Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > macOS > To everyone that's missing the point...

To everyone that's missing the point...
Thread Tools
wadesworld
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 10:40 AM
 
(which is quite a few of you)

Many of you are totally missing the point.

1) OSX is most importantly about gaining at least an opportunity for entry back into the corporate marketspace. Apple is currently completely excluded from corporate America. OS 9 is rejected immediately by any IS committee evaluating platforms. Whether that's wrong or short-sighted doesn't matter - it's how it is.

OS X gives Apple the opportunity to get back into the corporate world, which is how you grow marketshare. You cannot grow marketshare in the home. If you stay solely in the home, you become insignificant, which is exactly where Apple is today. If you can grow your corporate marketshare, home marketshare will follow.

2) The most important thing about OS X is its ability to "fit in" and its application development tools.

In order to get back into that corporate space, you need to fit in as easily as possible. If it's difficult to integrate Macs into a Windows/UNIX environment, then the company won't bother. With UNIX underneath, and TCP/IP as the only server-based protocol, companies who have excluded the Mac will now be much more comfortable with MacOS X.

The development aspect of OS X cannot be overlooked. Cocoa is so powerful it's incredible. As OS X becomes more popular, more and more people will eventually spend a little time playing with Cocoa to see what it can do. Once they get started, they won't stop. Cocoa is that good. We will see more apps on MacOS X than we've ever seen before.

This also applies to the UNIX underpinnings. This allows for immediate entry back into the science and technical areas, where the Mac has enjoyed great popularity, but was largely abandoned because it couldn't keep up. Already many scientific programs have been ported over and science people are excited about having the Mac as a choice again.

3) This release is out there simply to get application and driver developers off their butts. When you're Windows, you can tell developers to have their stuff ready for the next OS that will be released in 2 years and they will. When you're Apple, you can't. Apple had DP3, DP4 and PB and most developers still said, "Yeah, yeah. We'll think about looking at OS X when it's released." So Apple forced their hand the only way they could - they shipped OS X.

4) The Aqua interface is so different because Apple had to shed the legacy of the old interface. While we look upon the OS 9 interface with fondness, most of the world looks at it and sees a computer that can't multitask well, has no software, and is only good for graphics (the common perceptions of MacOS).

Apple had to leave that behind. They had to create an interface where people who are not familiar with Macs would look at it and say, "Oh, that's that *new* MacOS, with UNIX underneath, not the old crappy MacOS that was only good for graphics."

Now, some argue that Apple could have done that without removing some of the functionality they did (windowshading, the Apple menu, etc). I think there's some truth to that. But I think Apple also wanted to break as much away from the old as possible, and see what new ways can be invented. As you have proven so well, once people get used to something, they will rebel against change of any sort. It's extremely difficult to introduce new ways of doing things, because people will always just go back to the old, comfortable ways. So Apple said, "Let's wipe the slate clean and see what new ideas we and others come up with."

5) Allow me to dream for a minute...

Imagine a year from now:

All the major, and most of the minor UNIX apps have been ported

All the major OS bugs have been worked out - speed has improved significantly, etc.

Most of the OS 9 apps have been ported, most importantly, MS Office.

What if at that point, Apple releases OS X for Intel? There would be a *lot* of people who would convert. They wouldn't take over the market, but they'd immediately gain a small percentage of the PC marketshare (say 5-10%). Probably a large number of Linux users would convert, since OS X would give them exactly what they've always wanted - a UNIX OS with commercial apps on cheap PC hardware.

Now, there's two problems with that:

1) MS. Apple would have to find some way to appease MS. All MS has to do is slow the development of Office on OS X and the platform is dead. MS would have to be careful not to be too obvious and get in trouble with the DOJ again, but they could easily make life difficult.

2) Apple would have to find a way to replace lost hardware revenue. However, if got a decent return on the OS license per machine sold, it's possible it could make that up since they'd be selling a *lot* more units. I'm not saying it's simple, but it could be done.

By doing all this, Apple could be the first serious challenger to MS in the PC space.

Ah, just a dream.....

Anyhow, my point is, I think so many of your are so wrapped up in the fact that your favorite interface widget is gone, or that the GUI is a bit slower than it should be right now, you completely miss the larger pictures of what OS X can do for Apple and us as users over the coming years. It's ALL about marketshare. And anything Apple can do to gain marketshare benefits ALL Mac users.

Wade
     
HeatMiser
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 10:53 AM
 
I just remembered this song when reading your post. I agree with you, BTW:

Gooses! Geeses!
I want my geese to lay gold eggs for Easter
It will, sweetheart
At least a hundred a day
Anything you say
And by the way
What?

I want a feast.
You ate before you came to the factory
I want a bean feast!
Oh, one of those
Cream buns and doughnuts and fruitcake with no nuts
So good you could go nuts
You can have all those things when you get home
No, now!!

I want a ball
I want a party
Pink macaroons and a million balloons
And performing baboons and ...
Give it to me
Rrhh rhhh
Now!

I want the world
I want the whole world
I want to lock it all up in my pocket
It's my bar of chocolate
Give it to me
Now

I want today
I want tomorrow
I want to wear 'em like braids in my hair
And I don't want to share 'em

I want a party with room fulls of laughter
Ten thousand tons of ice cream
And if I don't get the things I am after
I'm going to scream!

I want the works
I want the whole works
Presents and prizes and sweets and surprises
Of all shapes and sizes
And now
Don't care how
I want it now
Don't care how
I want it now


------------------
The power of UNIX with the simplicity and elegance of the Macintosh.
I am the harsh nemesis of all that is unclean!
     
mikebeam
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 10:55 AM
 
Very well said. Its nice to read something like this around here every now and again.
     
unimacs
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 11:05 AM
 
While I agree with your positive outlook on OS X. I don't agree that OS X on PC hardware is a good idea, at least if you want Apple to surive.

