I heard that Apple Computer has changed its name to Apple Inc. What is that all about? I wonder if they have any ideas of moving away from computers and selling ipods, iphones, and stuff like that and buying various other companies that make movies, etc. In other words, maybe drop being a manufacturer of computers and computer operating systems?
Apple Inc?
- Thread starter Mystic
- Start date
- Status
I think the entertainment gadgets comprise the majority of their revenues. So in order to position themselves better for that, a name change might have been necessary.
I don't know if the name would have mattered much. A good product is a good product. The bombs that MicroSoft made (zune, etc.) failed because they were bad products, not because of the name.
I don't know if the name would have mattered much. A good product is a good product. The bombs that MicroSoft made (zune, etc.) failed because they were bad products, not because of the name.
Mystic,
I think you hit the nail on the head. It shows that they want to do more than just computers. I think they re-did their mission statement at the same time. It was a way to metaphorically expand their focus to other markets, at which they have been pretty successful.
I think you hit the nail on the head. It shows that they want to do more than just computers. I think they re-did their mission statement at the same time. It was a way to metaphorically expand their focus to other markets, at which they have been pretty successful.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
The company's name was "Apple Computer, Inc" until early 2007 when the "Computer" part was dropped. The new name is signaling expansion into areas other than computers. To conclude Apple will drop out of the computer business is in my opinion preposterous, especially at this time.
I think there has to be something important and serious about all of this-a corporation does not change its name for no reason. Exactly what it means in total I don't know. But certainly Apple is moving more and more into consumer items of various types. Much of the current Apple revenue comes from the sale of items like the iPod. And if this iPhone is a hit they will be making a lot of revenue from it. Mac computers may become a distant secondary concern.
Apple computer sales in the USA still amount to something although not a very great deal-6% of the total. Worldwide Apple hardly even exists-something like 2%.
There are a lot of people who buy iPods at the Apple Stores who refer to the Apple Stores as the iPod stores. The Apple computers are like something in the store that is of minor interest.
I don't think that Apple overnight is going to toss their computer manufacturing (which I hear has been outsourced a lot to countries like China) and their software. But the official story is that the Leopard OS was delayed because addtional programmers and engineers had to be switched to the iPhone. Leopard has been delayed 4 months in case somebody has not heard (to October). And a lot of developers have been apparently complaining about serious bugs in the beta versions of the new OS.
Do not be surprised if most of Apple revenues come from stuff like iPods and iPhones that the computers and perhaps the OS gradually get phased out.
After all, if GM started to make more money from electronic equipment like sound systems than they did with automobiles GM would probably gradually move away from automobiles.
Worldwide Apple is hardly even around. But iPods are everywhere and the iPhone will be everywhere also if it is successful. And a smaller workforce might be required to assemble iPods and iPhones. So if the computer revenue becomes small enough why even bother?
Apple computer sales in the USA still amount to something although not a very great deal-6% of the total. Worldwide Apple hardly even exists-something like 2%.
There are a lot of people who buy iPods at the Apple Stores who refer to the Apple Stores as the iPod stores. The Apple computers are like something in the store that is of minor interest.
I don't think that Apple overnight is going to toss their computer manufacturing (which I hear has been outsourced a lot to countries like China) and their software. But the official story is that the Leopard OS was delayed because addtional programmers and engineers had to be switched to the iPhone. Leopard has been delayed 4 months in case somebody has not heard (to October). And a lot of developers have been apparently complaining about serious bugs in the beta versions of the new OS.
Do not be surprised if most of Apple revenues come from stuff like iPods and iPhones that the computers and perhaps the OS gradually get phased out.
After all, if GM started to make more money from electronic equipment like sound systems than they did with automobiles GM would probably gradually move away from automobiles.
Worldwide Apple is hardly even around. But iPods are everywhere and the iPhone will be everywhere also if it is successful. And a smaller workforce might be required to assemble iPods and iPhones. So if the computer revenue becomes small enough why even bother?
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
You're a real ray of sunshine with your biweekly Apple tales, Mystic. "Profit über alles" isn't everybody's mantra. As a consumer I don't care to support the biggest fish in the water. 90% of the folks in my field use Macs. 2% of a worldwide market is still a large number of individuals.
