Your point "the cost of opening a new channel, or a new layer of a channel, for MacOS devices, doesn't increase the cost of OS development." is a important one, though I would qualify the statement with assuming Apple does not try to reinvent too much an OS for simpler information appliances.
That's a good point, and something I'd neglected.
It occurred to me after thinking through these things that Apple's position as the maker of both the OS and the hardware can work for it or against it.
Theoretically, it should work in favor of Apple, because it means they can innovate much faster in areas where there is a need for the hardware and OS to change together. This is especially true in the development of new standards. On the Wintel side, standards often take awhile to develop, as competing versions have to beat each other out in the marketplace before other players can rely on them. An example of this is the switch form the ISA to the PCI bus, which took some weird detours in EISA etc before arriving at PCI. Apple, on the other hand, can determine its own standard internally, and move ahead faster.
Historically, though, that benefit hasn't accrued to Apple, at least not since the original Mac. Instead of streamlined development, Apple was all over the map, with its OS group broken into warring factions (e.g. Copland and System 7) and its hardware group inventing a new motherboard for every model. And when they did come to market first, they either rushed to get there and arrived too early, as with Newton, or they failed to follow through on a good market lead, as with digital cameras. Ultimately, too, the greater competition and economies of scale on the Wintel side meant that their products were produced cheaper and, in some cases (e.g. PCI), were better.
My sense is that now, for the first time since the original Mac, Apple is focusing to the point where it could benefit once again from its hybrid software/hardware makeup. The G3s, and soon the PowerBooks, with their single motherboard design, clearly afford a streamlining that Apple hasn't seen in a long time. I assume that that has played a big part in the improved margins on G3s, and of course it also gives Apple room to lower prices. A similar thing seems to be going on with the unified OS strategy. Where before Apple had three OSs (Copland, System 7, NewtonOS), and only one profitable product line, they may soon have one OS (a merged Openstep/MacOS) and three profitable product lines (Mac clients, servers, and consumer devices). If the rumors about Columbus/AMP turn out to be true, and Apple is ahead of the market, I think that too will be attributable to their OS/hardware combination.
And I don't think it's any coincidence, either, that Apple has had such focus only when Jobs has been present. The more I see of him, the more I like him. I really hope that what some on this thread have been speculating about recently, i.e. that Jobs is going to drop the "interim" soon, turns out to be true.
rhet0ric |