Apple will loose their ass selling OS X for pc's

Why?

1. drivers

3rd party hardware makers will provide Windows drivers first and
perhaps exclusively. It'll be up to Apple or somebody else to write them.
This was a killer for NeXTStep and OS/2. Even linux has some trouble with
this. It will be a source of frustration for users and many support calls for Apple.

OS X on Intel would always be behind on supporting the latest and greatest hardware.

2. loss of hardware sales

Apple makes money selling hardware. Apple will sell less hardware because
now people would be able to get the OS they wanted on cheaper hardware. Good for the consumer in the short run, but ultimately bad if Apple goes under.

3. Microsoft will make money off OS X sales

Most PCs you buy come with a copy of Windows. People buying a PC for OS X will pay the Microsoft tax even if they never use Windows. It's tough to compete with MS when a certain percentage of your OS sales also involve a sale of Windows.

4. The track record of non-Windows desktop OS's on pc's is pretty dismal. OS/2 and BeOS are both superior OS's that failed. Linux has had some success because it is free and it's used mostly for servers.

5. Classic apps would probably not work on OS X for Intel.

6. Apple would loose some ability to innovate because they no longer would control the hardware.

As good as it is, Mac OS X is not so vastly superior to Windows that it would have enough success on the PC to compete with MS. MS has a stranglehold. In the mid to late 80's would have been the time to do this. Maybe the time will come again. I don't think it's now.
     
bhcs
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Gowanda, NY USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 11:08 AM
 
I didn't miss any points I know that the OSX I have is just as you said-for the developers to get off their fannies I loved the OSX, but on my little 266 iMAC it slowed me down to much. I am planning to DL all of the new OSX versions of the software as they come in and storing them. Once I have at least 85% of my programs ready to work with OSX I will go back to it. Running 9.1 and OSX was to much strain on my poor baby. If I had the money to go buy a newer and faster machine I would have already done it. I didn't want to go back, but the with the amount of work I do on my machine and the limited time to do it in I can't afford to be so slow.

I totally believe that as OSX is refined and the programs updated it will be a system to be envied. I am very excited about this and very anxious for everything to get settled in so I can go back to it and run it faster and smoother. Beats the heck out of any Windows junk any day in my book Mind you-I am a Mac convert! I will never go back to a PC.

I don't think you or anyone else should get so defensive and upset if someone has questions or gripes. Without the questions and gripes Apple wont know where they need to go from here in improving OSX. As a convert I have noticed that long time mac users get very offended at any statement that can be construed as a complaint and we get treated like we are whiners. My fella has been an Apple user since the 1970's and gets really upset with me if I say anything. You people have to understand that some of us are relatively new to this much more simplified world and have lots to learn. We also will ask questions and complain a bit, but I think you will find we wont go back to Microsloth. Show some compassion and understanding and you will make us even stronger converts
God Bless America!
     
bpbond
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 11:31 AM
 
Nice post, wadesworld...

I don't see much incentive at all for Apple to release X on Intel. From both a financial (profit on boxes, threatening Office) and development (hardware variance, drivers) perspective, that's just asking for trouble. They'd be limited in their ability to make up the lost hardware revenue by charging more for the OS license--if only because Microsoft can support Windows indefinitely from its Office revenues!
     
plaidpjs
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wethersfield, CT, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 11:46 AM
 
Wadesworld,

I am very much in agreement with 95% of what you had to say, and I'm glad you said it. However, not unlike everyone else that uses these forums, I need to put my two cents in, about one thing. Microsoft Office is by no means that important to the success of Apple or OS X, especially not as to whether it gets accepted in the PC using community.

It has been my experience, that were there another "viable" option, that many PC users (at least of those I know) would run screaming away from Office. They hate it! And, having used Office 2000 compared to Office 2001, I know why and can say without doubt, that in this one area, microsoft makes a better product for the mac then they do for the PC.

------------------
G4/500 DP, 768 MB RAM, 40GB HDD, 32MB ATI Radeon OEM, 30GB VST Firewire Drive, and an Apple Cinema Display
G4/533 DP, 768 MB RAM, 40GB HDD, 32MB GeForce2 MX, 30GB VST Firewire Drive, and an Apple Cinema Display.
     
Colonel Panic
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 11:57 AM
 
unfortunately it's not easy to run from Office, particularly if you use Excel extensively. A lot of people have an array of Excel spreadsheets that use VB extensively. No one wants to port docs. Anything less than 100% compatibility means people stick with Office, especially if they are interacting with clients who use Office. I haven't seen anything with 100% compatibility yet. AppleWorks not even close. StarOffice closer but not w/VB.

for OS X to be a viable enterprise OS, it NEEDS solid Office support....
     
moss514
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Tuck, CT.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 12:13 PM
 
I'd have to say I agree with Wade. Though I do not agree with Plaidps.
MS Office, even on a PC is very easy. Especially if you are used to it. For years I used MS Excel on PC's and When I finally came to my senses and started using Macs (Mac user for 2 years now ) I still needed MS Excel. I see no big differences between the two.

If there were no Excel for Macs I'd be up shytes creek. Word is also a pretty powerful tool. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to promote MS. I'm just trying to relay the point that Office is an Integral part of my computing (along with Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Final cut pro and a lot of other stuff I wouldn't even think of trying to use on a shytey PC)

My two cents.