Don't be so quick at prophesying Apple's exodus from the computer business. If anything, success with their other electronics products will allow Apple to be more competitive when it comes to computers. In an effort for your peace of mind, I am all for you getting rid of your Mac and getting a PC already!
Actually I started using the Mac in 1996, one year after I got my first computer which ran Windows 95. The various Windows opersting systems looked very inferior to me-I really enjoyed the various Mac OSs. I liked Mac OS 9.1 the best. People complained about the Mac OS as not being multi-tasking and that memory had to be manually applied to programs. My experience was that the Mac was more relaible than Windows, and once enough memory had been manually applied to a program the Mac would not crash very often. Mac OS 9.1 had some multi-tasking ability. It is nice to be able to run several programs on a computer at one time but really how many programs does the average person run at once? When I was working with Photoshop I rarely was trying to do three-four other things on my computer at the same time. Personally I got sick and tired of hearing about these so-called 'power users' who wanted to be able to run several programs at once. Occasionally I would run a few programs at the same time but I ususally worked on one thing at a time. Working on photographs in Photoshop requires a persons attention.
I have to say that I actually loved the Mac OS. It was a delight to use. I still remember my experience with Windows 3.1 at work. It was horrible. Windows 95 was a lot better but I still remember the computer crashes and the 'Blue Screen of Death.' Windows Me was the joke of the century.
Then Apple came out with Mac OS X. I still don't know exactly what to say about that. Without a doubt Mac OS X is very attractive and multi-tasking and so forth. But personally I think Mac OS 9.1 could have been improved and have some additional multi-tasking ability and maybe automatic memory allocation. And Mac OS 9.1 could run on computers that had lesser hardware requirments. I still remember seeing the actual rooms at the local newspaper where people were putting together the newspaper and they had a bunch of early iMacs in there running Classic Mac OSs. I guess what I am trying to say is that something changed when they went to Mac OS X.
You misread me. I actually like the Mac very much. I have been a very loyal customer although it often seems that nobody at Apple gives a darn about customers like me. I wish very much that there was real competition in the desktop computer market. I think we would be all better off. But I really do not think it is ever going to happen. The growth of Macs in this country has been slow and extremely limited it seems worldwide. Linux has been a major disappointment. I have no hopes for Linux anymore. It is always wait until next year.
I have been a good customer even though it seems like I am a nonperson to some in the Apple community. I wonder about the decision to abandon the Classic Mac OS. Was it really the right thing? Apple wasted probably a billion dollars on the Copeland Project but really a few good programmers could have supercharged Mac OS 9.1-Mac OS 9.5 anybody? I still remember having plenty of power to do things on computers that had a fraction of the processor and RAM capabilities that I possess today. I still remember how totally secure a person could feel using a Mac. And around 1996 Apple was still something like 13% of the market.
I guess I am nervous. What happens if Apple stops making computers in a few years? I remember when Apple almost did go under a few years back. People who do stuff on computers have a lot of money invested in computers. Photoshop is not cheap. Photo printers and scanners are not cheap.
Do iPods now make up much of Apple's income? Personally I have never owned an iPod. If the iPhone is as successful as the iPod how much of Apple's income will come from computers? If I was running Apple and I saw that computers now made up 5% of the income I might say that we can do without that division. What happened to the Oldsmobile Divison of GM? Actually Oldsmobile was making some pretty good stuff right before the end. I guess I am worried and thinking about how my money might be invested better in another area.
I have to say that I actually loved the Mac OS. It was a delight to use. I still remember my experience with Windows 3.1 at work. It was horrible. Windows 95 was a lot better but I still remember the computer crashes and the 'Blue Screen of Death.' Windows Me was the joke of the century.
Then Apple came out with Mac OS X. I still don't know exactly what to say about that. Without a doubt Mac OS X is very attractive and multi-tasking and so forth. But personally I think Mac OS 9.1 could have been improved and have some additional multi-tasking ability and maybe automatic memory allocation. And Mac OS 9.1 could run on computers that had lesser hardware requirments. I still remember seeing the actual rooms at the local newspaper where people were putting together the newspaper and they had a bunch of early iMacs in there running Classic Mac OSs. I guess what I am trying to say is that something changed when they went to Mac OS X.
