Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
awk, I agree with you, but not to distance myself from micro's comments, I think what he is saying is not incompatible with what you are saying.
Apple will have to embrace trusted computing.
Altaire, now there is a name I have not heard in a long, long time...
Where is "pizza, pizza" boy?
Awk, I most certainly do agree with you. That is one of the few reasons I have hung on way past my bedtime with Wave.
Now why has the WaveXpress movie distribution failed to take off? Because of many things (of course), but the lack of a secure DRM has kept the content providers on the sidelines.
Will Apple have the same problem? We will have to see what Pixar has up its sleeves.
I believe that if WaveXpress were ported to the Mac for distributing Pixar content it would be a blockbuster. And it would force (competition is good) the PC world to embrace a more secure (TPM) platform to distribute movies too.
But I am an idealist and Atlas may have shrugged.
rachelelise, I'm looking up to you on this point, but in a meek and mild voice I'm going to squeek this:
Why is MSFT not liked? Is it because they are non-responsive to needs of customers, leaving them to fend for themselves, especially after an attack, hack, or virus infection?
This dislike, coupled with stability and a safer and more responsive open source platform has led to the divorce of many users from their PC and the love affair with the Mac. The iPod has served as the trist. The marriage is not far behind (in my opinion of course).
However, the Unix/darwin platform of the Mac is more stable (there is a lot written about this out there - so don't take my word for it). A more stable foundation tends to be more secure.
The peer review process has helped ensure stability with the side-effect of more secure.
Thanks for your valuable thoughts!
Awk, regarding TrustZone...
...when I talked about ARM and TIs early work that led to this development I was excoriated (not by you) by a select number of posters in the RB forum. As a result I stopped talking about it. I have always believed that ARM's endeavor in a zone of trust was going to happen. Lark gave us the blueprint many years ago.
I have not talked about it recently because it has already happened. Now it is a matter of Wave positioning and executing (only in my opinion of course).
Your discussion points regarding ARM are salient. I'm curious about the latest virus that is now moving amongst mobiles - it's called "metal" something or another.
The mobile space seems to be poised to embrace services and security. Now with the MOT/Apple phone coming that will distribute services, I wonder about their idea for protection? Of course many will ignore this development until the kid sitting across the table is listening to his music over his headphones plugged into his phone - or will those headphones be high fidelity wireless BlueTooth headphones?
barge, Janus as the iPod killer...
...I suspect we find eBay littered with millions of iPods once Janus is finally released?
I think first mover and staturation might trump Janus, at least for a while.
All incoming students at Duke University are issued iPods. They are used for more than just music. It is an open source platform for services - like downloading my class schedule, keeping my periodic table, etc.
And now an iPhone with MOT is discussed as to be released in 2005.
And I think with the MPAA watching the music model evolve on this platform AND Jobs at the helm of Pixar, Janus is not the slam dunk that I once advocated it was.
The lack of flexibility, nimbleness, and responsiveness over time provided an opportunity for the iPod phenomenon. The iPod wouldn't have made it if the PC world had not ignored the customers on digital services and security.
Thanks for the great discussion points!
kantbleveit, I just addressed the question in my last note to Weby.
To answer your question simplistically, yes and no.
Yes, more viruses and hacks will pop up. The depth and breadth will not be as great because there are less vulnerabilities.
No, viruses and hacks will not run rampantly and virally. That is because the open source space operates in a customer service environment (culture) that reacts very quickly to patching the few weaknesses that are discovered.
svenm, this is what the iPod has done...
...the WSJ calls it the "halo effect." I call it the trojan horse (wonder where I got that?). My last line is probably the most important, but in between is background.
Because of the nature of the unix backbone, compilers are out that can quickly move PC-centric software to dual platform software. There are not a lot of firms doing this (yet) and this is a niche. The software that is starting to pop up in the open source community is happening quickly.
For example, my Samsung phone would not sync to my machine two years ago. However, a friend told me about the "MissingSync." This is open source software and it worked perfectly! The guy now has a triving business.
Then there is ffmpegX. This is an open source package that allows me to take an mpeg4 and move it to mpeg1 (don't ask why I would want to do this, but just know that every now and again I need to). Again, the open source guy (Major) now has a thriving business.
Since I believe Apple is indeed experiencing a re-birth, and because its users are looking for a home entertainment experience, I think those that can look past thumbing their noses as the open source platform and embrace it, can make a tremendous amount of money.
I think WaveXpress would be a better application in the Mac world right now that security. If it were me that is what I would focus on in the Mac space.
WaveXpress for dual application.
Security for the PC right now and dual later.
I would not buy a PC for WaveXpress. As much as I would like ot use a product that I'm invested in, I will not jeapordize my business and private information just to have a "cool" and "neat" product.
The argument often thrown out for not creating a Mac version is the size of the market. Though I disagree on this point (who would not like to have 2% of this market and make a couple of billion dollars per year?), I am not in charge. BTW, I think based upon Apple's numbers over the last year (and the stock price reflects this), 2% is not the number anymore. The market size has doubled. Just stand outside an Apple Store and look in...