Hey here's another Willy wonka that only mac users could say:

------------------
"We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams"
My pants are fancier than yours!
     
mefogus
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 12:37 PM
 

3) This release is out there simply to get application and driver developers off their butts. When you're Windows, you can tell developers to have their stuff ready for the next OS that will be released in 2 years and they will. When you're Apple, you can't. Apple had DP3, DP4 and PB and most developers still said, "Yeah, yeah. We'll think about looking at OS X when it's released." So Apple forced their hand the only way they could - they shipped OS X.


I hear a lot of people talking about this, and I'm curious to know more about it. Does anyone know of any Apple white papers, interviews, etc... that talk about this?

-m
     
osiris
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Isle of Manhattan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 12:40 PM
 
Nice post - very impressive. Of course you realize that Apple has a great deal to prove to the world and there is an enormous amount of pressure for them to do so quickly (as in NOW/Summer)

But it all makes sense now - this will be the summer of OS X!

BTW Willy Wonka RULES - I met that 'Veruca' girl at a convention in NJ where the Willy Wonka kids were reunited - she is very nice!

"Faster, faster! 'Till the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death." - HST
     
Gilsch2
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 01:58 PM
 
I agree with most points, however I don't with the "Apple is dead without Office". That is not correct. I'm willing to bet that less Mac users depend on Word than you might think. The Mac's bread and butter is video editing, publishing,graphic design. The casual home user has many options besides Office. Now in a business environment, that is not the case. Whoever said that is right about the Mac being dead without Office since the other options are not quite up to par. I personally have never used Office or any MS product besides IE whose interface I totally hate(not a bad product overall though). That Apple-M$ deal should be over next year I believe, someone correct me if I'm wrong, and I really hope Apple and maybe a third party can come up with something for businesses so that they have a real and viable alternative to M$ Office.

[This message has been edited by Gilsch2 (edited 04-18-2001).]
     
ppmax
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 02:11 PM
 
good thread. but one thing not mentioned so far is that the battle for the "den" is over--sure there is market share to gain here, but one look around the rest of the world and the one thing you notice is that the biggest batte ahead is for the "living room." sony with the play station, microsoft with the xbox, tivo with their gizmo--this is where the future of computing is gong. all these new devices are "pc's" in the sense that they are transforming the experience of accessing, using, and distributing (to other people or other devices) entertainment based information...including email, web surfing, etc.

the future of the "television"--what it is, how it works, what types of media it can play back--is whats at stake. this is why you see industry leaders talking about "digital media hubs" etc.

dont get me wrong--apple is on the right track. gaining market share in corporate or home settings is a good thing. but people shouldnt lose sight of the fact that there are many more people that own tv's and vcr's and stereos and game consoles than own computers. convincing these people that their next purchases should be multifunction devices capable of handling all this different kind of media is where the big money is.

ppmax
     
Brad Nelson
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Washington State
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 02:21 PM
 
Wade, you make some good points. Therefore all I need is a nice letter from Apple stating:

"Dear Brad. Thank you for being a long-time Mac user. Welcome to OS X. We didn't include a lot of the time-tested refinements that make the Mac OS so easy to use because you're not that important to us anymore. Refinement-reshminement. Corporate America is where it's at. Unix. TCP/IP. We need to make all the right connections, and unfortunately you're not one of them. But thanks for helping us to get this far."

And Wade, this is NOT a poke at you. Your post was very well thought out - and probably has a lot of truth to it. I actually agree with the direction you suppose Apple to be going. I just don't agree with the implimentation of the user interface. Yes, giving it a new look makes some sense. And in fact if that new Aqua look also had labels and other OS 9 refinements that have been cast aside it would STILL look like the next-century operating system. I believe interface shortcomings to be more a case of NeXT arrogance than corporate strategy.

I don't use Office, but is AppleWorks getting good enought to do w/o Office? Sure would be nice for Apple to be able to get rid of any reliance on Microsoft.
     
Colonel Panic
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 02:32 PM
 
AW is not getting there yet. I like 6, but unfortunately it's missing too many key features to substitute for Office in any environment in which you share files.

word processor docs, for example, have no notion of comments, or blacklining, or accepting/rejecting proposed changes. These are critical for collaborative documents like contracts or proposals.

spreadsheet docs fall woefully short. you can't have stacked, tabbed sheets - a basic in most execl spreasdsheets beyond the rudimentary. it also doesn't solve iteratively as well as excel. finally AW 6 added linking to other sheets, but it's not enough.

AW6 is great for personal use, say home or small business, in which you need printed docs, for the most part, as output. AW6 is easy to use and the modules are beautifully integrated. and -here's sacrilege to many at macnn- AW6 is a nice step forward from AW5, bad button bar design notwithstanding. Most office settings will need Office, like it or not.
     
Angus_D
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 03:30 PM
 
Apple wouldn't release OS X for Intel. If it moved away from PowerPC, it would probably move to AMD with proprietary hardware... They wouldn't let it run on any old machine. That's why the clones almost killed Apple - people could get Macs cheaper than Apple was selling them.

Also, there are technical problems... No binary compatibility, no Classic, people would have to rewrite any assembly, etc etc.
     
urp
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 03:44 PM
 
I believe interface shortcomings to be more a case of NeXT arrogance than corporate strategy.
Why does everyone who has problems with the UI assume the UI is finished. I find it very obvious that aqua is a response to UI research undertaken with regard to tech support issues. From Apple's re-entry into the home market through the iMac, I am sure that there is a wealth of information gleaned about how a "typical user" interacts with the UI. And it seems obvious to me that Aqua is Apple's response to these issues. The typical complaints about useability with regard to the UI have come from "power users" who have lots of apps, lots of files and lots of organizational issues. Laying features from OS9 on top of Aqua may solve the problem in the short term, but it may also end up destroying any real rethinking of the UI and more complex tasking required by "power users." While I think there are many things missing from the Finder and UI in general, I would rather Apple and users not think of them in terms of "labels", "pop-up folders" etc, but in terms of metadata, organization and structure, etc.
     
