It's shoot for the moon daze, people! Following up on Al Gore's challenge to convert all electricity production to wind, solar and recumbent bike power in the next 10 years, two other probably even less likely to be accomplished challenges were raised.
First, TechCrunch wants users to build them a dead-simple web tablet for $200. There's that can-get-other-people-to-do-it spirit that made this country great! Make sure you get a tetanus shot before taking those test models for a spin! Some of those edges might be sharp.
Now one of the founders of Ubuntu maker Canonical, Mark Shuttleworth, says he wants the operating system that's fun to say to "blow right past Apple" in terms of an artful desktop experience. Right. Look, the Macalope has some really nice things to say about Linux and Tux himself, who he frequently plays against in the Mythical Creatures Intramural Softball League. But artful experiences are rarely, if ever, created by committee. Also, it's not just the presentation layer that separates Ubuntu from OS X. It's also this. It's not enough to look good, it has to just work, too.
Well, you know, MobileMe notwithstanding.
Cough.
According to InformationWeek, Microsoft has finally come clean and admitted its Vista mistakes (tip o' the antlers to Daring Fireball).
But what's an admission of guilt without spreading some blame around?
Microsoft (NSDQ: MSFT) is now acknowledging it screwed up with its initial launch of Windows Vista, and is ready to try again.
Oh. OK. So, wait, Windows will be five years late instead of four now? Huh? How's this going to work exactly? Has it used its vast resources to somehow turn time back?
"We broke a lot of things."
We broke your applications. We broke your hardware. We broke your collectible figurines. We broke your Aunt Elma's hip...
"We know that, and we know it caused you a lot of pain."
Particularly Aunt Elma.
"It got customers thinking, hey, is Windows Vista a generation we want to get invested in?"
Yes. They're thinking that. A year and a half after Vista's launch. That's awkward, isn't it?
If only there were some other operating system...
So Brad Brooks, Microsoft's VP of Windows Vista consumer marketing, fessed up publicly this week.
Wow, bummer detail you pulled there, Brad.
"Say, Brad, this thing you're going to do at our Partner Conference next week... are you familiar with the Japanese tradition of seppuku? Here's an informative pamphlet."
Speaking at a keynote address at Microsoft's annual Worldwide Partner Conference, Brooks signified that Microsoft was ready to admit mistakes and reposition itself to tell a better story about Windows Vista...
Yes! Because it's all about the "story" about Vista. Well, a minute ago it was about breaking things. But sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make a story omelette. Or something.
"You thought the sleeping giant was still sleeping, well we woke it up and it's time to take our message forward," Brooks said.
We didn't think it was so much "sleeping" as we thought it was "lumbering". Lumbering drunkenly down the hall smashing things and blaming everyone else when it woke up in a pile of its own filth.
In the coming weeks and months, Microsoft will launch a huge advertising campaign that's been reported to be worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
Finally! Yes, please, Microsoft, make the pain go away through the power of marketing!
"We've got a pretty noisy competitor out there," Brooks said of Apple whose "I'm a Mac... and I'm a PC," commercials criticize Windows Vista. ... "We're going to start countering it. They tell us it's the iWay or the highway. We think that's a sad message."
"iWay or the highway"? Microsoft must buy its tone-deafness in bulk from Costco or something. "I know our slogans are meaningless and our product names are vapid, but we got a great deal on them!"
Overall, the message Microsoft hopes to impart is that Windows Vista is ready, and that Microsoft will no longer take a back seat while word of mouth and Apple drive negative messaging about the company and Windows.
Look, the Macalope has actually been somewhat sympathetic to Vista. It's got a good security model -- certainly better than Leopard's as poor Brad rightly notes -- and a decent enough user experience. And he knows the audience was Microsoft partners who are looking for any kind of help they can get to mask the smell of Vista flop sweat.
But Microsoft made its bed by over-promising for six years and then delivering an OS that forced a lot of uncomfortable decisions. Marketing isn't going to clean this mess up. The horny one really isn't sure what is, frankly, but the "Get a Mac" ads aren't responsible for businesses choosing to stick with XP. Microsoft is.
The InformationWeek piece portrays this as an "about time" move, but this is more "my dog ate it" territory.
UPDATE: some delightfully shrill piling on can be found here and here.
Someone in Apple marketing deserves a gold star for advertising a free seminar on OS X Client Management on InfoWorld's email newsletter.
