Jump to content
Swad

Is Steve hurting Apple?

89 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Advertisement

jobs brought apple back from the brink not so long after they tossed him out. NeXT became os x

whatever issues you may have with him (and some of them are justified), jobs IS apple. eventually hell be replaced but right now is a critical time for apple if they ever want to gain some dominance in the market and if he left mac usage would plummet. steve kept apple ahead of the game and they owe most of their success to that

 

i second alloutmacstoday: he rocks

Edited by nickg331

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ramm

Everyone is a flamboyant {censored} at Apple, legal. You should know :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that Steve Jobs sould step down, in about a year or two he should step down for a new CEO but still be in the board.

 

That's what I think.

Everybody can be replaced, but Steve Jobs is Steve Jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve is Apple.

 

The company once thought they could do without Steve, and failed miserably.

 

No Apple without Steve, ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve is Apple.

 

The company once thought they could do without Steve, and failed miserably.

 

No Apple without Steve, ever.

 

i was going to say the same

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can tell you, if Steve Jobs ever left Apple, and they started marketing the Mac based on actual fact instead of inflated numbers, and talked about the real reasons why a Mac is better, rather than "PC's suck, and this isn't a PC", then I might actually consider getting one.

 

Right now, I don't want to be associated with a company that lies about its product, and has such a low opinion of its own products that its only marketing tactic is to make fun of the competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can tell you, if Steve Jobs ever left Apple, and they started marketing the Mac based on actual fact instead of inflated numbers, and talked about the real reasons why a Mac is better, rather than "PC's suck, and this isn't a PC", then I might actually consider getting one.

 

Right now, I don't want to be associated with a company that lies about its product, and has such a low opinion of its own products that its only marketing tactic is to make fun of the competition.

 

Amen. This let's compare Windows 95 problems to OS X, and we're so hip style doesn't cut it. The PC is for work (which makes the world go round), and OS X is for fun is also something else. This whole mac community thing needs to fly away. It's a damn computer, I also don't like the fellow users attitudes. The lack of customizability also hurts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amen. This let's compare Windows 95 problems to OS X, and we're so hip style doesn't cut it. The PC is for work (which makes the world go round), and OS X is for fun is also something else. This whole mac community thing needs to fly away. It's a damn computer, I also don't like the fellow users attitudes. The lack of customizability also hurts.

 

Macs are for fun? You've been watching too many Apple commercials. How many games do you play on your Mac? Have you seen how many games are available for Windows? There are about 6 at any given time for Mac, and they're all 2 years old. I guess if you consider making a crappy home movie that no one will ever watch and then sharing it on the web where no one will ever download it fun, then yes, Macs are for fun.

 

Check this out for a laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Macs are for fun? You've been watching too many Apple commercials. How many games do you play on your Mac? Have you seen how many games are available for Windows? There are about 6 at any given time for Mac, and they're all 2 years old. I guess if you consider making a crappy home movie that no one will ever watch and then sharing it on the web where no one will ever download it fun, then yes, Macs are for fun.

 

Check this out for a laugh:

 

Yep, I agree. Not only that, but DX 10 kicks the {censored} out of Apple's Multithreaded OpenGL. The movies, yep a perfect waste of time also, so is that little iWeb blog that maybe only a few zealots will read on your .mac account (which is a holdup). Real Video, real web design? Well, both can be done about the same on a PC with Dreamweaver and Avid, both Windows versions. Macs are nice, but there's nothing really so beneficial about them as much as ties to Windows.

 

Also take note to the .ani glitch in Windows. Today I just downloaded Microsoft's fix, and intentionally looked for a bad .ani file, and I got off fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can tell you, if Steve Jobs ever left Apple, and they started marketing the Mac based on actual fact instead of inflated numbers, and talked about the real reasons why a Mac is better, rather than "PC's suck, and this isn't a PC", then I might actually consider getting one.

 

Right now, I don't want to be associated with a company that lies about its product, and has such a low opinion of its own products that its only marketing tactic is to make fun of the competition.

I feel the same way but not to the same extent. OS X really owns, but they shouldnt have to continually bash PCs to promote it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But replacing Steve at Apple would be like replacing Bill at Microsoft.

There is very few men that can even think in future terms like those two.

We think of today or maybe a few days down the road.

