[Am-info] New Apple store near Beantown

[Mitch Stone]

--- From a message sent by Erick Andrews on 12/15/01 5:21 PM ---

>On Sat, 15 Dec 2001 15:43:35 -0800, Mitch Stone wrote:
>
>>--- From a message sent by Erick Andrews on 12/15/01 10:20 AM ---
>>
>>>The way I see it is most Mac users will have to pay more to 
>>>stay on MS's "upgrade treadmill", sped up every year or so 
>>>with MS Office, Outlook, and other MS apps, changed with 
>>>new fluff and changed so the previous versions will become 
>>>incompatible with the latest.  Yep, paying again and again to
>>>help maintain MS's monopoly.
>>
>>So, what you're saying is, Mac users would be better off if Microsoft did 
>>not offer Office and its other products for the Mac platform?
>
>No, I did not say that, and I do not intend to be obtuse.
>
>I have no problem with an "open format" MS office.
>
>Simply put, when the Apple (was it Jobs again?) took the $150M,
>I think then that Apple too sold much, if not most of its soul to 
>the devil.  Survival?  Yeah, maybe.  War is hell, and business
>is business...so to speak.

What, precisely, did they sell?

>I recall others, perhaps you too, remarking with much concern
>about such fear of an MS infiltration back when it happened, not
>too long ago.  Sorry, I don't have the archives at my fingertips, 
>but I'm darned sure it was said by many.

Oh yes, I can recall much pointless speculation at the time, much of it 
no better than today's virtually mythological versions of those events. 
One major technology columnist went so far as to predict that MSIE would 
soon become integrated with MacOS, just like it was with Windows -- after 
all, a deal with Microsoft could mean no less, right? These and other 
"concerns" proved unfounded.

>Believe me, I am not shitting on Macs.  I wish I could have one,
>but even with my OS/2 preference, and having designed computer
>subsytems for more years than I'll admit, I DON'T want to see
>Macs go away.  Dammit.
>
>>
>>>And with Internet Explorer, should one *not* choose a 
>>>different browser, Mac users will get sucked more and more
>>>into the MS proprietary websites.  Dunno, maybe many 
>>>already are.  Once addicted, the leap to Passport, .NET and
>>>subscription services will an easier step.  Hold on to your
>>>wallet!
>>
>>Please explain this argument. I really don't understand it.
>
>It's less an argument than my declaration.  And I think it's
>simple enough to understand, but I'm willing to argue it:
>Macs are going to be "sold down the river".  Not today.  Soon 
>tomorrow:  Kollar-Kotelly?  Probably.

This assertion is too vague for my tastes. I'm not sure what "sold down 
the river" means in this context, and I certainly don't know in what way 
you mean.

>So are you trying to mitigate MS's $150M investment in Apple
>and its...perceived by many at the time...dire consequences?

I'm unsure why you believe it calls for mitigation. You are arguing a 
variation on what at the time I called the "one smart guy" theory -- 
which, in a nutshell, is the assertion that only Bill can win. Apple won 
that round. The predictions of "dire consequences" have come to naught. 
Why is that so hard to accept?

>
>Mac users are/will be forced to sign up for the newest MS "push"
>-- not just the "desktop application" takeovers like Windows OS 
>folks, too, but through exclusiveness on the Internet.  What will 
>your and their landscape look like in another few years?  I'll tell 
>you:  less choice, locked in, and nailed down.  Proprietary Internet.  
>Can you understand that?  Maybe you don't care anymore?

Mac users will be no more forced than anyone else, and certainly 
Microsoft will have less leverage over Mac users then they do over 
Windows users. The 1997 deal had no real bearing on any of Apple's 
subsequent plans.

>I think Apple is perceived as surviving just a bit better than OS/2 
>today.  And I really don't think that OS/2 folks are your enemy.
>
>I say that you will be having even LESS choice than you have now.
>
>C'mon.  What do you think this monopoly controversy all about?
>I know you know better.  Is it just lack of better words on my part?
>
>Gates wants to have ALL the toys when he dies.
>
>Are we still thinking in the same terms?

Hard to tell, since I can't quite get a handle on your thinking.

 Mitch Stone  
 mitch@accidentalexpert.com