View Poll Results: Is Sony the Apple of the PDA world?

Voters
32. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes!! Sony is "Thinking Different"

    24 75.00%
  • Sony is trying but note quite

    3 9.38%
  • Just give me an Abacus and I'll be fine

    5 15.63%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 38 of 38
  1. #21  
    Sony is Apple of the PDA world in many respects (thinking differently and pushing the frontier and stuff). But contrary to what homer posted above, Apple has failed miserably. Apple did intend to become the major player in the computer industry (yeah that is what Steve Jobs visioned, that EVERYONE would use a Mac).

    The difference is that Apple had its proprietary software/hardware. No one else made Apples. Sony, on the other hand, creates hardware for the leading OS of the PDA, and is helping the Palm OS maintain its lead on PPC OS. As someone posted in a different thread, Sony might just be the savior of Palm OS. It's smart to be on the cutting edge at the same time be part of the leading group.

    yeah, i wrote that ...
  2. hloakes's Avatar
    Posts
    64 Posts
    Global Posts
    66 Global Posts
    #22  
    If I remember correctly, Bill Gates and/or Microsoft bought a big chunk of Apple and saved them a few years back.
    Howard
  3. #23  
    Originally posted by hloakes
    If I remember correctly, Bill Gates and/or Microsoft bought a big chunk of Apple and saved them a few years back.
    Yeah, well, you may want to check that out a bit more thoroughly. MS wanted to make sure they got money even if their OS went south. I'd wager, given MS's attitude, they care about OS's only as much as it gives them a platform to hoist their money making schemes onto the public. Were it necessary, they'd be manuvering toward the same end with the Mac OS. They just wouldn't be making that ~$150 right off the bat.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  4. #24  
    Apple has failed miserably. Apple did intend to become the major player in the computer industry (yeah that is what Steve Jobs visioned, that EVERYONE would use a Mac).
    You are mixing Jobs' vision and Apple, as a company's, vision. They have succeeded tremendously as a company. They did make some big mistakes shortly before Job's return (hence, Jobs return).

    Job's was ousted early on...so yes, maybe you can say he failed miserably, I suppose, but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone that will agree with you that Jobs is a miserable failure.

    The difference is that Apple had its proprietary software/hardware. No one else made Apples.
    ALL commercial software is proprietary. I think you mean that the Apple OS only works with Apple hardware. Fine. Whatever. That means you need to purchase a Mac if you want the MacOS. How does that equate to failure on Apple's part? I see that as the reason for Apple's success.

    Sony, on the other hand, creates hardware for the leading OS of the PDA
    Certainly. Sony is really a hardware company, after all (with some exceptions...ie, the AIBO). So, from a consumer-goods standpoint, they are only similiar to Apple on their hardware sales side of the business. Apple is just as much of a software company as they are a hardware company, so a direct comparison isn't quite right.

    If I remember correctly, Bill Gates and/or Microsoft bought a big chunk of Apple and saved them a few years back.
    sigh...no that's not really what happened...check your history a bit...
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  5. #25  
    MS wanted to make sure they got money even if their OS went south.

    Well, this was really a smart marketing move by both Jobs and Gates. Both sides gained form this from a publicity standpoint.

    At the time, Apple had a few lawsuits pending with Microsoft, and, I believe, Gates know damn well that sooner or later the DOJ would be coming after him.

    When Job's returned, he knew that it was important that a relationship with Microsoft be preserved. They swung a deal:

    Apple agreed to drop all lawsuits against Microsoft, bundle IE with the new Macs, and would sell Microsoft NON-voting shares totalling $150,000,000

    In addition to the cash, Microsoft would commit to continuing development of Microsoft Office for MacOS.

    In the end, though, this was really more about publicity than anything. The cash wasn't a whole lot, and it was non-voting shares. The lawsuits were rather petty, and weren't a big deal for Apple to drop.

    Microsoft, more than likely, would have continued developing Office for MacOS regardless, as the biggest selling application on the Mac platform is MS Office. That said, it perhaps eased Microsoft's mind, as they really needed Apple to stay on the radar of the DOJ to help deter any monopoly accusations.

    Microsoft has money in an amazing number of companies now-a-days: Great Plains, Corel, Cox Cable, ATT, Audible, NexTel, etc...