It's possible this ad buy was simply the product of thinking "Oh, InfoWorld = enterprise, let's advertise there", but InfoWorld has also become the online champion of the SAVE XP!!! campaign, also known as "OMFG, who could have possibly foreseen that Microsoft would kick its clients in the nuts like this?!" or Vista Affectedness Disorder (VAD) for short. This leads to the serendipitous confluence in today's email blast of an ad for how to smooth deployment of Macs in your enterprise followed by the top story which is Last Call for Windows XP is mid-June.
Michael Gartenberg rightly notes that the important thing coming out of Monday isn't going to be hardware, it's going to be the iPhone as a platform for development. The horny one may have prematurely poo-pooed (and we all know how unfortunate prematurely poo-pooing can be) the impact of the iPhone on greasing Apple's skids into the business market a few weeks ago. He's since heard it really is opening doors that were previously shut.
So, the Macalope would not at all be surprised to see more details of Apple's enterprise strategy revealed on Monday and it's why he's bullish on the "Snow Leopard" rumors. After all, there's gold in them thar cubes.
David Card on Microsoft's plans for Windows 7.
So, apparently, the 2009-2010 version of Windows will still not have the next-gen file system I was writing about more than 10 years ago -- when "Cairo" was the lead codename -- let alone a microkernel with modules for OS "personalities" and compatibility.
You're gonna fend off Google and cloud computing with a touch screen?? Good luck. I do hope there's a skunkworks Plan B in the labs. No wonder buying Yahoo "isn't strategic."
Also amusing is the Microsoft reaction to Tiger's search capabilities.
Rik Myslewski takes a look back at Apple's experience with cloning in the mid-1990s. It's an important lesson as some are once again calling for the company to license OS X for non-Apple hardware. Either these people weren't around in the mid-1990s or they've suffered some severe head trauma or they really just want Apple to do something monstrously stupid.
The Macalope had to do a double take at this piece on eWEEK that argues that a well-rounded IT background should include knowledge of the Mac.
An article on Macs in business that reasonably lays out the pro case?
A quote about religion that is about Microsoft instead of Apple?
A reporter who didn't get a quote from Rob Enderle?
A planet where apes evolved from man?!
"There is almost a religious belief by existing IT staff in the Windows religion, and it's a symbiotic relationship: They keep getting Microsoft certifications and they keep telling their bosses to continue buying Windows," Technology Business Research analyst Ezra Gottheil told eWEEK.
Ezra, you're lucky you're not in the same room as the Macalope right now, because he wants to sweep you up and give you a great big hug and that would be embarrassing for both of us.
Probably more so for you.
Definitely for you.
But it's true. Mac home users are constantly derided as some kind of "cult", completely in thrall to Steve Jobs. But it's Microsoft that has created an entire church, with priests, acolytes and altar boys (also known as "Access developers").
Though consumer and enterprise technologies function in largely separate universes guided by wildly different demands, the uptick in Mac use puts pressure on enterprises to allow employees to use what they're used to.
Well, the Macalope doesn't know about that. Since when does corporate IT care about your needs?
Since never, that's when.
What does make a difference is when the IT professionals themselves get sick and tired of Microsoft's licensing requirements or Dell's build quality and try using the Mac. You know this guy, right? After years of dismissing the Mac, he's all, "Boy, it turns out Macs aren't so bad after all! Boy, if it hadn't been for those obnoxious Mac users who keep saying how great they are, I would have converted years ago! It's obviously their fault and not because I'm a pig-headed ignoramus!"
Mmm-hmm.
Well, whatever these people tell themselves in the mirror, the horny one has seen an increasing number of these once-straight IT professionals who are now taking a walk on the wild side.
OK, that may not have been the best analogy.
"I've spoken to IT directors who have liked many things about Macs, but the rarity of Mac technicians and the commonness of Windows skills was an issue for them," said Kay.
For "issue" you may feel free to read "excuse".
Until Microsoft refuses to give companies loopholes that allow them to use XP and Microsoft to claim it as a Vista sale, there's probably going to be little movement toward the Mac. It's a down economy, so corporations aren't exactly chomping at the bit to undertake a big software and/or hardware conversion. They're content to sit on XP.
Again, the Macalope's not sure he necessarily agrees with the entire premise. Sure, there's little doubt that some companies are going to give the Mac a try, but it's not going to be a wholesale switching. There's too much investment and cultural bias to overcome for substantial movement to happen. Still, this piece was a pleasant change from the usual claptrap we've been forced to endure.
