Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Nick_G · Apr 30, 2003, 05:38 PM

I've just been reading the latest issue of MacUser and an article in it has confounded my fears over the possible future of Apple. In an article headline "Merrill Lynch analyst sees difficult year ahead for Apple" it states that the depressed state of the IT industry and weak US education market and and design industry has meant depressed sales of Power Macs and consumer desktop models. The analyst, Michael Hilmeyer has suggested that Apple should move to the PC standard Intel/AMD architecture. The reasons for this include higher costs in developing hardware for Power PC processors and the fact that current processors are seen to be slower than the ones used in PCs.

This suggestion made me think of all these persistent rumours of Project Marklar, where Apple have developed a version of Mac OS X to run on an Intel chip. The above story together with the Marklar rumours have made me think of this worst possible scenario:

Apple makes OS X available for Pentium processors.

People think, "Hold on a minute, why should I spend a grand on switching to a Mac when I can buy OS X for �80 for my PeeCee?"

As a result, although sales of OS X skyrocket, demands for Macs plummet and Apple lose so much money that they decide to stop making hardware.

End result: no more hardware=no more Macs, and Apple become a software-only company. Aaaagh!

I don't know if this analyst is just a PC weenie who
likes to spread the usual prophesies of doom. Maybe I'm just being paranoid but every time I come across these rumours it fills me with dread. I know that new Power Macs using the new IBM 970 processor are allegedly due later this year and I sincerely hope that they kick start an increase in sales as they will certainly be a big jump in performance.

Please reassure me because I seriously think that if Apple really did eventually switch to Intel/AMD processors and/or release an Intel-compatible version of OS X they would seriously be shooting themselves in the foot.

daimoni · 11:03 AM

.

I Bent My Wookiee · Apr 30, 2003, 05:43 PM

Meh

boots · Apr 30, 2003, 05:47 PM

Originally posted by Nick_G:
The analyst, Michael Hilmeyer has suggested that Apple should move to the PC standard Intel/AMD architecture. The reasons for this include higher costs in developing hardware for Power PC processors and the fact that current processors are seen to be slower than the ones used in PCs.

The other option is to run with another chip that has lower (shared) production cost. Like the 970 that may or may not be in Apple's future.

Moto has a hard time with cost because Apple is the only purchaser for the G4.

IBM used the the 970 design in other things, so much of the development cost would be shared.

Of course, analysts can't speculate like that, so this wouldn't reflect that option...

Nick_G · Apr 30, 2003, 05:57 PM

I know this topic has probably been brought up many times before, but I have only been a Mac user for about 10 months, and would like to STAY a Mac user for many more years!

simonjames · Apr 30, 2003, 06:10 PM

Usually I am strongly against naysayers and defend Apple's market share and position by comparing it to other niche players in different markets - namely Benz and BMW.

However, today is different.

One of Apple's largest market segments - DTP - is slowly being eaten away by fast cheap PCs running the same software yielding the same output for a cheaper price.

Apple's other large market segment is education which is being quickly eaten away by cheap PCs. Why Apple didn't market airport strongly when it came out I don't know - every PC manufacturer under the sun is advertising wireless as the best thing since sliced bread. Yes, Apple can sit there smugly and say "we were first" but that means squat if they never turned it into market share.

And then there is the perceived arrogant dismissal of half it's user base - namely the non-American Mac-faithful. Apple favours the American market with some very nice software features and lower hardware prices whilst makes the rest of the world wait and pay.

Finally - the decision to have proprietry licensed hardware and OS that only Apple can produce has handed Microsoft and Intel the lion's share of the computer market.

I can see a book opportunity "Apple - how not to run a business"

Swiss Bob · Apr 30, 2003, 06:18 PM

I can't see it happening. Half the appeal of running Mac is the hardware.

It comes down to: Be an analyst, talk crap, get paid for it.

But hey it doesn't matter anyways - Apple will be bankrupt and out of business by the time I've finished writing this.

Kitschy · Apr 30, 2003, 06:25 PM

Originally posted by daimoni:
Haven't we heard this argument/question from pundits every month now... for like the past 10 years?