    I have no doubt in my mind that, if the DOJ said tomorrow that Windows must be spun off, that Gates wouldn't bat an eye. He's a brilliant man and he is hell-bent on being the biggest company in the world. There's something inherently evil in that, but, at the same time, there's something to respect about that as well.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  6. #26  
    Originally posted by AzNCoMpUtAnErD
    True, but that's because it's emulated. Windows was not written for PowerPC processors, and it's not even possible to compile the code for PowerPC. Virtual PC is good for the occasional use of a PC by a Mac user. But Apple's not gonna sell Macs just because it can run Virtual PC...
    Hmmmm.... if Sony is the Apple of PDA world, does that
    mean Sony will be 2nd place and only have less than
    10% market share real soon?

    I think Handspring is fast becoming the Apple of the Palm
    world, with Palm being the IBM and Sony being the Microsoft.

    Anyway, it is fun to look at the zealots on this board.

    -henry
    Last edited by hmp32; 03/18/2002 at 12:04 AM.
  7. #27  
    Originally posted by hmp32
    [...] Anyway, it is fun to look at the zealots on this board. [...]
    Ironic considering some pretty zealous anti-M$ comments that you've made. ; )-<
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  8. #28  
    Sony will be 2nd place and only have less than
    10% market share real soon?
    2nd place in what? Apple is actually in 4th or 5th, I believe. The top-6 manufacturers (Dell, Compaq, HP, Gateway, Apple, IBM) have been jumping around the top 5 slot for the past decade. I don't think Apple has been high on the list since the early 90s (though I believe they jumped to the top of the list briefly around the time of the first iMac launch).

    In terms of OS sales, they're certainly behind Microsoft Windows (EVERYONE IS) though I can't say where they are in relationship to some of the commerical *nix distribution (granted, OSX IS a commercial *nix distrubution...) and I can't say where any commericial OS is in relationship to all of the open source OSes.

    Anyways, what does market share have to do with the overall success of a company? That's a VERY American POV. In this country, we have a very predatory capitilast mind set. A company must constantly strive for more and more market share if it is to be viewed as a success in the eyes of American investors.

    I'm less of a Mac zealot and more of a 'understand the system' zealot. The American consumer really doesn't understand how the big-business system works and how it affects society as a whole.

    Arbitrarily deciding that a particular company or product is inferior to another based purely on the market share it commands is a very dangerous attitude to take as a consumer. In doing that, you let big-business walk all over you.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  9. #29  
    Originally posted by hmp32
    Hmmmm.... if Sony is the Apple of PDA world, does that
    mean Sony will be 2nd place and only have less than
    10% market share real soon?

    I think Handspring is fast becoming the Apple of the Palm
    world, with Palm being the IBM and Sony being the Microsoft.
    Sony is already near 2nd place, only behing Handspring in the PalmOS market. And gaining that 10% in about 9 months is incredible. Sony CAN'T be an Apple of the PDA world if you're thinking they'll just be taken out by someone else. Apple came first, then Microsoft. In this case, Palm and Handspring came first, then Sony. So according to you, Palm will become the Apple of the PDA market

    We were talking morely about the thinking behind Apple. Apple and Sony are both taking technology to a new level, thinking in new terms, thinking out of the box. Apple is the one that brings aesthetics into technology. Without them, we'd still be looking at crazy ugly electronics and computers. Hmmm...we still are...oh well. I'm not Apple and Sony are very important o their industries, without them, who knows where we'd be.

    As for Palm becoming an IBM, I think that's possible and I can totally see it, haha. I don't quite see Sony becoming a Microsoft though, dunno why, just can't imagine it. That's not what Sony does. Who says we have to name all these companies after old ones, we can just call them "Palm," "Handspring," and "SONY." HEHE
    nelson.hsieh
    good artists copy, great artists steal. . .
  10. #30  
    Apple came first, then Microsoft
    Both Apple and Microsoft were founded in 1975.

    Apple is the one that brings aesthetics into technology.
    That's true, but, perhaps more importantly, they push ergonomics and usability as well. To be fair, Microsoft does, too, but only when forced...never (or, at least rarely) voluntarily.

