"Can you describe in a few statements how the Mac is superior to today's Wintel platform."
I can do in in three words: "Ease of Use". While Windows appears on the surface to be equivalent in features to Mac OS there is simply no comparison when it comes to ease of use for the non-technical person. I know many people that gave up on Wintel machines because they couldn't get their apps installed or get their network to work, or had problems when the computer crashed and couldn't figure out what files to fix or remove. Or how to uninstall applications without leaving a mess behind. Ever try to move an application to a different folder on a Wintel machine once it's installed. Good luck if you did. None of these problems exist for these people in the Mac platform. USB and Firewire just works on a Mac. I've never seen them just work on a Wintel machine.
"What kind of applications can only be implemented on a Mac ?"
Technically there is no reason that Wintel machines can't implement equivalent apps as a Mac, but in practice it just doesn't happen. I believe it's a function of the development environment. And the quality of the development teams. And it's partly due to the fact that for a Mac, the hardware and OS are developed by the same company and so there is not the proliferation of incompatibility due to many manufacturers. This, of course, has it's obvious disadvantages, too.
Midi apps are one example that fare better on the Mac platform. Wintel users scream constantly about how difficult it is to get Midi apps to work consistently. This is especially important during a performance. These work very well on the Mac platform.
DV apps are another example. Look at Final Cut Pro or even iMovie. These just work and work well. I can't find anyone to say the same about the Wintel equivalents.
"Unless the superiority of the Mac, or its application software, is obvious to non-Mac users, it in extremely unlikely that your prediction will hold. Prior to Windows 3.0, the scenario you described was probable, but my perception is that to an average user, todays Mac and Wintel platforms are equivalent."
I agree that Apple has a big job in front of them as far as getting their message out, but if you look at some of their recent TV ads, they are getting better at that.
"The larger installed base means that new software is developed first for Wintel, and more software is available for Wintel. The larger volumes and cutthroat margins ensures that the Wintel platform stays cheaper, and this further ensures that the Wintel platform becomes more pervasive."
Apple has enough volume to compete on price and they are doing that. Compare the price of the new iBook with the Sony Vaio equivalent. I agree with you, though, that there will always be manufactures that provide a less expensive product because it is not proprietary.
"I understand that the Mac faithful will never abandon their Macs. But today I think it will take a major paradigm change or a gross fumble by Wintel, for Apple to regain the high ground of the 80's."
I don't agree. I stand by my prediction. Time will tell.
"IMHO it makes a lot of sense for Apple to port its environment to the x86 platform. This platform is a lot cheaper due to the economy of scale, and development cost of the PPC is a big drain on Motorola."
This would be death for Apple. And whether the development cost of PPC is a drain on Motorola is for Motorola to decide. There are alternative manufacturers for PPC (IBM is one). And IBM continues this development without the benefit of being inside many of the Apple products. Now why do you think they would do that? |