Milio
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 03:48 PM
 
[quote]Originally posted by urp:
I would rather Apple and users not think of them in terms of "labels", "pop-up folders" etc, but in terms of metadata, organization and structure, etc.
Metadata like filename extensions? Blech!
     
Joey (sans password)
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 04:07 PM
 
I honestly think a lot of people like to be miserable about something at any given time. This is just the flavor of the week. It's just my observation from being a Mac user steadily since '92, and an Apple user before then. I don't think they want to get the point. They want to stamp their feet and shake their fist.

Ah, that felt good to say.
     
urp
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 05:05 PM
 
Milio: its fine to complain about the OS shortcomings if you have a constructive point to make. Yes, metadata, can include file extensions. It can also include file type and creator data, attached .plist of XML information, MIME types. Metadata can also be extended to include Finder metaphors of spatial proximity and file clustering, done through regular expression file searches and user defined tags.

Do you have a problem with the consideration of a concept, or is the lack of an OS9 reference point troubling you, i.e. I'm going to hold my breath until I get Labels back. There is a sublimely childish thread started by Kosmo if that works better for you. ;-)
     
xenu
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 05:40 PM
 
urp, don't expect constructive critisism from milio.
He hates Unix, therefore he hates OS X.

I'm sure there is a logic to that, but I cannot see it.

He ignores all the the positive benifits of Unix, while bitching about file extensions, of all things.

I have my files colour coded by file extension (I'm using linux). Very handy.
Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion - Steven Weinberg.
     
suthercd
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 10:57 PM
 
Great thread! When I step back and look, Apple has a small install base- in the face of that they had the guts to build a completely new OS- and figuured out a very smooth interface with the existing OS. They had to, but they did it well.

Not an adaption of the existing OS, all new. And they sold $190MM+ in the first 2 weeks. Made money for the quarter- yeah sold some investments to get there, but not the qaurter that was forecast.

Excel works- very fast. As does the rest of the suite. Just released Timbuktu client for X now removes the last resaqon ( for me) to boot 9.1.

Updates to come- they'e betting $2.5B insales that the intial concerns will disappear as the releases upgrade the interface. Running all the apps I need and all the ones I don't- wow. Linux with Start Office was never like this.

Great OS. If you want polish, give so time for the adjustments to be made.
     
wadesworld  (op)
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 11:08 PM
 
I hear a lot of people talking about this, and I'm curious to know more about it. Does anyone know of any Apple white papers, interviews, etc... that talk about this?
What do you want to know about it? It's a fact.

How many Carbonized or Cocoa applications were released before OS X was released? Adobe still doesn't know when it will be releasing OS X versions of their apps? MS won't be ready until fall? Quicken won't be carbonized until Quicken 2002 is released? Almost no printer manufacturer's have their drivers done yet?

While I didn't expect them to release anything before OS X's release, they certainly could have been closer than they were.

They waited until OS X's release.

Wade
     
Terri
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Sitting in front of computer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 11:32 PM
 
[quote]Originally posted by urp:
While I think there are many things missing from the Finder and UI in general, I would rather Apple and users not think of them in terms of "labels", "pop-up folders" etc, but in terms of metadata, organization and structure, etc.
Metadata, organization and structure are the magic behind the interface. In 9 labels", "pop-up folders" etc are my tools to handle the data in a way that works for me. I'm always open to new ideas. Right now the only thing that has been given me is the dock and it is a one size fits all the is too small for some.

I'm one of those have 20+ programs open with lots of windows open in each program as I put together a project. 9 works pretty damn good for me.

I already use file extension most of the times. I already keep all my apps in one folder. The only thing on my desktop is what I am working on, just like me real world desk. My hard drive has less folders in the root then what 10 keeps there and I'm not afraid to learn some UNIX.

I want to see more Metadata not less and something better then labels like tags.

Maybe Apple is going to surprise us this summer. But unless we let Apple know, very loudly, that we want more then how will they know?

I've had personal attacks from some because I use Labels as one of the things that I find missing in 10. I'm excited at what 10 can bring, but it falls short right now for my needs.



------------------
Terri Zamore
     
wadesworld  (op)
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2001, 11:38 PM
 
I agree with most points, however I don't with the "Apple is dead without Office". That is not correct. I'm willing to bet that less Mac users depend on Word than you might think.
It doesn't matter whether Mac users use it a lot or would be able to get by without it.

If you don't have office, you won't be accepted in the corporate world, period.

"Dear Brad. Thank you for being a long-time Mac user. Welcome to OS X. We didn't include a lot of the time-tested refinements that make the Mac OS so easy to use because you're not that important to us anymore. Refinement-reshminement. Corporate America is where it's at. Unix. TCP/IP. We need to make all the right connections, and unfortunately you're not one of them. But thanks for helping us to get this far."
Combining replies here....

Brad, catering to corporate America is the most important thing Apple can do right now. That requires making some changes.

But if that's successful, you as a home user will benefit. If Apple were to increase its marketshare to 25% percent and get a good start on corporate penetration, do you have any idea how many more software developers that would bring to the Mac? Or how many additional hardware devices would become available? It would be huge.

If Apple continues to focus only on the home user, they'll have a lot of happy home users, but will continue to be insignificant and continue to lose marketshare.

