Related articles

• Apple’s former ad slogan of “Think Different” isn’t entirely accurate. While Apple is challenging consumers to make the switch away from the most popular operating system in the world, the Apple world is one of conformity. Once you decide to play in the Apple sandbox, you are stuck in the Apple sandbox. I can only buy a notebook in two colors: aluminum and white. I can’t buy a 2.0 GHz Macbook with a lighted keyboard or a MacBook Pro with an aluminum unibody design and a matte screen. I can’t buy a laptop with eSATA or an iMac with a Core 2 Quad or a monitor-less Mac with a Core 2 Duo and an Nvidia GPU. If I go with Apple, I have to play under Apple’s rules. On the other hand, the Apple Kool-Aid is mighty tasty. The iPod and iPhone have been the gateway drugs to the Mac ecosystem and philosophy. Both represent highly structured environments. By giving up the flexibility to load music directly onto your iPod or to use exotic formats such as FLAC or APE, you gain the ease of use that an iPod offers and the widespread support of automotive manufacturers where integrating your iPod with your steering wheel controls requires no trickery. The same is true with the iPhone. You get one provider: AT&T. You only get one form factor. But in turn, you get one of the best smart phones on the market. The strengths of a Mac are clear. On the consumer side, iLife remains one of the best consumer multimedia suites ever produced. For years, iLife’s photo slide show capabilities have outclassed anything available on the PC with regard to ease-of-use and the ability to produce fully animated menus. Apple Aperture offers a great alternative to Adobe Lightroom 2 for a lower price while Apple Shake and Final Cut Pro Studio represent true Hollywood-grade applications falling short only of products from Autodesk/discreet. Built-in capabilities to the operating system such as Time Machine make data security a breeze. Keynote remains one of the most sophisticated presentation tools available on the market, and as soon as Pages and Numbers have support for EndNote and Error Bars, I’m confident that the Mac will gain even more traction in the scientific/academic world. Given the option between a PC that can only run Microsoft-branded software and a Mac that can only run Apple-branded software, the easy answer is the Mac (although admittedly, I am using Office 2008 to write this). Even the day-to-day Mac experience is pleasant. When comparing an eight-core system running Windows Vista/Aero, Mac OS X, and Xgl/Compiz; there is no question that Mac OS X offers the subjective feeling of a snappier interface. I’m not sure what it is about Mac OS X that makes it so responsive, but the last system to have the same level of responsiveness was my SGI Octane. The only similarity between Mac OS X and SGI IRIX was the use of Display PDF/Display Postscript and a closed system with tightly controlled hardware support. Vista/Aero may be slower because non-WPF windows are rendered in 2D (even though the composition is 3D), and Linux driver support lags behind Windows and Mac OS X (DRI2 may change things). In addition, recent benchmarks show that Mac OS X offers superior power management compared to Windows Vista (Anandtech), and in general, offers superior raw performance to Ubuntu Linux (Phoronix). With Mac OS X, you get style and substance.

• Innovate or perish: The challenge facing Apple's new Intel iMac and...

