| Mike Leone on 6 Apr 2004 20:53:02 -0000 |
|
Adam Turoff (ziggy@panix.com) had this to say on 04/06/04 at 16:28: > On Sun, Apr 04, 2004 at 07:23:48PM -0400, Mike Leone wrote: > > Jeff Abrahamson (jeff@purple.com) had this to say on 04/04/04 at 17:00: > > > On Sun, Apr 04, 2004 at 03:26:24PM -0400, Mike Leone wrote: > > > > Wasn't Apple "seriously dying" a few years ago, and MS put some > > > > money into them, too? And Apple is doing pretty well these days. > > > > > > > > (yes, I know Apple is retail-oriented and Sun is not) > > > > > > And Apple is MS's last best bet to keep antitrust regulators off > > > their back, as Apple is viewed as their only real competitor in the > > > commercial OS market. > > > > > > Many of us believed (and still do) that MS helped Apple because they > > > *need* Apple to have a minority OS share if MS is to have any hope > > > at all in the legal arena. > > > > The point being, that Apple stayed in business and thrived, after > > having money invested in them by MS. And they, too, signed some > > technology agreements with MS (at one time). This as a counter to the > > claim that Sun would be out of business Real Soon Now. > > By that logic, any animal with black stripes must be a bumble bee. Nope; an animal with black stripes might be a bumble bee. I cited one example, of a possible different outcome, based on a past example. I did not present a definite outcome. You're stretching my example to prove your own point. > Apple is thriving on its own merits. It went back to its core values, > nurtured its fanatical customer base, and developed great products. > Their OS was dying a long, slow death, and they managed to complete a > transition to a new CPU architecture, while gradually migrating to a new OS. > > In the process, they also built some cool hardware that enticed many > non-customers to become customers: the iMac and PowerBooks come to mind. > They also delivered software to define and simplify 'the digital > lifestyle', as well as pretty much writing the book on digital music. > > Sun, by comparison, has been languishing longer and deeper than Apple > did after Jobs left. They're dealing with a stodgier customer base that > isn't fanatically loyal, and they're not innovating anymore. > > The things that Apple and Sun have in common, aside from their > investments from Microsoft, are that their continued existance helps > bolster Microsoft's claim that it does in fact have competition. But > that is precisely where the analogy ends. Perhaps. Let's pick this specific conversation up in about 5 years, by which time we should know for sure. Attachment:
signature.asc
|
|