And Apple knows that when it has to make a change that's not going to be popular, it has to force users into that choice. Look at how many users are going ballistic over losing the control strip or the Apple Menu. If they said, "We'd like everyone to stop using AppleTalk for servers and start using AppleTalk over TCP/IP, do you think people would do it? No way. Apple has learned that when it's time to make a change, they just have to make the change since given a choice, users will always take old, comfortable choice.

I know a lot of people would like things to be different. For Apple to support every protocol forever, or to give them a gentle migration. But that's not practical, so it's better to make the right decisions and just move on. (Which is not to say that every decision is right, but hey, they're doing better than they did during the Sculley/Spindler/Amelio era)

Wade
     
Brad Nelson
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Washington State
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 12:37 AM
 
Wade, if the road to a larger market share is through corporate then I expect we'll see major changes soon in OS X. After all, bouncing icons and huge heart-shaped Finder buttons scream "consumer" not corporate.

I'm all for nominating you to the board right now 'cause it seems many at Apple don't have a clue. I mean, such a simple thing as having a neutral gray theme was considered somehow beneath the new Aqua look. For crying out loud, if I'm correct they added this to appease designers - and then went and botched it anyway with a blue-gray theme. Will they treat corporate needs with as much sensitivity?

Yes, I know interface isn't everything. I was playing with Windows ME today. Can't believe how cumbersome the UI is. The menu bar alone would cut my productivity by 20%. But Windows rules the world. Go figure. Still, I'd prefer Apple combine their grand master plan (whatever that is) with their traditional eye for detail. And clearly to displace Windows and gain market share you've got to at least be clearly better in some way. For those who think OS X is, well then I just respectfully disagree.
     
Gary Finley
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canmore, AB, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 12:37 AM
 
"The development aspect of OS X cannot be overlooked. Cocoa is so powerful it's incredible. As OS X becomes more popular, more and more people will eventually spend a little time playing with Cocoa to see what it can do. Once they get started, they won't stop. Cocoa is that good. We will see more apps on MacOS X than we've ever seen before."

And better. Any of us old NeXT'ers can tell you about that. Check out OmniGraffle for a good example. This is the NeXT program "Diagram!" ported to OS X by Omni. It's a wonderful drawing program, absolutely night and day better for network diagrams and flowcharts than lame Windows junk like Visio. Another good example of superior software from the NeXT environment was Taylor. This incredible program let you do click-and-drag GUI editing of a PostScript image (PostScript was the NeXT's native tongue for display and printng). Most people I showed this to, who knew enough about PostScript to understand what they were seeing, could hardly believe it was possible. It was a brilliant piece of work.

"This also applies to the UNIX underpinnings..."

To say nothing of the object-oriented design. The OOP core of OS X makes the UI parts of new apps a snap to write. I hacked up a few myself in the old days, just for the pleasure of using InterfaceBuilder and ProjectBuilder. It also simplifies debugging, and lets developers quickly build up a library of code modules that they can reuse and combine into new products. It's a developers dreamworld.

I really hope it works for Apple. I thought my NeXTs were the best computers on the face of the Earth. Their commercial failure (as MS crap exploded in market share) was one of the great tragedies in the history of computer technology. If OS X brings back some of that kind of elegance to personal computer software, it'd be a wonderful thing.
Gary Finley
Director of Networking
Netera Alliance Inc.
     
one
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: here
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 12:44 AM
 
Originally posted by wadesworld:

Almost no printer manufacturer's have their drivers done yet?

While I didn't expect them to release anything before OS X's release, they certainly could have been closer than they were.

They waited until OS X's release.
[/B]
As an aside as well as a comment:

E-mail from Lexmark yesterday says they'll have X drivers for their printers posted on their website by the end of the month (04/01). Because of this, I expect I'll be buying a Lexmark in the next couple of weeks.

On the larger topic: The notion of X needing to ship as a message to developers IS fact. No one has to run a poll or do a study for this to be a widely-acknowledged truth (witness Lexmark's low-key move to support).

It's not the *only* truth, nor the only fact, but it is an important one. If you're a software producer, deciding to support a new OS is like getting married: it 's a MAJOR commitment, a very expensive commitment, glorious in success but a messy catastrophe otherwise. No small, or even medium-sized, s/w house will take on the headaches, lost sleep and potential disaster to support a platform that might never materialise (remember Copland, Rhapsody, et al? they never materialised).

Here's the quid pro quo:
Apple: You gotta support the NBT!
Devels: You gotta deliver the NBT!

Apple HAD TO deliver X. To the stores. HAD TO.

------------------
only howling babies don't know what howling babies sound like...
'Crime doesn't pay' - that's a philosophy....
Philosophy doesn't pay - that's a crime....
     
Gilsch2
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 06:43 AM
 
You know Wade, if you're gonna quote me, quote the whole sentence.Leaving out my point to attempt to prove yours is quite lame. Again, your statement about Apple being dead without Office is pretty ignorant. AGAIN, Apple's bread and butter are the printing, video editing, publishing markets. If Apple makes, and I hope they do, a small dent into the corporate market thanks to OS X, then Office is necessary due to the lack of an appropriate alternative(people have mentioned StarOffice? but I have only seen screenshots). Is Office necessary? Of course it is, like most Adobe, Macromedia programs to name a couple. Since my last post I have been playing with Word 98 and it appears to be a pretty useful app. For making flyers and doing school work. I'll keep using Quark and InDesign for the pro stuff.
     
GRAFF
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Paris, France
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 07:14 AM
 
Originally posted by Wade:
To everyone that's missing the point...
I may have missed the point, but I at least deserve the correct pronoun!
How about "To everyone WHO is missing the point..."

