Scott,
It's all over now. Alomex is throwing in the towel, not that he was ever really in the fight. Of course, he's not the only one, if we can believe all the posts here and elsewhere. Still, it's curious how Apple's purchase of Power Computing, and its hard line against the clones, has been spun into another death watch for Apple. "Stick a fork in it. It's done(?)" Not just yet. And certainly not because of the Power purchase or anything else that Steve Jobs has done lately.
If I'm not mistaken, Apple originally authorized the clones to help expand the Mac market. The strategy failed. The clones had (have?) no intention of helping Apple expand the Mac market. Instead, they've cannibalized Apple sales, aided and abetted by Apple itself which subsidized each clone sale to the tune of "several hundred dollars."
True, they've introduced new technology quicker since, unlike Apple, they didn't have to wait for volume availability of new components. Free from many advertising and R&D costs, they've had relatively low overhead so they've kept prices low too. They've forced Apple to control costs better and get product out in a more timely way. These have been good things.
The clones have a loyal and vocal following. Most of the Mac fanzines, Mac-friendly web sites, and many newspapers have sided with them. Apple's decision to either radically change the terms of the clone agreement or curtail the effort has been roundly criticized as a retreat to the bad old days when the Mac was a closed system. We've read jeremiads about how prices were going to skyrocket, Mac users were going to switch to PCs in a snit, developers were heading for the hills and Steve Jobs was a retro lunatic. Don't you just love this stuff?
In the interest of full disclosure, I not only use a Mac, I'm an Apple shareholder. Perhaps this warps my reality a bit. I tend to favor business strategies that will shore up Apple's bottom line. I have this quaint notion that Apple needs to stop the bleeding before it can begin to grow again.
Unlike some, I always viewed cloning as a means to an end, not an end in itself. Long term, Apple does need a robust "Mac ecosystem" that includes a variety of platforms. But if Apple is ever going to get to the "long term" it has to overcome some major short term problems. Right now, the clones are part of those short term problems. Apple has asked them to become part of the solution. They said "no." Steve Jobs has reacted in the only way a sane businessman would.
I doubt Apple will run-up prices. It still needs to attract new users. To do that, it needs to compete on price as well as performance.
I doubt Mac users will now flock to PCs because Apple is trying to rationalize the clone agreements. Power Computing customers will almost certainly be well treated by Apple. After all, Apple wants to keep them as customers.
Other Mac clone users are unlikely to jump ship quickly either. Presumably, they've got several thousand dollars tied up in hardware and software. Does it seem logical that they would chuck it all, then spend several thousand more for PC hardware and software, just to spite Apple? Please.
As for software developers defecting, well, it's not happening right now. True, some have defected over the past several years but it's unlikely the "clone wars" will cause any more to jump ship. Certainly there have been no announcements. And I doubt there will be.
I don't think Apple is retreating to the bad old days either. If keeping the future Mac system closed was actually a goal, then Rhapsody wouldn't be happening.
The reaction to the Power acquisition, and Apple's hard-line with the other clone manufacturers, has been emotional and predictable. Some of it appears to be well orchestrated too. Anyway, the bears see it as another nail in Apple's coffin. The bulls see it as a short term business strategy essential to Apple achieving profitability this year. I'm in the bull camp.
FWIW, I still think something will get worked out with MOT, UMAX, et. al..
Bob |