So often when deconstructing a work of silly punditry, the Macalope will log on later to see that there is a response, a comeback, a retort.
And he will sigh.
Because they're always really lame.
Can't the brown and furry one just let the air out of a piece without having to spend an entire week on it?
Well, such was his initial reaction upon finding that ZDNet's Jason Perlow had posted a response to his piece from Monday. But to his delight, he found this response was different. This was saucy, with a piquant flavor and none of the usual bitter aftertaste so many of the Macalope's other sparring partners have left him.
The Macalope's frown? Turned upside down.
In response to the pointy one's point that the legs of the Mac cloning biz might be short and stumpy, Perlow replies:
What, amputees aren't entitled to have fun? You got a problem with veterans who had half their limbs blown off in the OS wars?
See what he did there? He riffed on the Macalope's bit. It's almost unheard of. A tip o' the antlers to you, sir!
But I guess Macalope likes to get his point across using inflammatory and tasteless metaphors.
Inflammatory, yes, but as a gourmand such as yourself should know, taste is subjective.
I believe the good Macalope is again confusing harmless PC hobbyists doing things in the privacy of their own homes with the activities of a struggling upstart computer manufacturer, whose business practices are under very close examination. Not once have I advocated people actually go out and buy systems from companies like Psystar. Yet.
Fair enough. Whatever freaky hermaphroditic PC action people are into at home is their own business.
But I have said, continuously, that Apple could significantly expand its market share by allowing Mac OS X to run legally on other hardware platforms, particularly to leverage and entice the efforts of the Open Source community working on Linux and similar systems.
The horny one would argue with you about how significantly cloning would expand market share. But, more importantly, market share is not the most important metric. If it comes at the cost of profit, it's not much of a prize. As a matter of fact, it's the kind of "prize" that can put you out of business. Remember, we have precedent.
The Macalope was there, Jason, and maybe he remembers it a little differently than you. In his recollection, it went down like this:
- Technology pundits say Apple must license or die.
- Apple licenses and has its lunch eaten.
- Steve Jobs returns, kills licensing and returns the company to profitability.
OK, there are some details left out, but that's the Reader's Digest version and the Macalope's seen nothing other than your unsupported assertions to the contrary that would belie this historical truism.
But, who knows? Maybe you're right. Clearly Apple's doing something wrong, huh?
Not everyone thinks the Apple industrial design ethos fits their ideal of cool or sexy, mister smart antlers.
The Macalope doesn't argue that you and many others want more choice -- everyone loves choice -- but our fundamental disagreement is over whether it's in Apple's interests.
Oh, and "mister smart antlers"? Awesome.
Don't you know anything about Godwin's Law?
That was actually the Macalope's point -- that you were flirting with it.
Incidentally, the most hysterical example evah of Godwin's Law was executed by a former ZDNet blogger you might have heard of.
Well, Jason, the Macalope can't say it hasn't been fun because it has. He looks forward to our next bout.
Ah, spring! When a gentleman's fancy turns to Mac cloning! Like ZDNet's Jason Perlow.
... I have to think that this whole idea of commercially produced Mac Clones has legs...
Ah, so Perlow's a leg man. Well, Jason, the Macalope's not sure what you're into but, just so you know, these particular legs are likely to be of the short, stumpy variety.
But despite all the lusting, is this relationship meant to be? Sure, cloners were able to legally have their way with Windows, but OS X ain't that kind of girl. She's gonna put up a fight.
There is the obvious difference here that Apple owns Mac OS X and the rights to the hardware platform it runs on, whereas IBM had a non-exclusive license from Microsoft which prevented a loophole from being closed, but to use the hackneyed phrase -- when there is a will, there is a way.
There are certainly going to be more attempts to create unlicensed Mac clones. The problem is, who wants to buy a computer running an unsupported operating system from a company that has the life expectancy of a fruit fly?
I have always said that it made absolutely no sense that Apple backed off from the prospect of cloned systems.
And the Macalope has always said that the water fountains at ZDNet must be served with lead pipes.
How easy is it? Well, along with legal copies of Mac OS X and a special EFI firmware emulator for PC BIOS-based equipment and instructions how to put it all together it doesn't really require any more effort than what it would have typically taken a PC homebrewer to assemble their own DOS or Windows-based white box 10 or 15 years ago.