Indeed.

wataru · Apr 30, 2003, 07:21 PM

GAAAAH! THIS TOPIC JUST WON'T DIE!

itai195 · Apr 30, 2003, 07:30 PM

Well there's nothing stopping Apple from switching to x86 hardware and still maintaining proprietary hooks on some components, like the motherboard. They'd probably want to keep developing their own motherboards. And really, pretty much the only thing in PowerMacs these days that is proprietary IS the motherboard... I don't know why so many Mac fans are against any notion of switching to x86 -- we'd gain much faster processors for much less money, and we'd kick a dependence on Motorolla (did somebody say "worst semiconductor company EVER" ?

) And we'd probably see some components, like premier graphics accelerators, coming to the Mac sooner.

j45degrees · Apr 30, 2003, 07:35 PM

I'm beginning to be convinced that Microsoft, or someone else, hires people to keep these kind of "Mac is gonna die" stories going.

Mac is good for you. My brother who was a fanatic anti Mac guy for many years just bought an iBook. I never thought I'd see that happen.

Mac is not going to go away any time soon. It's a great product and there will always be a market for it.

wdlove · Apr 30, 2003, 07:38 PM

So many over the years have written of the demise of Apple. They have been wrong in the past, today, and in the future! This has the making of being a banner year with the introduction of the Music Store, PPC 970, & Mac OS X 10.3. Go get them Steve, we are four square behind you, we have you six!

SirCastor · Apr 30, 2003, 08:05 PM

Originally posted by simonjames:

And then there is the perceived arrogant dismissal of half it's user base - namely the non-American Mac-faithful. Apple favours the American market with some very nice software features and lower hardware prices whilst makes the rest of the world wait and pay.

There's more involved than Apple just deciding to screw over non-US folks. If you want to point blame, I'd look to trade legalities and Tarriffs. Certainly Apple could wait until everything was squared away for every corner of the Earth, but that makes whatever they're selling even older.

I can see a book opportunity "Apple - how not to run a business"

Perhaps a more appropriate title would be: "Apple - How not to run a Business, and still succeed"

Superchicken · Apr 30, 2003, 09:55 PM

You know what I would like to see Jobs do after Panther and the 970s are rolling out?

In a press release say "Apple would like to thank (list of anlysts who have predicted their demise) for stating that we'd be dead a long time ago, we would also like to point out that we have a new music distribution service that is succeeding where others have failed, we have an OS that has torounced our compition in the majority of reveiws that we've found, hardware that can slam what you have been telling us to switch to, and a user base that has not abandoned us but were simply waiting for new hardware that was worth their money that we can now provide... now if you wouldn't mind... please kindly shut up."

mixin visuals · Apr 30, 2003, 10:18 PM

nuff said.

mitchell_pgh · Apr 30, 2003, 10:34 PM

I love how the analysts overlook the fact that Mac users are, on average, much more inteligent the PC users. There really hasn't been any major reason to upgrade your system in over 3 years (since the G4 came out). I'm not trying to burn Apple, but I think THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of people are waiting for the 970 hardware to come out. They are waiting for the new cases, faster system buss, 64 bit architecture, faster RAM, etc. etc. etc.

A 400 MHz G4 system is still a cool system, and it's well over three years old.

dampeoples · Apr 30, 2003, 11:17 PM

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
I love how the analysts overlook the fact that Mac users are, on average, much more inteligent the PC users. There really hasn't been any major reason to upgrade your system in over 3 years (since the G4 came out). I'm not trying to burn Apple, but I think THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of people are waiting for the 970 hardware to come out. They are waiting for the new cases, faster system buss, 64 bit architecture, faster RAM, etc. etc. etc.

A 400 MHz G4 system is still a cool system, and it's well over three years old.

Exactly

MindFad · Apr 30, 2003, 11:24 PM

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
I love how the analysts overlook the fact that Mac users are, on average, much more inteligent the PC users. There really hasn't been any major reason to upgrade your system in over 3 years (since the G4 came out). I'm not trying to burn Apple, but I think THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of people are waiting for the 970 hardware to come out. They are waiting for the new cases, faster system buss, 64 bit architecture, faster RAM, etc. etc. etc.

A 400 MHz G4 system is still a cool system, and it's well over three years old.

If you check your mail and browse the web, sure.