  San Francisco (CA) - From this point forward, Apple Computer will have to innovate toward a unique and perhaps unparalleled computing platform, if the company expects Macintosh to remain a competitive force in a rapidly changing consumer computer market. That's the opinion of David Daoud, IDC's research manager for personal computing. "A company that has a 4% market share cannot afford remaining stable from a product line perspective," Daoud told TG Daily this afternoon. "They need to innovate, or otherwise they will simply just disappear." The little remote control, the media player front end, the embedding of the computer in a thin, flat panel behind the widescreen monitor, are all very nice. And the addition of Intel's Core Duo processors are, in Daoud's opinion, a tremendously positive step. Both the new iMac desktop units and the completely new MacBooks "certainly have all the nice features, like Front Row [media player], iSight [built-in camera], but they need to do a little more than that if they really want to gain market share in substantial ways," said Daoud. You can almost hear the Macintosh proponents' outcry: How could today's announcements not be innovative enough? The company has made an unprecedented platform shift from an architecture derived from the Motorola concepts on which the original Mac was built, to a platform that doesn't even count multi-Byte numerals in the same Byte order. The new notebook machines will feature dual-core processors as standard equipment, along with features that have been called "innovative" and "competitive" in the past, like Airport WiFi and Bluetooth connectivity. And today, Apple CEO Steve Jobs announced his company will be completing its transition to all-Intel processors by the end of 2006, as much as half a year ahead of schedule. How can this not be considered innovative? The problem facing Apple is innovating the Macintosh to a degree as substantive and as market-changing as its innovations to the iPod. Consumers interested in new systems are going to be comparing the new Intel-based Macs with the well-established established array of Intel-based PCs, feature for feature. At that point, they're going to discover some very familiar features - half-a-gigabyte of memory, 80 Gb hard drive, ATI Radeon X1800 graphics card, and others - and then compare the new MacBook Pro's entry level price tag with a comparable system from Dell, which Daoud calculated at about $1,400. Add-ons for such a system, like Bluetooth, WiFi, camera, and maybe even a little remote control, could bring the Dell system up to about $1,750. Apple has slimmed down its "Macintosh premium" - the extra price consumers will pay for the right to say they own a Mac - to a gap of perhaps less than $200, assuming that these consumers necessarily want all the MacBook Pro's high-end features. Is this reduced premium enough to convince current or would-be Windows notebook users to make the jump? IDC's Daoud says no. The iMac now comes with Intel's Core Duo dual core processors "I think any analyst out there who expects Apple to duplicate its success from iPod with the computer line, will be very mistaken," Daoud remarked. "The iPod sets the stage for a new industry, a new market. The PC is a very mature, very well established industry, and there are several very gigantic companies out there, and a host of small companies that are extremely innovative." So whereas it is much easier for Apple to define the theatre of operations for the entire portable music market, that authority does not automatically translate into the PC market, where much of the true innovation, some believe, has already taken place. "It's going to be very difficult for a company like Apple, or anyone, to really move market share beyond one or two points. It's just not going to be possible." For Macintosh to gain market share, Daoud pointed out, someone else has to forfeit it. In most markets where market share is captured at the expense of a competitor, one company's innovation directly targets another company's leadership strengths. In the automotive market, for example, Dodge's recent re-introduction of the Challenger design at this week's Detroit Auto Show, and Chevrolet's dabbling in the waters of reinventing the Camaro, both appear to be moves directed at Ford's very successful refresh of the Mustang (one of Ford's few recent successes). In the PC market - even in portable computers - one computer tends to look very much like the next. But this year, that's changing. At CES 2006, the major players in the notebook market - including Toshiba, Samsung, HP, and Sony - indicated they're searching for that breakaway formula that would enable them to carve new market niches for themselves. All four of these manufacturers are dabbling with high-end features, such as high-definition optical discs, WiMAX connectivity, and even Dolby Surround Sound, all of which contribute to a premium price tag. The premium end of the market has typically been Macintosh territory. MacBook Pro doesn't appear to be targeted toward any of these high-end competitors at present. Instead, says Daoud, it's geared toward Apple's base, as well as heavy multimedia users who may already be familiar with - if not enamored with - the Apple brand. So MacBook Pro, he said, "really does not break into a new market. It really is a continuation of a product shift from the previous processors to the new ones, beefing up the system with applications that talk very well to the iPod world. But I really don't think that this is going to duplicate the success that we've seen with iPod, into that computer market." "What you will see [is] a number of innovative products entering the PC market," Daoud continued, "that are really going to be branded as 'media centers' - various forms of PCs in new form factors, that are going to make the market pretty interesting, very diverse, and extremely competitive...Each of the vendors out there right now are introducing very interesting systems, from tablet PCs to media centers to things that can replace your stereo system and television." And ironically, Intel may be doing the most to help out these competitors, through the advent of the Viiv media center PC specification, which embraces the Core Duo specification well enough, but also requires Windows Media Center Edition. "It goes back to a very critical point, which is innovation," IDC's David Daoud told us. What leads Apple to succeed in the portable music market is the fact that iPod has defined the functionality that consumers expect in that market, even from competitors. In the meantime, Apple's new computers "really are nothing else than refreshes. They are good systems, they are strong systems, they have new stuff, but so does everybody else. So it's a field where everybody is on equal footing, as opposed to what Apple did with the iPod, where they pretty much took the leadership role and created that market."