Hmm. The Macalope likes your American ingenuity, Jason, but he's not hearing the words that brings this sleazy scenario to its tacky nadir: steampunk casemod. Think about it.
If you want a clone Mac or a "Hackintosh" that badly, you can have one, for just a small amount of effort and a very modest cash investment in a relatively generic PC motherboard, processor, RAM, video card and case with power supply assembled from an ever-growing list of compatible parts.
Rob Griffiths might disagree with the "small amount of effort" part. Here's what he went through:
After all of the parts arrived at my home, it took a few hours to build the machine. ... But building the hardware is actually the easy part of the process.
...
Next, I installed Vista on the PC, just to be sure everything worked. From there, it then took many more hours to get OS X working right--while the process is relatively straightforward, there are a lot of steps involved, and BIOS settings to tweak. If you want to run Windows and OS X on the same drive, there are more hoops to jump through to get it all working. But after many hours of reading, assembling, disassembling, screaming, installing, uninstalling, reinstalling, saying bad words, pestering friends, and generally not having very much fun, I was done: my machine was up and running, and capable of booting into either Windows Vista or Mac OS X 10.5.2.
Jason, the Macalope decrees your pimp name to be "Sugar-Coatin' Perlow". But over at ZDNet, hope springs eternal:
In all likelihood, you probably can run it on the PC you have now...
That's true! But, in the Macalope's case, that's because the PC he has now is a Mac. You see, time being money, this colossal exercise is only economically worthwhile if your only opportunity cost is the hours you'll lose from your job as a fry chef down at the DQ.
Oh, you'll need to be your own support person, and it will probably be more than a little bit messy, but if you are determined to "screw the man" so to speak, than a private citizen can effectively do whatever the heck they want without any interference at all from the Evil Fruit.
Who burned the Reichstag? Why, Steve Jobs burned the Reichstag, of course. Jason's just having a little fun, but when did the computer company with the 7% market share become the Great Satan?
Don't get me wrong, Ubuntu Hardy Heron is nice and all, but a Mac OS X I could easily and legally install on any random $500-$700 Dell or Taiwanese special from Costco or Wal-Mart?
OK, the Macalope may be an ungulate, but he still doesn't like it when other people make him throw up in his own mouth.
It's baffling how someone could get through an entire article and neglect to address one simple question: what's in it for Apple?
Attracting homebrew Linux users? No offense, Jason, but that's not exactly the gold ring of desktop computer market share.
This is not business analysis. This is technology fantasy porn. And Apple's just not that into you.
All things being equal, the brown and furry one would much rather steal market share from Windows than Linux. The Macalope has a lot of respect for the neck-bearded Linux gnomes who solder and compile long into the night. Sure, they're cheap, but they live by a noble, if smelly and hirsute, code. And the Macalope loves the idea of three viable desktop alternatives really competing against each other.
In any event, licensed Mac cloning is simply not going to happen. The experience from the mid '90s is that licensees don't increase sales, they rob sales from Apple. And the amount of money to be made on licensing is never going to be greater than the sales of Apple hardware lost. That leaves unlicensed cloning which will never be really mainstreamed because of the obvious legal, technical and, well, moral implications.
Sadly, this won't stop some fevered imaginations from going on and on about how very, very hot it gets them.
Ew, indeed.
Poor Microsoft.
No, really.
OK, stop that. Stop that snickering.
OK, well, just a little snickering. Go ahead.
OK, done now?
OK.
But, look, they really have a tough job. Apparently -- and who could have predicted this? -- there's a cost to being everything to everyone. The Macalope doesn't envy them. They have a gazillion different users with a gazillion different requirements and hundreds (thousands?) of hardware manufacturers they have to get their software to satisfy those requirements on.
Suddenly the Apple method of making the whole enchilada doesn't seem so bad now does it?
So, again, please tell the Macalope how Apple desperately needs to license the Mac OS, because facing the choice of continuing to wrestle with this unmanageable hydra or breaking it apart into multiple code bases as Gartner is suggesting just sounds awesome.
Of course, it's not to say that Microsoft should necessarily jump on this advice. Gartner, you may recall, is the firm that famously said Apple should get out of the hardware business (albeit by licensing to only Dell).
Go back and read the arguments Gartner put forth. They seemed laugh-out-loud funny then and are even funnier now. So let's just say that not all of Ma Gartner's sons are business geniuses.