Not if you do lots of Photoshop work and 3-D work. A big hardware boost is well over a year past due. I'm happy with my Mac, but the 970s do need to get here fast (at least, I really hope they do, because I'd like to continue using my Mac for high-end 3-D work, and not have to go with a P4/AMD/whatever; it's all about the OS, baby). Man, I really can't wait for a 970.

euphras · May 1, 2003, 10:08 AM

Apple would spoil one of the main advantages of this platform if they would move over to Intel/AMD hardware. The Mac OS/Apple hardware has stability/reliability advantages BECAUSE IT ONLY RUNS ON PROPRIETARY HARDWARE!

If Mac OS would run on VIA/AMD/Intel/Asus/Elitegroup/MSI/etc. hardware we would run into the same driver/compatibility/bugs/etc. probs like on the windows side...

OptimusG4 · May 1, 2003, 10:22 AM

Nonsuch · May 1, 2003, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by Nick_G:
I know this topic has probably been brought up many times before, but I have only been a Mac user for about 10 months, and would like to STAY a Mac user for many more years!

That explains it. Someone writes an article like this every 3 months or so. Pretty soon you won't even notice them.

The only thing holding Apple back right now is a fast processor in its high-end systems. Sure, that's pretty significant, but every other piece is in place: great OS, great application software, a retail strategy that seems primed to pay off, more retail deals in the offing (partnership w/ Best Buy), software acquisitions ... even with sluggish PM sales, Apple is in better shape than it's been in at least the last 5 years.

dreilly1 · May 1, 2003, 02:20 PM

Apple is tough to evaluate as a company. They clearly have driven some real innovations since their inception (wirelss networking, firewire, USB, the GUI, some would say even the entire PC industry...). They didn't necessary invent all of these, but they made them usable.

On the other hand, they suffer because they are placed against the behemoth of MS and Intel. MS owns practically everything, and Apple wants to compete with them?

Let me start by saying I trust analysts about as far as I can throw them. Someone was talking about analysts on the local radio this morning, and said that out of the universe of analyst reccomendations -- that is, the stocks they say you should buy -- 40% of the stocks go up, 40% go down, and 20% stay the same. If you are looking to make money off of Analyst recommendations, you are better off flipping a coin!

But there are legitimate concerns aout Apple. With Safari, iTunes, (and especially Keynote), they are competing directly with IE, Media Player, and Powerpoint. Once MS decides that it's no longer in its best interests to put out a version of Office for the Mac, all of Corporate America will be throwing their Macs out. The current administration does not seem inclined to consider this an anti-trust violation, but that's a different thread.

What worries me more is the fact that Apple's profit comes from interest on tis $4b in the bank. not from selling computers. I know that we're in a recession, and that the cash is keeping Apple afloat, but shouldn't a computer company be making money by selling computers?

I think that the iTunes store (and the fact that the Universal rumors were false) will be a good thing; they've already built the infrastructure to deliver content, and at $.99 a pop (Approx. $.30 going to Apple), since they've sold some 250,000 songs in two days, that's a lot of profit. They'll need to sell lots more songs, but I think that they're in good position to make money from selling more than just computers in the coming years.

In short, Apple has cash and not a lot of debt, so it isn't going away anytime soon, (unless the buy Universal Music, and drain all their cash and take on debt..)!

DBursey · May 1, 2003, 02:23 PM

Apple is doomed! I don't see them surviving much past our sun's anticipated progression to red giant status.

dreilly1 · May 1, 2003, 03:31 PM

Originally posted by DBursey:
Apple is doomed! I don't see them surviving much past our sun's anticipated progression to red giant status.

At least they're not "beleagured" anymore...

Kitschy · May 1, 2003, 03:37 PM

Just felt like this image was called for.

Whoever posted this pic in another thread, thank you. I love this picture, it's my new favorite pic.

wdlove · May 1, 2003, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by mixin visuals:

nuff said.

Do you plan to purchase that as a vanity plate? Maybe you could also incorporate the smily face!

Superchicken · May 1, 2003, 07:24 PM

Does anyone in coperate america have a mac?

Besides OOo or many other open source developments can be used in place of M$ office, it's not ideal, but M$ aside from trying to cripple the platform has no reason to drop Office. They make to much money off it... besides I suspect apple will make a lovely word processor and spread sheet app combo that can compette with Office if M$ decides to leave the platform.

MindFad · May 1, 2003, 07:53 PM

Originally posted by Kitschy:
Whoever posted this pic in another thread, thank you. I love this picture, it's my new favorite pic.