Those two think 5 years or even 10 years down the road.

Steve is heading in the right direction with Apple, that I can see ...

 

Hope he keeps it up.

 

Just my two cents ..... :)

 

 

ZZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I don't see what Bill has EVER done for Microsoft.

 

I haven't taken much time to read up on the history of Microsoft, but didn't he do the business things for awhile before becoming the laid back CEO he is now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill isn't the CEO at Microsoft. That would be Steve Balmer (aka the crazy chair throwing gorilla - "DEVELOPERS!").

 

Honestly, Windows was crappier, but politically better under Bill's control versus Steve. Back in the days of Win 3.1/95/98 windows stunk. Crashed all the time. I had to reinstall at least every few months. Things would lock up for no reason. Etc. But overall it wasn't very restrictive. Fastforward to modern day.

 

Now, truth be told, functionally, Windows 2000, XP, and even Vista aren't that bad. I use all 3 on various systems. They're fast, responsive, and never crash. Sure spyware and adware is a problem for some Windows users, but as a very computer literate person (programmer/DB admin with a BS in CompSci), I never have issues with those (I use Firefox, keep my box patched, and don't download every other stupid cursor mod or desktop buddy program I see). The problem these days though is that I can't change more than a handful of components before the OS wants to call home and reverify itself. Microsoft's media player has the most restrictive DRM model I can imagine. If you want to protect your license files (like say, if you need to reinstall), you have to back them up separately, but the person who sold the media can stipulate that it can't be backed up - so essentially if I reinstall I lose that media, and there's no way to prevent it.

 

I'm not sure if I'd prefer to deal with the crappy functionality or the restrictive babysitting more, though "neither" is certainly my preferred answer (which is why I try to use OS X or Linux these days).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check out this Video, First time I have seen it, this ran so smooth 11 years ago. and wow does it seem like the OS we have today. Not much has changed...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quoted above "You can tell he loves his job too, because he has been working for only $1 (plus stock) a year."

 

Yeah... that (plus stock) gave him over 300 million dollars last year. I hate the fact that he publishes this because its simply not true. There are many many many CEOs who make less than he does when you factor it all in. If he was truly in love with his company, he'd give that stock back or do something good for the community. His publicity stunts make me sick.

 

phpguru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares what Steve makes, if I had a job I'd want to get paid doing it.

 

The Apple stock is at all time highs, what has Steve done wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, but you don't try to fool the public into thinking you're some humanitarian when you're really just in it for the money like the rest of us.

 

There's no question that the company under him has done well. And from what he started, it could definitely do better. If done right (doubt it would happen under Steve), Apple could streamline their products and slash prices heavily on their computers and basically own the computer market. The way they put physical design > engineering needs to be altered to produce hardware superior products in addition to software superior products.

 

phpguru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...what has Steve done wrong?<br />
Well, he has failed to release a mid-tower Mac, you know a regular computer like every other manufacturer sells...

 

Next, he has refused to license OS X to the likes of Dell, HP or Sony...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, he has failed to release a mid-tower Mac, you know a regular computer like every other manufacturer sells...

 

Which is really crazy because I don't understand what Apple would lose from such a computer. In fact they could gain tons more users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which is really crazy because I don't understand what Apple would lose from such a computer. In fact they could gain tons more users.

 

they would gain users but then no one would buy imacs anymore. all the cost and development of the imac would go to waste and then they would start to fall in line with every other hardware manufacturer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
they would gain users but then no one would buy imacs anymore. all the cost and development of the imac would go to waste and then they would start to fall in line with every other hardware manufacturer.

 

I disagree with this. iMacs are a different market, some people want an "all-in-one", some don't. The developing iMac or a new mid-tower Mac is negligible to a company the size of Apple. The idea of not given people a basic choice, a mid-tower, while trying to grow market share makes no sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. Apple needs to get a mid ranged tower, because I sure as hell don't want an allinone, I don't want a mini cube, and I can't really afford anything but the minicube anyway so I DEFINITELY can't get the pro. They need a bargain computer that's upgradable, it makes more sense to me then anything. I'd actually buy a goddamn Apple if I could afford one, but the only thing I'd be willing to buy from them is a powerbook or a mac pro. Which as I've stated before are too much $$$.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×