    I don't quite see Sony becoming a Microsoft though, dunno why, just can't imagine it.
    Sony wouldn't ever become a Microsoftian company unless they decide that total market domination is their goal. That is what makes Microsoft different...their singular goal IS to gain complete control whatever market they happen to be in at the time. Neither Apple or Sony take that attitude.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  11. #31  
    Originally posted by homer
    Both Apple and Microsoft were founded in 1975.
    Yes, true, but that's not what I meant. Apple made it big first, then Microsoft stole from them, and made it bigger . I'm thinking Microsoft wasn't founded until 1977, but you could also be right. Nonetheless, Apple was first, Microsoft's "stuff" then sucked against Apple's "stuff."
    That's true, but, perhaps more importantly, they push ergonomics and usability as well. To be fair, Microsoft does, too, but only when forced...never (or, at least rarely) voluntarily.
    LOL, riite...and Microsoft is selling Windows to HELP me do my homework and increase my productivity... Apple wanted to create the first computer that a normal joe smoe could use. And they did, and it looks pretty . Everyone else computers were not for "people" but only for big corporations. Who knows what Microsoft was really thinking back then...
    Sony wouldn't ever become a Microsoftian company unless they decide that total market domination is their goal. That is what makes Microsoft different...their singular goal IS to gain complete control whatever market they happen to be in at the time. Neither Apple or Sony take that attitude.
    Yea, SONY is the consumer electronics giant, but I don't see them becoming like Microsoft, though they could probably easily do so, haha. Microsoft is crazy, and no one can do anything about it, so just let them do what they wanna do. As for me, I'll ditch them and go to Mac
    nelson.hsieh
    good artists copy, great artists steal. . .
  12. #32  
    Yes, true, but that's not what I meant. Apple made it big first, then Microsoft stole from them, and made it bigger . I'm thinking Microsoft wasn't founded until 1977, but you could also be right. Nonetheless, Apple was first, Microsoft's "stuff" then sucked against Apple's "stuff."
    Actually, XeroxPARC was first with the mouse + windowed GUI. Apple stole that from them. Apple was also not the only OS at the time with the Windowed GUI. They were simply the one that is still around.

    Microsoft is crazy
    I wouldn't say that at all. Microsoft is a very brilliant corporation. Granted, true geniousness is often mixed with a bit of craziness.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  13. #33  
    Originally posted by AzNCoMpUtAnErD
    Yes, true, but that's not what I meant. Apple made it big first, then Microsoft stole from them, and made it bigger . I'm thinking Microsoft wasn't founded until 1977, but you could also be right. Nonetheless, Apple was first, Microsoft's "stuff" then sucked against Apple's "stuff."
    Microsoft was founded long before 1977 and thier first "stuff" was a Basic interpreter for the MITS Altair 8800 written by Bill Gates. This was all long before you could run down to Computerland and pick up an Apple ][. When MS-DOS hit the scene, Apple's OS and BASIC was what "sucked" by comparison. Be careful when talking computer history ... plenty of us "old timers" actually lived it
    <ul><li>Dave Kessler<br>President - Kopsis, Inc.</li></ul>
  14. #34  
    This thread seems to be morphing into a collection of black-and-white arguments regarding a very large, varied and old grey area. (I.e., there ain't much traction in the mud, boys. )

    However, a few corrections from an old tech guy:

    originally posted by AzNCoMpUtAnErD
    Apple wanted to create the first computer that a normal joe smoe could use. And they did, and it looks pretty . Everyone else computers were not for "people" but only for big corporations.
    Actually, if we're talking early 1980s, it generally fell into three camps: corporate data processing machine (e.g., IBM, Data-IO, Wang); engineering/military/educational computing "mini-computers", used by engineers, scientists and students (e.g., Digital); and the just-created home computer market, where Apple and a few others had made their mark.

    The first thing I bought after graduating with my BS in CS and getting a job in 84 was... a Macintosh Plus. To my mind, that was the machine that really opened up home computer use to the average person... with the stumbling block that the price kept the average person from buying one. (I had a choice of a Mac or a car. I used the bus for a few more years. )

    originally posted by homer
    Actually, XeroxPARC was first with the mouse + windowed GUI. Apple stole that from them.
    Well... "stole" is arguable. Xerox didn't kick up any stink at the time -- maybe because they were thinking that the home computer market wouldn't go anywhere, and/or that they hoped popularity over the Mac would spread to Xerox's Star system, which was aimed at business/engineering. At any rate, this is a major reason why Xerox's very belated lawsuit against Apple failed -- they waited too long before filing it.

    Also, while their is no doubt that Xerox's work (and particularly that of Alan Kay at Xerox Parc) was a foundation of Apple's Lisa (and afterwards Macintosh) computer, there were a lot of other work that both Xerox and Apple were basing their products on. Ivan Sutherland comes to mind right off. (Amazing that the mouse was actually developed in 1964!)