In the education space, 1/2 the machines are Macs. In the State of Maine all of its 7th graders are issued iBooks (the program is expanding to other grades). Since kids become future customers I think it would be an ideal insertion point for TVTonic with cartoons.
But then what do I know?
Weby,
Thank you for the response and offering a justification for a discussion of the open source platform. After all, IBM is migrating (internally) to an open source platform.
I believe to broaden beyond the two general statements (which are limited in my opinion) one needs to look at the nature of use for these platforms. Traditionally, at least on the mac side, they have been kept in education and the creative arts (publishers, graphic designers, architects, etc.).
I believe that open source code is more stable because it is peer reviewed. As a scientist you can appreciate the importance of the peer review process. MSFT has never had to withstand the peer review process and now they are paying the price by way of the public voice.
Open source peer review strengthens the stability of the platform. Therefore, browsers like FireFox, Camino, Safari, etc. are built in a peer review process and many of the weaknesses present in IE are engineered out and required to be engineered out by the participants through peer review.
I am not a proponent of open source security. I am a proponent of security due to stability. Once stability is established may the best security service win.
As Steve Balmer once said: "DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS..." It is the open source development process that is superior to the closed source process. That is why open source is more stable and secure.
The foundation is stronger. Therefore, the services that run on it are more powerful.
This is an important point because script kiddies (kitties too) who DO write viral code for the Mac don't like writing for it. The investment in writing it is not demonstrated in distribution. If you write a PC virus for one of the many a weaknesses that abound, you get to enjoy the fruits of your labor. However with an open source platform, finding the weakness is more difficult. Then once a weakness is found, there is a strong probablility a patch will be rushed into the marketplace quickly, squashing distribution. A web-service that runs on my open source platform called, "Software Update" runs whenever I want it to and it updates my machine in a turnkey way. I don't have to go looking for patches, they come to me.
Thanks again for the engaging discussion. And if you want to separate from that Franklin drop me a note.
Cheers!
Jaybeaux, undoubtedly the size of the market...
...plays a role.
I also believe that the Unix platform is much more stable and the work that has been done on top of it has eliminated many of the vulnerabilities. It is not perfect, but patches are released very quickly BEFORE consumers demand it. That is customer service.
Having agreed the size of the market is a mitigator does not mean that there aren't script kiddies out there trying to write harmful code - they are. However, getting it to run rampant is difficult because many of the easy vulnerabilities are not present.
A fortress weathered by time is still a fortress - only wiser.
And the next time I'm near you be sure I will provide you with early warning!
Weby, and the customers are screaming for products to meet their needs (digital content) AND security...
Linux Opinion: An Open Letter to a Digital World
"The Windows platform is not just insecure - it's patently, blatantly, and unashamedly insecure by design"
December 18, 2004
Summary
As a Linux desktop user himself, system administrator Chris Spencer did not relish having to clean up his wife's infected Windows PC after it had become compromised. By the time he'd solved the immediate problem, Spencer had become so fed up with spyware, trojans, viruses, and spam, that he decided it was time to write a letter to the world. It's a simple message: it's time to switch from Windows to Linux. "The letter serves as a guide," Spencer explains, "taking you through some of the history of Microsoft right up to this present day."
---
By Chris Spencer
To Anyone Who Will Listen,
Recently I was reading an article from Wired magazine talking about the Windows spyware problem [1]. It was unbelievable to me that people would choose to use programs that they know make all their personal information available to companies. It turns out that 80% of Windows users suffer from spyware [2]. I read many articles like these but always thought that these people have problems just because they aren't careful. Maybe they don't run anti-virus, they don't use a firewall, or they browse seedy sites and download applications for seedy activities. It turns out though that is not the case.
My wife discovered that her computer had been infected by spyware and trojans despite the anti-virus, regular Windows updates, having the good sense not to open attachments, using a firewall, and avoiding any type of seedy activities online. As best we can tell someone exploited IE transparently while she searched for medical information to help our nephew.
The clean up from these types of infections is great fun. I spent not less than 5 hours running about every spyware prevention program known to man. Each one searching for those pesky files and registry settings. The worst thing of all was that, once I cleared them off the disk, simply starting Internet Explorer would reinfect the whole system. Seriously, it was great fun and I did, eventually, have the satisfaction of beating the problem. That's right - a system administrator for 10 years with a degree in computer science and a RHCE CAN clean up a single spyware infection in 5 hours.
I hope you see what I am really saying here. How on this earth are people that aren't trained in Information Technology going to do it? As a Linux desktop user, I had never been exposed to this type of problem. Having now battled with spyware, I am finally motivated to speak up and say something to the world. I want to get a single message across:
It's time for anyone running a Windows PC to switch to Linux.
You see, the Windows platform is not just insecure - it's patently, blatantly, and unashamedly insecure by design and for all the lip service to security it's really not going to get better, ever. To make matters worse, it's more expensive and gives you fewer necessary applications right out of the box than Linux. Everyone, even Microsoft, knows this - they are just too afraid to say it. The tide is coming in. Nothing on this planet can stop it.