• Wolfgang Gruener What is it: 2007 Apple iMac, MacBook, MacBook Pro, MacPro, Mac mini; Dell Dimension C521, E521, Inspiron 1501, Latitude 131L, OptiPlex 740 Why we chose it: Let's start with Apple. There are friends who you never thought could be friends. If you are an Apple aficionado and have visited Steve Jobs keynotes in recent years, then you probably know all too well how those Power-whatever machines drove those mighty Xeon machines in the ditch and smoked one Photoshop benchmark record after another. There was lots of strange schadenfreude against Intel and unshakable enthusiasm for Apple, which you just knew would last for an eternity. But here is 2006 and Steve Jobs and Paul Otellini are best friends. How did that happen? You could speculate that Apple really did not have a choice in times where the Power architecture was outmuscled not only in terms of performance but especially in power efficiency and Apple was in dire need of a different supplier. We are still a bit dazzled that Apple went with Intel and not AMD, as the green team, at least from our view, would have been a better fit for the mentality of the Apple camp. But then, Steve Jobs has the kind of sales talent every company would kill for. Jobs could tell us the snow is black and we'd all believe it: In that view, the Intel proposition was really child's play. Nevertheless, the bottom line is that Apple made one gutsy move that could have resulted in a riot in the Apple crowd. The numbers, however, prove that it was the right decision. The company sold 30% more Macs in the most recent quarter (1.61 million) than a year ago (1.24 million). Plus, the user benefit is obvious: Besides more performance, Mac users get closer to a wealth of x86 applications and Windows guys have a real chance of getting their hands on a cutting edge-style machine without having to move to an entirely new system. We patiently will wait for the final version of the Bootcamp software. Dell-AMD Finally! Jeez, Dell, what took you so long? It appears that everyone always knew it was a matter of time when Dell couldn't resist the pressure of consumers asking for AMD anymore. I remember asking a PR representative in 1999, if AMD wouldn't be a great move for Dell and I heard the same "we are always evaluating other technologies ..." phrase then as I did earlier this year - when an analyst floated the rumor that a Dell-AMD announcement was very likely for this year. I discussed this topic with many tech journalists, including Charlie Demerjian from the Inquirer and we were quite certain that Dell would not go with AMD this year. A major concern was AMD's potential production capacity, which was rumored to be running around 90%+ even without Dell being a customer. Charlie was confident enough to put a bet on it against VoodooPC president Rahul Sood. I chickened out and turned Rahul's offer to join Charlie in this bet down, luckily, I have to say. As we know today, the Dell-AMD announcement came and Charlie had to do his IDF coverage in a bunny suit. But, if you remember, even Intel appeared to have been caught on the wrong foot: In a rather memorable email to Intel employees, Intel CEO Paul Otellini expressed his disappointment over Dell's move. But in the end, Dell had little choice, but to offer AMD processors to its customers. Starting with 4P servers, it was obvious that demand for Opterons were skyrocketing and HP and Sun were grabbing market share from Dell, practically unchallenged. Moving down the ladder to the desktop and notebook came a bit late, but was a natural extension of this strategy. Rumor has it that Dell used its bold AMD announcement to negotiate new prices with Intel, but - true or not - there is little doubt that Dell has made the right decision for its customers and itself - we just wish the company would have made this move three years earlier. What it means to you: More choice for everyone, that's what this industry should always be about. Bridges were built this year, enabling new products strong enough to be considered part of the most significant hardware announcements in 2006. The AMD-Dell announcement (we should not forget that Lenovo also adopted AMD) is especially significant, as it will strengthen AMD: A stronger AMD will promote healthier competition, in which AMD will be able to not only tease Intel once in a while. The result should be more innovation in the microprocessor segment than we have seen before, especially with ATI now being part of AMD. Predictions for 2007: Keep an eye on AMD becoming much more visible in the Dell lineup. Today, Dell is selling AMD mainly in entry-level configurations. Don't be too surprised seeing AMD's new processors, Kuma and Agena/FX, in the company's XPS series of notebooks and desktop computers. Apple is a tough one. People went bankrupt over betting on Apple products for the new year, so I will be very careful here. But I will say this: Apple will build a breakthrough entertainment PC based on Intel processors, it will roll out quad-core enthusiast Macs with more graphics capability and it will offer an UMPC-like touchscreen mobile computer, based on Intel ULV processors in 2007. Article Coverage: Apple announces Intel-Macs Dell's AMD computers now available Paul Otellini "incredibly" disappointed by Dell decision