     
Kosmo
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Bow, NH USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 07:15 AM
 
I think expecting Apple to make huge inroads into corporate America is a mistake. Which Corporate Amercia? Fortune 1000 companies with 2500 to 25000 employees or small corporations with employees of less than 100?

I can't imagine a company like Ford or General Mills, etc. making a change to Apple. Although it could be done, with a minimum amount of pain, it's still too much of a change to be taken serioulsy.

Small Corporate America though, is already slowly joining the Apple fold. You'd be surprised how many Real Estate, Lawyer, Dotcor, Dentists, and Insurance Companies are already running Mac offices..With OS X and a proper Sales Force this area could grow.

But here's the catch. Who's selling to Corporate America? In this area of the country no one is selling to Corporate Amercia , no Apple dealers anyway.

When I was an on-site sonsultant for an Apple Reseller here I provided insight into how to establish a small corporate sells force that would cold call small business's that would fit the Apple profile and try to get a foot in the door. They did OK for a while, made some inroads with a couple small companies and private schools. But they stopped because they said the cost of maintaining a Sales force of just ONE was too much to support the NARROW profit of selling a Mac to Corporate America..So they gave up and if any office wants to go mac they have to SEEK out a retailer with NO support. Apple Corporate HAS NEVER tried to sell computers in New England..but they do have an Education presence here.

Apple needs to go forth with their palns to open their own stores ASAP. This would give them a place for America to come for GOOD customer support and ample supply of knowledge and product, but most importantly, these stores can provide on-site service, and on-site SALES SUPPORT so that they can begin to really sell to small corporate Amercia, and small Corporate Amercia will be comfortable working with REAL Apple Sales people.

Once you establish a presence in smaller offices you can then begin to sell to larger and larger compaines....This Summer is the perfect time for this move. With OS X getting a huge update and sales for it already quite high, with Major Vendors onboard to port software, Apple can strike for Corpoarte Amercia....and still go after the neglected Education Market...

Oh, and as much as I like AppleWorks, there is no comparison to Office. Either Apple has to commit to a pro-level Office suite or kiss MS's ass to get them to continue to support Office for Mac.. I hoping fof the FORMER...Apple Office, yeah thaty would rock.

Also, the interface issue. This is NOT th 1980's...The Aqua interface would fare just fine in Corporate Amercia. Everything is about Style these days, everywhere. Corporate Amercia would ove the chance to bring a little excitement to their "1984" type monitors...



------------------


http://www.macnet2.com
     
wadesworld  (op)
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 07:46 AM
 
I think expecting Apple to make huge inroads into corporate America is a mistake. Which Corporate Amercia? Fortune 1000 companies with 2500 to 25000 employees or small corporations with employees of less than 100?
No, nobody said they would make major inroads. Just that their chances would start to improve. Right now, they have zero chance in 99% of corporations, whether large or small.

But here's the catch. Who's selling to Corporate America? In this area of the country no one is selling to Corporate Amercia , no Apple dealers anyway.
Agreed. But you can't put the cart before the horse. Before you can have people go out and knock on doors, you have to have a solid product with lots of apps.

Wade

     
SillyMonk
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North America
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 10:27 AM
 
Originally posted by Kosmo:
...snipped... Apple Corporate HAS NEVER tried to sell computers in New England..but they do have an Education presence here.

No disrespect, I know you were trying to make a point but Apple has tried to sell in New England. I have sat in meetings at my former (newspaper related) company in Boston with Apple reps who tried to sell us more Apple gear. It didn't work.

[If you hadn't used NEVER in all caps, I wouldn't have noticed. ]

BTW, the reason that Apple lost that already installed base of 300-400 corporate Macs to Dell was because of things like Applealk not being TCP/IP, not playing nice with other apps like Office, etc. Basically all the things Wade has been saying. Once a company makes an investment they have to be pretty disillusioned to change over to a new platform, never mind a new vendor.

-john
My life is my argument. --Albert Schweitzer
     
Milio
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 11:39 AM
 
Originally posted by Kosmo:
Also, the interface issue. This is NOT th 1980's...The Aqua interface would fare just fine in Corporate Amercia. Everything is about Style these days, everywhere. Corporate Amercia would ove the chance to bring a little excitement to their "1984" type monitors...
I find that after working in the new XP interface, Aqua seems very conservative.
     
bpbond
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 11:59 AM
 
Wow, Gilsch2, I'm not sure if you appreciate how central MS Office is in most places, and for most people. Sure, "Apple's bread and butter are the printing, video editing, publishing markets," but that doesn't mean Apple can survive just on those markets. (Those markets are buying the TiBook, but didn't buy all those iMacs!)

Sure, StarOffice is neat. But in most corporate and academic environments (with, obviously, some exceptions like law) it is *not* possible to interact with colleagues, etc., without Office. People who buy Macs in these environments are not interested in fooling around with translators, etc. That Word document has to open, perfectly, first try.

People have talked a lot about how the UNIX basement of X makes it more appealing to corporate IT, but as someone said earlier here, if Office isn't in the picture, X is not going to be considered. This state of affairs may be good or bad -- but it's the reality that most of us deal with.
     
Brad Nelson
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Washington State
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 01:00 PM
 
<<I find that after working in the new XP interface, Aqua seems very conservative.>>

Milio, yeah, they've definitely candy coated XP. I know an "early adopter" of XP and I've seen it myself. The first thing he did was change the theme back to the "traditional" look. At least THEY have a choice. Me, I'm seeing stripes everywhere. Stripes in the morning, stripes in the afternoon, stripes on my dinner table. And some people thought brushed metal was bad.