You misread me. I actually like the Mac very much. I have been a very loyal customer although it often seems that nobody at Apple gives a darn about customers like me. I wish very much that there was real competition in the desktop computer market. I think we would be all better off. But I really do not think it is ever going to happen. The growth of Macs in this country has been slow and extremely limited it seems worldwide. Linux has been a major disappointment. I have no hopes for Linux anymore. It is always wait until next year.
I have been a good customer even though it seems like I am a nonperson to some in the Apple community. I wonder about the decision to abandon the Classic Mac OS. Was it really the right thing? Apple wasted probably a billion dollars on the Copeland Project but really a few good programmers could have supercharged Mac OS 9.1-Mac OS 9.5 anybody? I still remember having plenty of power to do things on computers that had a fraction of the processor and RAM capabilities that I possess today. I still remember how totally secure a person could feel using a Mac. And around 1996 Apple was still something like 13% of the market.
I guess I am nervous. What happens if Apple stops making computers in a few years? I remember when Apple almost did go under a few years back. People who do stuff on computers have a lot of money invested in computers. Photoshop is not cheap. Photo printers and scanners are not cheap.
Do iPods now make up much of Apple's income? Personally I have never owned an iPod. If the iPhone is as successful as the iPod how much of Apple's income will come from computers? If I was running Apple and I saw that computers now made up 5% of the income I might say that we can do without that division. What happened to the Oldsmobile Divison of GM? Actually Oldsmobile was making some pretty good stuff right before the end. I guess I am worried and thinking about how my money might be invested better in another area.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
I'm not worried. What will happen will happen, no matter what I want. I've always liked my Mac, and I like my current Mac. I'll enjoy the ride as long as it lasts, and I don't think the ride is about to end. For what it's worth, I know people who still use Commodore VC64, Apple IIe and other fossils.
Atari 400
I miss OS/2....
IBM OS/2 was probably a superior operating system compared to Windows 95. OS/2 did not require a super powerful computer, was multi-tasking, very secure (I think only 2 viruses were ever developed for it), and could have been improved. It is stunning that Windows 95 beat out OS/2 and it is probably IBM's fault that it happened.
If OS/2 would have won the desktop computer wars instead of Windows 95 OS/2 probably would have replaced BOTH Windows operating systems AND the Apple Macintosh operating systems. We would all have been using OS/2 or some improved version of OS/2 on our desktop computers today and nobody would probably be talking about Linux operating systems either. IBM would have become the richest corporation on Earth.
A lot of people have never even heard of OS/2. I almost bought a copy of OS/2 to replace Windows on my computer. OS/2 being defeated by Microsoft Windows is like the Army deciding to use Sherman tanks instead of the M1 Abrams.
If OS/2 would have won the desktop computer wars instead of Windows 95 OS/2 probably would have replaced BOTH Windows operating systems AND the Apple Macintosh operating systems. We would all have been using OS/2 or some improved version of OS/2 on our desktop computers today and nobody would probably be talking about Linux operating systems either. IBM would have become the richest corporation on Earth.
A lot of people have never even heard of OS/2. I almost bought a copy of OS/2 to replace Windows on my computer. OS/2 being defeated by Microsoft Windows is like the Army deciding to use Sherman tanks instead of the M1 Abrams.
I too miss OS2. But I don't miss the funky networking setup and the search for hdwr drivers.
I still have a virgin copy of Warp 3 Server. I loaned out my copy of Warp 4 and it never came back.
It sure was great on my old 386-33 4 line BBS system. I bet it would really cook on my AMD Turion 64 x2 1gig laptop.
I still have a virgin copy of Warp 3 Server. I loaned out my copy of Warp 4 and it never came back.
It sure was great on my old 386-33 4 line BBS system. I bet it would really cook on my AMD Turion 64 x2 1gig laptop.
Apple is moving into other areas to realize the vision of "the complete digital lifestyle" It is called growing the business. It is Gate's dream, but Bill can't seem to get his act together. MS makes money on two things, OS's and Office; that is it and that is all it has been for years. Analysts are worried that MS is now a lumberng giant incapable of responding to the market forces, incapable of generating other streams of revenue, so they will continue to milk the OS market (HOW MUCH is Vista?)