Yeah, I thought it was a gem. You're welcome.

gumby5647 · May 1, 2003, 10:41 PM

Originally posted by boots:

Moto has a hard time with cost because Apple is the only purchaser for the G4.

Cisco also purchases G4 chips....

beb · May 1, 2003, 11:02 PM

My Xerox Phaser 7700 printer has a 500Mhz G4 processor.

Nick_G · May 3, 2003, 07:53 AM

Well it seems that most replies have been positive, and that's definitely good to see. Apple have been going now for about 27 years, and I hope they're still here in another 27! I just don't want to see them damaged by some dur-brained decision (i.e. Marklar). If Steve has any sense he won't go ahead with it.

BTW does anyone know when the new G5/970 Power Macs are due? Will they appear around the same time Panther is released?

Cipher13 · May 3, 2003, 07:58 AM

Originally posted by DBursey:
Apple is doomed! I don't see them surviving much past our sun's anticipated progression to red giant status.

They've been saying that for years...

May 3, 2003, 11:57 AM

Originally posted by dreilly1:
But there are legitimate concerns aout Apple. With Safari, iTunes, (and especially Keynote), they are competing directly with IE, Media Player, and Powerpoint. Once MS decides that it's no longer in its best interests to put out a version of Office for the Mac, all of Corporate America will be throwing their Macs out.

I read somewhere that MS makes more money from the average Mac user than the average PC users. Reason being higher price for Office and lower tech support demands. If Macs invade corporations again, MS will still make money. I don't think they'll axe Office.

:XI: · May 3, 2003, 01:55 PM

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
Does anyone in coperate america have a mac?

Besides OOo or many other open source developments can be used in place of M$ office, it's not ideal, but M$ aside from trying to cripple the platform has no reason to drop Office. They make to much money off it... besides I suspect apple will make a lovely word processor and spread sheet app combo that can compette with Office if M$ decides to leave the platform.

Doesn't Bush use a mac?

And don't use 'M$' unless you actually want to look like a dipshit.

istallion · May 3, 2003, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by Nonsuch:
That explains it. Someone writes an article like this every 3 months or so. Pretty soon you won't even notice them.

The only thing holding Apple back right now is a fast processor in its high-end systems.

RSN.

Everything will be great once we get the 970. This was also said about the G4, original imac, OSX, photoshop on OSX, the 'digital hub', etc. Same line, different year.

I'd really like apple to succeed. The industry could use some competition.

Adam Betts · May 3, 2003, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by Nick_G:
BTW does anyone know when the new G5/970 Power Macs are due? Will they appear around the same time Panther is released?

Everyone know as much as you do about 970

LVzardoz · May 25, 2003, 04:38 AM

Originally posted by mac-blog
Hey, the BeOS was a great OS that you could download for free and people still continued to use what ever was originally on their system. Mac OS X is great, but it would not be that different from either the BeOS or Rhapsody.

Intel kills good operatings systems. Long live alterative hardware/software platforms!

BeOS had poor hardware and driver support and didn't have the critical mass that OS X has.

OS X also appeals to Linux folks, having much better usability and with a robust Unix core.

The combination of inexpensive, more powerful hardware offered by x86 coupled with a superior OS would catch the attention of most influential tech writers. Maybe only the tech savvy and smarter folks would make the switch immediately from Wintel to MacTel, but the eventual surge could be enormous.

But let's face it, Steve Jobs lacks the balls to seriously challenge Microsoft. He's quite content to be the "well, I'm still better than you" niche market also-ran rather than take the risks necessary to really compete with Microsoft and appeal to the mass market.

tintub · May 25, 2003, 05:34 AM

simonjames · May 25, 2003, 06:11 AM

tintub - the new hair cut suits you - clothes are a bit dowdy though

kOnshii · May 25, 2003, 06:56 AM

THE FACTS...

G4 is old, and G3 is even older,

We can't a faster Processor, and that is why nobody want to buy a PM, that is way overpriced for something that should out 12 months ago.

we'v been stuck with it for some time now, EVERY body would agree that G4 is faster back in the days where the gap is just bearable,

but come one 1.4 vs 3G's that

I haven't upgrade since i bought my G4 533 after my 450.

U know whats worse, 533 is actually slower than the 450, and benchmarks everywhere has proved that. Something about saving face, so they increased the Mhz but not performace.