"We used to DREAM of having brushed metal." - The Four Yorkshiremen
     
MikeM32
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: "Joisey" Home of the "Guido" and chicks with "Big Hair"
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 01:11 PM
 
Wow, Gilsch2, I'm not sure if you appreciate how central MS Office is in most places, and for most people. Sure, "Apple's bread and butter are the printing, video editing, publishing markets," but that doesn't mean Apple can survive just on those markets. (Those markets are buying the TiBook, but didn't buy all those iMacs!)
Well being in the Printing/Publishing /Design business, I can't say we'd go for TiBooks, if I were running my own business? I'd consider it.

The iMac doesn't offer a large enough screen resolution or size (even though it does have VGA mirroring). The company I work for generally goes for the low-midrange towers, and minimum of 22" monitors on our real Graphics Worsktations.

This is not to say that we're going out and getting the most expensive product. As I take on the responsibility of recommending upgrades and maintaining our (albeit) small but productive Mac dept., I must try to find the best deal, but also over-look anything that would simply be impossible for an Artist/Designer to work with.

In short I ask myself "what would/could I get myself?"

As far as MS Office goes, I wonder why businesses outside Apples primary market (namely Graphics, Music, and other Creative and production industries) would adopt the Macintosh. But this is a positive thing. It's great to know that other types of industries are going Macintosh for performing "Non-Traditional" Macintosh only tasks.

The department I maintain at work, hasn't required MS Office yet however.

Mike

[This message has been edited by MikeM32 (edited 04-19-2001).]
     
mefogus
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 01:39 PM
 
Originally posted by wadesworld:
What do you want to know about it? It's a fact.

They waited until OS X's release.
Wade
Why is it a fact? Sounds like speculation to me. It's as much speculation as me saying that there are no applications for OSX because no one wants to develop for it. I hope that this isn't true, but it's as valid as your 'theory'. That is, unless you can make me eat crow by quote some sources.
     
Kosmo
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Bow, NH USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 01:51 PM
 
There are already a couple of hundred apps for OS X, plus the thousands that can run under Classic...

X-Photoshop, GoLive/Dreamweaver/Office/ect ect ect. already exist.. they're just not released yet. Seybold Boston had Adobe showing InDesign for X, Adobe released X-Acrobat Reader and some are gearing up beta programs for X..you'll probably see some major apps by the end of May.


There will be -every- popular application for OS 9 ported to X either as Carbon (most likely for the next year or so) and then Cocoa probably in early 2003.

What I think is exciting is the aspect of smaller, leaner, and meaner companies out there ready to write Cocoa Apps that can get an early grip (however short-lived) on the X-market by being first to market.

I can't wait to see what they can come up with..

------------------


http://www.macnet2.com
     
Kosmo
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Bow, NH USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 01:56 PM
 
Is this what you mean? From the macromedia site:


Macromedia is excited about Apple's latest operating system and is committed to creating native "carbonized" Mac OS X versions of our products in the future. FreeHand 10 is the first carbonized Macromedia product.


------------------


http://www.macnet2.com
     
Kosmo
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Bow, NH USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 02:02 PM
 
Sorry to triple post here, but what about this: I think my first post above holds true:
From Adobe:

Adobe software and Mac OS X
Adobe supports the direction Apple is taking with Mac OS X. Apple's new operating system promises to ultimately deliver a powerful desktop platform with enhanced stability and reliability for the Macintosh customer.

Currently, most of Adobe's software products do not offer native Mac OS X support. Adobe plans to support Mac OS X native mode in future releases of our flagship products, beginning with Adobe Acrobat Reader� 5.0.

------------------


http://www.macnet2.com
     
selkirk
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 02:35 PM
 
Although Microsoft could do bad things to Apple by withholding office, they won't do it. First, MS makes money by selling office for the mac. Second, they cannot afford to leave the space open to incubate an office competitor. If they pulled out of the mac, companies would make replacement products. One of them might even be better. For both these reasons, the larger the mac market, the less likely they are to pull out. (that seems obvious)

Cocoa may be good, but don't overestimate it's impact in a corporate environment. An inability to hire programmers and an inability to migrate cocoa applications to an Intel platform will cool cocoa's corporate prospects. Java is much more important to getting Macs into corporations. I am very much interested in an official JBuilder release for the mac.
     
wadesworld  (op)
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 02:59 PM
 
Why is it a fact? Sounds like speculation to me. It's as much speculation as me saying that there are no applications for OSX because no one wants to develop for it. I hope that this isn't true, but it's as valid as your 'theory'. That is, unless you can make me eat crow by quote some sources.

Um, if every developer finished their porting work prior to MacOS X's release, why are they not shipping thier apps/drivers yet?

I'm not saying nobody did any work on OS X. I'm not saying that lots of apps won't be released in the coming months.

I am saying that none of that would have been happening if OS X was not on the streets. Developers may have done some work in the background, but they weren't going to sit down and start shipping apps until OS X was released.

A very few developers had 90% of their work complete. Most had done some work. And some weren't doing much of anything until OS X shipped.


Wade
     
urp
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 03:12 PM
 
Kosmo:

OSX is not important enough for any of those companies [Macromedia, Adobe] to ship product outside of their normal development cycle. After Effects and Acrobat were in development before Carbon API was complete hence no OSX support [Reader is trivial at this point]. Same with Macromedia, i.e. you will not see OSX Dreamweaver or Fireworks for a while as they were just released. If anything, the hated MS, has stepped outside their usual development calendar and will ship OSX Office before any major update is expected. Though this largess does allow to charge a hefty upgrade fee, and really pad their profits.