Thanks for raising the "Isn't Apple going out of business" mantra; I've been hearing it for 10 years, and they continue to produce compelling consumer products people want.
Thanks for raising the "Isn't Apple going out of business" mantra; I've been hearing it for 10 years, and they continue to produce compelling consumer products people want.
I really feel myself that most or all computer operating systems today have a lot of excess baggage. It is sort of like a city growing and parts of that city being buried and lost beneath the surface. A lot of now unused passageways and dark basements.
Some people say that Microsoft Windows XP has 40 million lines of code. And that Microsoft Windows Vista has 50 million lines of code. Linux operating systems and Mac OS X are more streamlined but they too could use some redesigning.
It appears that perhaps the most secure operating systems are the BSD ones (OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and NetBSD). Mac OS X is often included in this group but Mac OS X apparently has some complexity beyond the other three.
Some Microsoft people themselves have talked about a clean sheet of paper and putting a Microsoft GUI on top of BSD. Mac OS X itself is on top of FreeBSD but there is as I said above some additional complexity. Microsoft is already developing a new operating system but little is known about it. The code name of that operating system is something like 'Vienna.' Will it just be another 10 million lines of additional code on top of Vista?
It is anybody's guess what Apple is planning to do in the future. Recently Apple renamed itself to Apple Inc. and took the word 'Computer' out of the corporate name. Who knows what that means. It may mean that computers will be taking a back seat in development. Or maybe it just means that Apple is expanding into a lot of other stuff besides computers.
At any rate I personally feel that BSD is a more promising type of operating system than Linux. Apple has already demonstrated that a GUI could be put on top of a BSD operating system and made to work.
There are ways known to make a BSD operating system extremely secure. Some such technology is already being developed for some BSD operating systems. Microsoft came up with some advanced ideas to protect Windows Vista, such as programs loading into memory in an unpredictable way, Date Execution Prevention, and a lot of other stuff that not a lot of people know about. Such technology used with a BSD operating system with a GUI on top of it could produce a very difficult to defeat secure operating system.
Some people say that Microsoft Windows XP has 40 million lines of code. And that Microsoft Windows Vista has 50 million lines of code. Linux operating systems and Mac OS X are more streamlined but they too could use some redesigning.
It appears that perhaps the most secure operating systems are the BSD ones (OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and NetBSD). Mac OS X is often included in this group but Mac OS X apparently has some complexity beyond the other three.
Some Microsoft people themselves have talked about a clean sheet of paper and putting a Microsoft GUI on top of BSD. Mac OS X itself is on top of FreeBSD but there is as I said above some additional complexity. Microsoft is already developing a new operating system but little is known about it. The code name of that operating system is something like 'Vienna.' Will it just be another 10 million lines of additional code on top of Vista?
It is anybody's guess what Apple is planning to do in the future. Recently Apple renamed itself to Apple Inc. and took the word 'Computer' out of the corporate name. Who knows what that means. It may mean that computers will be taking a back seat in development. Or maybe it just means that Apple is expanding into a lot of other stuff besides computers.
At any rate I personally feel that BSD is a more promising type of operating system than Linux. Apple has already demonstrated that a GUI could be put on top of a BSD operating system and made to work.
There are ways known to make a BSD operating system extremely secure. Some such technology is already being developed for some BSD operating systems. Microsoft came up with some advanced ideas to protect Windows Vista, such as programs loading into memory in an unpredictable way, Date Execution Prevention, and a lot of other stuff that not a lot of people know about. Such technology used with a BSD operating system with a GUI on top of it could produce a very difficult to defeat secure operating system.
The licensing terms for BSD are more amenable to companies like MS and Apple using it in closed-source applications.
You cannot legally do that with Linux.
You cannot legally do that with Linux.
JHZR2
Staff member
I kind of see what mystik is saying... after all, "general electric" isn't chenging their name because they no longer get the majority of their revenue from lightbulbs, gas turbines and power plants, but rather from financial services...
That said, consumers are tools as a whole, and in the competitive market of 'gadgetry', I suppose having the household name fit the image is something that is important.
IMO, it was kind of silly, but as moribundman said, "What will happen will happen, no matter what I want."
JMH
That said, consumers are tools as a whole, and in the competitive market of 'gadgetry', I suppose having the household name fit the image is something that is important.
IMO, it was kind of silly, but as moribundman said, "What will happen will happen, no matter what I want."
JMH
JHZR2, I am glad somebody can understand. To me it is very strange and worrying that Apple has changed its name from Apple Computer to Apple Inc. There has to be some kind of reason. Maybe they are just going to expand into a lot of other areas or maybe they are going to move away from computers. Why fanatic Apple fans are not willing to discuss stuff like this is beyond me. If Apple did start moving away from computer development it would affect the Apple fanatics ALSO! Nobody in their right mind wants to be left high and dry with a lot of investment in computers and software and hardware. But we can't control what is going to happen. What moribundman sais is also true-'What will happen will happen, no matter what I want.' However, I want to be ahead of the curve if I can. If I find out Apple is going to give up computer development I will sell my iMac fast.
Imagine if Microsoft changed its name in some way that indicated it might move away from its software development. Every commentator on the news, TV, radio, internet, newspapers, etc., would be discussing the Microsoft name change. Apple removes the word 'Computer' from its corporate name and there is near total silence.
Steve Jobs came back to Apple and saved Apple. I personally do not feel that Apple has had the best management except for the excellent leadership (rather than management) of Jobs. The last time I saw Jobs on video he looked ill. He looked very different than he had looked in the past. There have been rumors about him leaving Apple.
There are all kinds of stories floating around concerning Apple. I heard a story that Apple might buy Disney!
According to some stories developers have found beta versions of Mac OS 10.5 very buggy. The operating system was recently delayed by 4 months. Some people are complaining about the recent upgrade and security upgrades for Tiger (10.4). On my own computer the upgrade to 10.4.9 slowed down my computer and my flatbed scanner will not work now on my Apple computer. All the time now there are considerable numbers of potential security holes being found in the Mac OS. Somebody is after Apple big time. And when they finally decided to take a look at the Apple OS and Apple applications they found holes. There have been more potential problems being found in Mac OS 10.4 than in Windows XP in some months, let alone Windows Vista.
I have no idea what is going to happen in the future. But like I said I am going to try to stay ahead of the curve if I can.
Imagine if Microsoft changed its name in some way that indicated it might move away from its software development. Every commentator on the news, TV, radio, internet, newspapers, etc., would be discussing the Microsoft name change. Apple removes the word 'Computer' from its corporate name and there is near total silence.
Steve Jobs came back to Apple and saved Apple. I personally do not feel that Apple has had the best management except for the excellent leadership (rather than management) of Jobs. The last time I saw Jobs on video he looked ill. He looked very different than he had looked in the past. There have been rumors about him leaving Apple.
There are all kinds of stories floating around concerning Apple. I heard a story that Apple might buy Disney!
According to some stories developers have found beta versions of Mac OS 10.5 very buggy. The operating system was recently delayed by 4 months. Some people are complaining about the recent upgrade and security upgrades for Tiger (10.4). On my own computer the upgrade to 10.4.9 slowed down my computer and my flatbed scanner will not work now on my Apple computer. All the time now there are considerable numbers of potential security holes being found in the Mac OS. Somebody is after Apple big time. And when they finally decided to take a look at the Apple OS and Apple applications they found holes. There have been more potential problems being found in Mac OS 10.4 than in Windows XP in some months, let alone Windows Vista.
I have no idea what is going to happen in the future. But like I said I am going to try to stay ahead of the curve if I can.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
What a shame...
Mystic, don't worry. Dell changed from Dell Computers to Dell, Inc. in 2003 for similar reasons. In order to change public brand perception/awareness from just computers to broader media concerns (like selling TVs), Dell decided a change was needed. Hasn't changed their focus from computers, despite the downturn in their recent fortunes.
I HOPE Apple keeps developing computers and software for computers. Microsoft needs some competititon and right now the competititon that Microsoft has is pathetic. Apple is just about the only competition Microsoft has in the USA. But Apple has only about 6% of the market in the USA. 10% or more would be a lot better. Worldwide Apple is only about 2% of the market. Linux never has been able to compete. I am talking about desktop computers of course.
A lack of competition is not good for anybody. Competition makes a corporation (or a country for that matter) better.
A lack of competition is not good for anybody. Competition makes a corporation (or a country for that matter) better.
- Status
