Originally posted by e-coli
Nipsy, while I know you are simply trying to defend your viewpoint (as we all should), you have a very simplistic view of a computers role in society. This is a tragic flaw with all Mac users. Running a piece of software in "emulation" is a poor example of compatibility. It's like having to buy an external drive for your portable computer. It's cumbersome, hardly ideal, and defeats the purpose.
Admittedly, running in emulation is slow and cumbersome, but the simple fact is that we can, and PC users can't. Just one of those things to counter the 'Windows can do so much more' argument.
I don't believe that argument, but hey, my Mac can run Windows (acceptably), so it is not a point of contention any more.
For most tasks, we have native software, but for the very rare occasion when something can not be done natively, it can still be done.
The problem with Apple simple. They have no enterprise strategy. They have no muscle to get developers to begin including Macs in custom software solutions, database integration, and web-services compatibility. Apple is totally missing the point, and doesn't understand the place of the computer in business and (this is the sad one) education.
Ummmm....developers? Developers are flocking to OSX, because it gives a good UNIX environment, with a good user experience. I see more geeks at more non-Mac conventions with iBooks and TiBooks every time I go.
Databases...you haven't been paying attention! Sybase, Oracle 9i, MySQL, PostGreSQL, which db were you looking for?
http://developer.apple.com/server/
Web services...my machine is running Tomcat, apache, php/mysql, and Webobjects servers. ASP is available for UNIX, which means an apache module could prolly be compiled for Mac. Which services did you want? .net? passport?
Businesses...businesses are slow to change, but I have seen increased interest in Apple (since OSX) for the first time in a decade.
So, Apple has the Xserve, right? Huge dismal failure for them. They are giving hardware to Universities, but they're not leveraging their weight to get software and datablase companies on board to write enterprise-wide server-based applications. A good example: some universities are in the process of migrating all their research to secure server farms, and interconnecting them nationwide to increase the pool of information available to researchers. This means that different applications, different file types, and different methods of gathering that information (such as a custom-written piece of software that, say, reads indentity cards or thumb-print records) need to become recognizeable, retrieveable, and editable from any location. Or what if libraries wanted to interconnect, trade data, and allow data to be submitted by individual users (such as a publication written by an independent party).
Xserve adoption will be slow, and the product needs to be excellent to gain share. Thankfully, I, and many many reviewers, think it is.
However, your argument about data migration is silly, as data is accessed through a pipe (odbc, jdbc, etc.) and Mac OSX has a nice set of pipes. You can put a GUI on a pipe and call it an app, but all it does it form a query which gets fed to a stored proc and echo the data.
It can be done now via the command line, which means easily via an app. With data, the 'server based app' is a collection of stored procs, and the client (a browser, Sherlock, a custom client, etc.) makes it pretty.
Furthermore, the developers I mention above, are making sure we get many good browsers, and the browser will be the path to data (hell, it already is).
These are great examples of how the world is becoming more interdependent, and the personal computer is becoming merely a gateway to more information, applications and services.
Affirms my point above...
Digital Skunk
Apr 14, 11:19 AM
Agreed, at this price point, I can't see that there would be any market for FCE.
I honestly think that's the point. Apple had iMovie, FCE and FCP (within Studio suite) so I think Apple is going to sell the standalone, fully unlocked version of their software for dirt cheap and discount it for students.
FCE was just missing a few minor features from the pro version, a UI tweak here to adjust for those missing features, and that was about it. Now, they can sell FCPX stand alone for $299 and bundled with the rest of the UBER UPDATED SUITE APPS :D for $999 maybe.
stuffradio
Mar 28, 11:12 PM
It'll be $129 � the same as ALL of the past upgrades except for Snow Leopard which was Leopard but just a slimmed-down, rewriting of the OS. Apple felt that without a lot of core new features being added, they would give the public a break and just charge a nominal fee for Snow Leopard, rather than the typical $129.
Don't listen to anyone who says differently. It will be $129.
It will be $99.
MacFly123
Apr 13, 06:30 PM
"However, this does not mean these other applications are dead - simply that Apple is not talking about them... yet."
So maybe this explains the low price point. $299 for Final Cut Pro X and $999 for the full suite? I hope not. All looks amazing though!
Dude, this software is simply INCREDIBLE!!! It is worth so much more than $999.00 it is not even funny! If they sell each separate for $299 or $999 for the whole suite then that is an awesome deal with more options for individual purchase than before. I CAN'T WAIT to see the rest of the suite especially the new Motion with Shake baked in :) I was a bit nervous that the other apps were dead so this is GREAT news!
I also think this is the end of Final Cut Express. It makes perfect sense. iMovie = Free, Final Cut Pro X = $299, or if you are a pro you will get the whole suite for the same $999 price as before. Simple and better deals all around for everyone!
0 comments:
Post a Comment