    I'm not saying that you're not right, because I haven't studied the history in detail (and there are a LOT of opinions from a lot of people who were involved at the time). However, theft is a strong word, and should be used carefully.
    Jeff Meyer

    "And he died like he lived: with his mouth wide open."
  15. #35  
    Originally posted by homer
    Actually, XeroxPARC was first with the mouse + windowed GUI. Apple stole that from them. Apple was also not the only OS at the time with the Windowed GUI. They were simply the one that is still around.

    I wouldn't say that at all. Microsoft is a very brilliant corporation. Granted, true geniousness is often mixed with a bit of craziness.
    Hehe, I forgot to mention Xerox, they seriously got JACKED! Which sucks for them, but it's their fault, all those guys in their New York office bagging on the PARC people, hehe. That's where I get my signature from, "good artists copy, great artists steal." I don't know if Jobs really said that, but that sure was the mentality back then...

    I wouldn't be talking about "windowed" GUIs. Xerox was the first to come up wif the Graphical User Interface. Then Apple improved it, and I wouldn't quite say Microsoft improved it, but they did make it so that it would sell. They called it "Windows" because they have a lot of windows that pop up, hehe. Yea, I admire Bill Gates just as much as I do Jobs, their both brilliant guys in the technology industry. Jobs just had an attitude problem. LOL.
    nelson.hsieh
    good artists copy, great artists steal. . .
  16. #36  
    Originally posted by dkessler
    Microsoft was founded long before 1977 and thier first "stuff" was a Basic interpreter for the MITS Altair 8800 written by Bill Gates. This was all long before you could run down to Computerland and pick up an Apple ][. When MS-DOS hit the scene, Apple's OS and BASIC was what "sucked" by comparison. Be careful when talking computer history ... plenty of us "old timers" actually lived it
    Hehe, ok, I'm just a young'n . I wasn't even born when the original Macintosh came out, LOL, though I've seen the commercial! Man...I don't see why anyone would have wanted to buy one of those Altair things...they looked so funnie, hehe.

    Yeh, it's coming back to me, wasn't it in a 1974 magazine that Gate's heard about the Altair? And subsequently dropped outta Harvard. As for Apple...they were doing a lot too, at the HomeBrew Computer Club at Berkeley. Woz was the guy that came up with the "display" for a computer wasn't he?

    Haha, MS-DOS was bought have some Seattle company for like...$50,000 wasn't it? And it made millions with IBM. Then Apple finally showed their stuff at the 1977 Trade Show in San Francisco, I believe. Apple got a little too cocky, and though that no one could mess with them, and boy they thought wrong. Man...this is funnie stuff, too bad I wasn't even born yet...
    nelson.hsieh
    good artists copy, great artists steal. . .
  17. #37  
    Originally posted by bookrats
    Also, while their is no doubt that Xerox's work (and particularly that of Alan Kay at Xerox Parc) was a foundation of Apple's Lisa (and afterwards Macintosh) computer, there were a lot of other work that both Xerox and Apple were basing their products on. Ivan Sutherland comes to mind right off. (Amazing that the mouse was actually developed in 1964!)
    And old timers can be mistaken, too. I was wandering through the Sun website about Sutherland, and ran into the fact that the mouse was created and developed by Douglas Engelbart, not Ivan Sutherland. (And not until 1968.)

    Englelbart did use the mouse in conjunction with work based on Sutherland's SketchPad system; both he and Sutherland created many of the primary foundations for modern computer UIs. But SketchPad used a light pen, not a mouse.

    Mea Culpa!
    Jeff Meyer

    "And he died like he lived: with his mouth wide open."
  18. #38  
    Originally posted by bookrats
    And old timers can be mistaken, too. I was wandering through the Sun website about Sutherland, and ran into the fact that the mouse was created and developed by Douglas Engelbart, not Ivan Sutherland. (And not until 1968.)

    Englelbart did use the mouse in conjunction with work based on Sutherland's SketchPad system; both he and Sutherland created many of the primary foundations for modern computer UIs. But SketchPad used a light pen, not a mouse.

    Mea Culpa!
    Hehe, like I said..."Good artists copy, great artists steal." The "Great Artists" are the ones that make the most money
    nelson.hsieh
    good artists copy, great artists steal. . .
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions