthcoming Apple laptops is spreading throughout the net. Meanwhile, MacosXrumors has received a very unexpected report, providing information about one of the forthcoming MacBook Pros.
The sources that can be qualified as �very reliable� (yes you read it well), are claiming that Apple plans to keep similar display size for its entry level Mac Book Pro by releasing what sources called an �ultra-thin 12 inch Mac Book Pro�."
Source: www.macosxrumors.com
I would buy one on the same day.
notjustjay
Apr 18, 02:56 PM
Have you looked at the TouchWiz UI? It's almost identical to iOS - dock at the bottom, pages of icons in a grid and you even remove applications in the same way as you do on the iPhone. I've nothing at all against competition for iOS, but they shouldn't just rip the design off
Looking at the TouchWiz UI, I see your point.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be standardized
(e.g. copied) for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
Looking at the TouchWiz UI, I see your point.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be standardized
(e.g. copied) for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
Pman17
Mar 27, 03:34 PM
I believe that they will announce iOS 5 next month or during WWDC. They have been late on their consistent announcements on iOS in March, probably because of the new cloud service and of course the iPad 2. We should at least expect iOS 5 developer kits to come out soon.
There is one more point I would like to make... 2011 is the Year of the iPad 2.
There is one more point I would like to make... 2011 is the Year of the iPad 2.
stridle
Dec 4, 07:00 PM
I've been looking all over the internet and the stores do not carry them either. Frankly this is BS, first TOMTOM pushes the date of release by over a month and then they cannot even keep up with supply.
BC2009
Apr 7, 12:09 PM
Apple does learn from the competition... no doubt. And competition is always good. But, at the same time, Apple does seem to be the one that does something different and changes the game way more than the others.
Apple is extremely proactive. Which means they have a plan in place. When competition does something good that fits with their plans, then Apple can add it as a line item to their existing plans and assign it to a specific iOS release.
The competition on the other hand is defining their plans and goals completely based on what Apple does or what Apple's critics are saying. They do not have a very long-term vision of where they want to be and are by-and-large reactionary to what Apple is doing.
I will say that Google does indeed have a long-term vision, but not for Android's features. Google's long-term vision is to do anything they can to ensure they sit in between the user and the information on the Internet so they can advertise to them. They see Facebook as a major threat in this regard as well as Apple. Google's long-term plans are being disrupted by these other major players. Android/Honeycomb is a reactionary attempt to correct for some of that.
Apple is extremely proactive. Which means they have a plan in place. When competition does something good that fits with their plans, then Apple can add it as a line item to their existing plans and assign it to a specific iOS release.
The competition on the other hand is defining their plans and goals completely based on what Apple does or what Apple's critics are saying. They do not have a very long-term vision of where they want to be and are by-and-large reactionary to what Apple is doing.
I will say that Google does indeed have a long-term vision, but not for Android's features. Google's long-term vision is to do anything they can to ensure they sit in between the user and the information on the Internet so they can advertise to them. They see Facebook as a major threat in this regard as well as Apple. Google's long-term plans are being disrupted by these other major players. Android/Honeycomb is a reactionary attempt to correct for some of that.
chadley_chad
May 6, 08:12 AM
... Arm haven't got a leg to stand on!
Gepat
Jul 30, 05:06 AM
I guess the guy who told you that story can kiss his career (with apple) goodbye ;) There's not that many photographers who take pictures of upcoming Apple products ...
Anyway, I can't wait to see the phone...
Anyway, I can't wait to see the phone...
ntnwwnet
Aug 12, 12:15 AM
If they made it a little taller it should be easy-peasy for Apple to fit the necessary cooling. Hey, if they're making it taller, they could add a 3.5" Hard Drive which is much cheaper than laptop hard drives and we could finally get a 500GB Mini.
But then it wouldn't be a Mac Mini, now would it?
(My first MR post. Ever.)
But then it wouldn't be a Mac Mini, now would it?
(My first MR post. Ever.)
kwikdeth
May 7, 10:32 AM
I've heard similar rumors about MobileMe going free. Makes sense if Apple could leverage the new iAd system to generate targeted campaigns, and effectively subsidise the cost of opening the system up to more users.
It would also pave the way for multiple cloud-based user accounts for the iPad.
Nail on the head right there. From a business standpoint that makes tremendous sense. Apple would likely pull in much more revenue from advertisers placing content on a regular basis than they would from a limited subscription base. Make the service free, more people use it, apple brings in more $ from iAd services.
It would also pave the way for multiple cloud-based user accounts for the iPad.
Nail on the head right there. From a business standpoint that makes tremendous sense. Apple would likely pull in much more revenue from advertisers placing content on a regular basis than they would from a limited subscription base. Make the service free, more people use it, apple brings in more $ from iAd services.
BC2009
Apr 7, 12:09 PM
Apple does learn from the competition... no doubt. And competition is always good. But, at the same time, Apple does seem to be the one that does something different and changes the game way more than the others.
Apple is extremely proactive. Which means they have a plan in place. When competition does something good that fits with their plans, then Apple can add it as a line item to their existing plans and assign it to a specific iOS release.
The competition on the other hand is defining their plans and goals completely based on what Apple does or what Apple's critics are saying. They do not have a very long-term vision of where they want to be and are by-and-large reactionary to what Apple is doing.
I will say that Google does indeed have a long-term vision, but not for Android's features. Google's long-term vision is to do anything they can to ensure they sit in between the user and the information on the Internet so they can advertise to them. They see Facebook as a major threat in this regard as well as Apple. Google's long-term plans are being disrupted by these other major players. Android/Honeycomb is a reactionary attempt to correct for some of that.
Apple is extremely proactive. Which means they have a plan in place. When competition does something good that fits with their plans, then Apple can add it as a line item to their existing plans and assign it to a specific iOS release.
The competition on the other hand is defining their plans and goals completely based on what Apple does or what Apple's critics are saying. They do not have a very long-term vision of where they want to be and are by-and-large reactionary to what Apple is doing.
I will say that Google does indeed have a long-term vision, but not for Android's features. Google's long-term vision is to do anything they can to ensure they sit in between the user and the information on the Internet so they can advertise to them. They see Facebook as a major threat in this regard as well as Apple. Google's long-term plans are being disrupted by these other major players. Android/Honeycomb is a reactionary attempt to correct for some of that.
currentinterest
Apr 20, 01:34 AM
I will be buying the next iPhone no matter what it is. My 3GS is getting a little long in the tooth. I am sure Apple will provide something great and the new iOS 5 will rock. My guess is there will be larger screen in a similar form factor, though it will likely be thinner and not have a glass back.
milo
Sep 11, 11:36 AM
Except that under NetFlix, theortically (and I know people do this) you could get the DVDs, rip them, and send them back same day. Under a d/l scheme, you can only view the movies with a license. You only get, say 3 licenses. So you'd have to physically watch the movie, if you wanted to see it, before getting more. That would act as a brake on how many d/ls an avg. customer would make a month because most people only have time to watch 2-5 DVDs a month...if that. As for those who abuse the system, nothing to stop Apple from cutting people off just like Netflix does.
Even if you rip the DVD's from netflix (or just watch them immediately and send them back), you're still limited by the speed of the post office. With unlimited downloads, you could watch three or four movies a day if you had time (I doubt most Netflix users are only watching 2-5 DVD's a month, if they do they might be better off renting normally). The "brake" allows much fewer with Netflix. And if you really promise "unlimited", watching a ton isn't really abusing the system, is it? Apple would have to either have a monthly cap or raise prices.
Not to add onto the whining about merom notebooks, but I thought people a little while back were saying they'd be coming on the apple event on the 12th...:confused:
That was before the invites were sent. They won't be at the event, but they'll show up in the next week or so.
Even if you rip the DVD's from netflix (or just watch them immediately and send them back), you're still limited by the speed of the post office. With unlimited downloads, you could watch three or four movies a day if you had time (I doubt most Netflix users are only watching 2-5 DVD's a month, if they do they might be better off renting normally). The "brake" allows much fewer with Netflix. And if you really promise "unlimited", watching a ton isn't really abusing the system, is it? Apple would have to either have a monthly cap or raise prices.
Not to add onto the whining about merom notebooks, but I thought people a little while back were saying they'd be coming on the apple event on the 12th...:confused:
That was before the invites were sent. They won't be at the event, but they'll show up in the next week or so.
Makosuke
May 6, 05:10 AM
I'm not so much joining in the discussion as publicly recording what I think is going to happen in a few years based not really on this prediction, but the way things are going in general, so that I can point to this post in a few years and either say "I told you so" or "look how clueless I was."
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.