I don't want Mhz i just want a new Chip,

and won't upgrade till a G5 comes out.

I'v bought 2 PCs since my PM, for compatibility and still, i wait.

I'v been saving all this time, and still now, i wait. I'v got enought money to nearly buy a freakin car now, and all i want is a computer.

F**K a new case,
F**k Apple
F**K motorola
F**K everyone who still supports the G4, and tolerates the G3.

Im now going to carm down and have a CRY.

beb · May 25, 2003, 10:40 AM

I want some circus peanuts. They're soft and yellow and are a fat free candy. They're so good. I also want a bowflex. Watching those commercials on the various cable networks has convinced me. Being able to do only about four or five pullups at a time sucks -it would be better to do five hundred.

The 970 based Powermacs will be here very soon. (I mean it's practically a given at this point) iMacs and Powerbooks will follow later this year. The iBook will get a G4 or an IBM G3 with the vector processing unit tacked on. We'll hopefully get a better system out of the Panther update. 980 based macs will arrive at the end of next year or the beginning of 2005. Tell those Wall Street a--holes to take a breather, and have a coke and a smile and shut the f--k up.

coolmacdude · May 25, 2003, 12:31 PM

Originally posted by Nick_G:
Merrill Lynch analyst sees

That's all I needed to read. Understand this, ML (and most investment analyst companies) don't have a clue about the complexities and issues surrounding Apple's current position, nor their strategy for the long term growth of the company. All they care about is short term stock price. And they can't even do their job there, since they reiterated their sell rating on AAPL right before it went up over $5.

macarita · May 25, 2003, 01:24 PM

Originally posted by LVzardoz:

But let's face it, Steve Jobs lacks the balls to seriously challenge Microsoft. He's quite content to be the "well, I'm still better than you" niche market also-ran rather than take the risks necessary to really compete with Microsoft and appeal to the mass market.

How true..if he doesn't have the balls why can't he hire the a**holes needed to do the job?

beb · May 25, 2003, 07:02 PM

If you really read into it, Apple isn't a competitor to Microsoft. Apple the beautiful aqua marble is somewhat held in orbit around the Microsoft sun via Office, Explorer etc. Whether Apple can do it on thier own is no longer an issue because of this codependency.

If you go buy a Dell, HP a Sony or whatever... Do you have a choice between Windows or some other operating system? Windows is always the default OS. Yes, you can be smart enough to install some form of Linux at a later time -but jeez...

LVzardoz · 11:29 AM

Originally posted by beb:
If you really read into it, Apple isn't a competitor to Microsoft. Apple the beautiful aqua marble is somewhat held in orbit around the Microsoft sun via Office, Explorer etc. Whether Apple can do it on thier own is no longer an issue because of this codependency.

If you go buy a Dell, HP a Sony or whatever... Do you have a choice between Windows or some other operating system? Windows is always the default OS. Yes, you can be smart enough to install some form of Linux at a later time -but jeez...

Well, if Apple released OS X on x86, then part of the compatibility issue could go away. Surely, Apple or a third-party developer could add on a separate "Windows compatibility" mode/window that would allow "native" x86 execution of Windows apps and utilities. This is already available in Linux with good success using CodeWeaver Crossover. Plus it's many times cheaper than using overpriced, underpowered Apple hardware.

LVzardoz · 06:43 PM

.

dampeoples · May 26, 2003, 07:53 PM

Apple is gonna die!
wait
no it's not

kOnshii · May 26, 2003, 08:23 PM

wait...

YES IT IS.

beb · May 26, 2003, 08:50 PM

Originally posted by LVzardoz:
Well, if Apple released OS X on x86, then part of the compatibility issue could go away. Surely, Apple or a third-party developer could add on a separate "Windows compatibility" mode/window that would allow "native" x86 execution of Windows apps and utilities. This is already available in Linux with good success using CodeWeaver Crossover. Plus it's many times cheaper than using overpriced, underpowered Apple hardware.

mmm....

I still really like my iMac -underpowered or not. I intend to buy another one when it has a 970 chip.

I really think that in order to make a dent into the Microsoftoply that you'd have to have Comp USAs and Circuit Citys and PCs that you can buy online with OS X already on it.

cenutrio · May 27, 2003, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by mixin visuals:

nuff said.

You should send it to Steve...