No one's really busting their ass to get OSX shipped, except in the really high-end markets like 3D and CADD. Stop in at the Adobe Support Forums and see the wealth of ignorance about OSX.
     
Kosmo
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Bow, NH USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 03:45 PM
 
Damn...IE screwed this post up, I hope it prints well....I gotta start using Omni all the time...Jesus!

I totally agree in several points being made here. I know Adode and Macromedia won't do anything outside their normal plans, except that they will port their apps to OS X. Not next week, nor next month..but they will and soon.

It's a strange time right now. OS X is OUT there and developers know that there is no turning back from Apple, not this time...It's out and will stay out..so, that being the case, things will start to happen.

There is a lot, I'm sure, going on behind the scenes with Apple and some major vendors, and although we've been using OS X for what seems like months, it''s only been a month.

I agree that Acrobat Reader for X is a small deal, but to have it appear less than 30 days after the official release ain't bad. I happen to think that vendors were waiting for Apple to commit to shipping. I wonder how much money vendors put into initial work a few years back when Rhapsody was being developed. Burn me once shame on you, burn me twice, shame on me, ya know?

Microsoft has more resources available to them to be able to ship a carbon IE and also start work on Office. They can throw money at IE and Office for Mac and expect to see a return pretty quick, Adobe and others don't have the cash..but they'll do it anyway because they don't have a choice.

I disagree that they don't feel OS X is important. Since there is no turning back now, I doubt very much is they would abandon the Mac market, despite having to develop a new way with Carbon. Applw will sell a lot of macs in the next 12 months, plus a lot more OS X boxes..the market will be there.


Personally, I'd like to see Apple give some money to help speed things along, I know it won't happen but I'd like to see it.


------------------


http://www.macnet2.com
     
American in Florence.
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 04:03 PM
 
Contrary to the speculation here, OS X is not designed for corporate America. Jobs, who is running the company, has stated that Apple is consumer oriented. OS X will garner some ancillary increased corporate marketshare, but its thrust is to appeal to consumers, hence, as someone here pointed out, the stoplight metaphor controls, and the translucent icons.


The premise that success in corproate america must come before consumer success is seriously flawed and based on past evidence which has little validity in a fast-changing technology world. Consumers are more comfortable now with computers than they were in the late 80s, 90s -- they can better navigate now between two different OS. Also, there is a large segment of home users that has no invovlement with corporate america. A company cannot be all things to everybody, and doesn't need to be to achieve consistent profitability.


Apple is opening high profile stores -- that should be an obvious signal to everyone here that this is a consumer company. Apple has no experience selling to corporate America, and its values are not those of most of corporate america.

If OS X were designed for corporate america, why would Apple be spending a fortune to open consumer stores? Why wouldn't Apple spend that money recruiting a corporate sales force? Why has Jobs stated the goal of the company to sell to consumers?
     
urp
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 05:07 PM
 
I agree that Acrobat Reader for X is a small deal, but to have it appear less than 30 days after the official release ain't bad. I happen to think that vendors were waiting for Apple to commit to shipping. I wonder how much money vendors put into initial work a few years back when Rhapsody was being developed. Burn me once shame on you, burn me twice, shame on me, ya know?
Lets not call it Acrobat Reader for X, because its just Acrobat that happens by some quirk to work in OSX. OS9 installer, no package, and I imagine that since it works in OS9 and OSX that its compiled CFM rather than Mach-O. Its just a test of Adobe's carbon libs to see how they work.

Re Rhapsody: How can you get burned if you haven't done a lick of work? The main reason Carbon exists is that Adobe et al, really weren't that interested in Cocoa [nee YellowBox] no matter how elegant and easy to program.

Microsoft has more resources available to them to be able to ship a carbon IE and also start work on Office. They can throw money at IE and Office for Mac and expect to see a return pretty quick, Adobe and others don't have the cash..but they'll do it anyway because they don't have a choice.
I really don't wish to defend MS at every turn, but Adobe and Macromedia are not hurting for cash either. And Adobe is sticking to its story of not pre-announcing product, despite the fact that its silence on OSX is disturbing. Adobe itself is running some good FUD on the Support Forums about PS and OSX. Chris Cox [name in PS splash screen] claims that OSX will run PS much slower than OS9 because of increased *nix overhead. While there has been enough said about the speed of OSX vs. OS9, this is the first time i've seen a claim of increased system overhead significantly slowing down an app [this was not in reference to Quartz and Aqua, but the BSD layer]. Marc Pawlinger [nother splash screen name] also claims that OSX VM scheme is not as sophisticated as PS's, and will not help the user. Of course their background is PS3 which ran on XWindows, so how much truth these claims is a matter of conjecture until PS is released and benchmarked. But suffice to say that Adobe is not neccesarily enamored with OSX, but will move apps over because they see profits. If the profits aren't there say goodbye to Adobe.
     
Kosmo
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Bow, NH USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 06:41 PM
 
Oh please, despite what you think, Adobe is NOT as healthy cash-wise as you believe and Macromedia has been on the step of bankrupty before and is quite frightend of it happening again.

I was a top level beta tester to f Xres, I KNOW how much they were burned before.

I know, beside the point, but I had to make it anyway


------------------


http://www.macnet2.com
     
Milio
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 06:47 PM
 
Looks like this has turned into the Kosmo's View of the World forum.

Kinda light on work there Kosmo?
     
Kosmo
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Bow, NH USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2001, 07:05 PM
 
Well I have been sitting here watching movies all day. After watching RKO 281 today I am going to rent Citizen Kane again...

Sorry if I upset you. I was asked a question and I answered it...

------------------


http://www.macnet2.com
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:55 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,