Whew. I said it. I am so happy to get that off my chest, however, for me to stop here would be unfair. I haven't really proved it to you. So if you will entertain me a bit longer here is the rest of the story.
Microsoft started conducting a "Get the Facts" [3] marketing campaign against Linux. This signaled that they have correctly assessed that their competition is Linux and that they need to fight it with all they have. It even made it into their 10K filing. [4] It's really an interesting read to note that Microsoft sees Linux as a major threat It's a big enough threat to their monopoly that they say:
"The Linux open source operating system, which is also derived from Unix and is available without payment under a General Public License, has gained increasing acceptance as its feature set increasingly resembles the distinct and innovative features of Windows and as competitive pressures on personal computer OEMs to reduce costs continue to increase."
If Microsoft thinks this then that alone is more than enough reason to give a fair look at Linux. Of course it's just as likely that they are preparing the lawsuits to attack Linux because it is a real competitor. I am not sure which distinct and innovative features they are referencing. Perhaps it was the whole GUI concept that Apple sued them for stealing from them. Perhaps it was the Microsoft Office-like functionality that Open Office has that Microsoft took from Word Perfect. It's hard to tell and it gets me off topic to delve into it.
Alright, let's talk about the "Get the Facts" marketing campaign. What happened is that Microsoft and vendors that make money on Microsoft products have all come together to tell us that we us why we should use their products. As a consumer and something of a student of history, I always question people that are highly motivated to protect their jobs and money. Did big tobacco say their products were safe long after they knew it wasn't true? Might Microsoft be inclined to say that their products provide better total cost of ownership (TCO) and security than another product despite knowing it wasn't true?
It turns out they have done something strikingly similar before. [5] When IBM OS/2 had just taken off and become "the best selling retail software product in America" then "sources close to Microsoft" leaked word to a columnist for the UK edition of PC Magazine, who dutifully reported both the rumor and source." - Computerworld, March 20, 1995, page 118. From there it was all downhill for IBM. Despite everything indicating that OS/2 was doing great the press just kept printing the Microsoft party line. In the almost 10 years since that happened, have things changed? Are they kindler, gentler, and friendlier to work with or do they still spin, bully, and use talking heads?
Carrying on in their history we see that, empowered by their victory over IBM, just 4 years ago Microsoft was ordered to be split in two by Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson because they were convicted of abusing their monopoly market position. Then 3 years ago Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly reversed the decision to split them and a much lighter penalty was imposed. Unhappy with the results the EU took up the case and just this year Microsoft was convicted in the EU. Since then Microsoft has paid billions of dollars to the companies that were aligned against them. One by one settling the differences. Most of the companies had little choice but to accept the money they were offered. Because they have been so badly beat. Now they stand with billions of dollars in the bank and a patent portfolio that is rapidly expanding.
I don't know about you but when a convicted monopolist that has been shown to use those monopoly powers against their competitors says that Linux is a competitor but that it's not as secure or cost-effective, well then I take note. Because I know there is a good chance that a half truth was spoken.
Maybe Linux is shoddy code just hacked together by a college student. However, according to the four-year analysis by five Stanford researchers [6] Linux contains only "0.17 bugs per 1,000 lines of code" and most all of those bugs have been fixed. Given that an earlier study from Reasoning, Inc [7] had already shown that the Linux TCP/IP stack had a 0.013 per 1000 lines of code defect rate back in 2001, it is hardly astonishing that the entire Kernel is also relatively low in defects compared to your average commercial software application To put that in perspective the average code seems to have anywhere from 2 to 30 bugs per 1000 lines of code. That makes the Linux kernel between 11 times and 176 times better than your average product. So it's certainly not shoddy software by any stretch of the imagination.
Considering that many Linux distributions are free, it is hard to believe that it would be more expensive than Microsoft where a simple upgrade costs $100 and their Office application costs hundreds more. Call me crazy but I am having a hard time finding any truth in the "facts" as reported by Microsoft. However, Microsoft studies the TCO to show that other factors make Linux more expensive. Yet, the studies that I have read seem to make crazy assumptions like saying it takes more money to train users to push a button on Linux than it does to push a button on Windows. They also tend to ignore the costs associated with viruses, spyware, and trojans that prompted me to write this. Perhaps most unfortunately for Microsoft they also ignore that wildly varying labor costs directly affect TCO. [8] That means it wouldn't just be a poor decision it would be a completely moronic decision for a government to use the Windows platform in the third world if it wasn't absolutely necessary. To be honest, for a long time I have wanted to see a case study that took these types of issues into account. I was, for this reason greatly disappointed, when I heard about a study from Cybersource [9] that ignored these things but still found Linux, even Red Hat Enterprise Linux, to be at least 19% less expensive. So much for Windows being better value, they can't even win when the whole thing is tipped in their favor.
Maybe I missed something? Maybe Microsoft just happens to be truly better at security than Linux? For this I had to get dirty and dig. On the surface it did seem like Windows had fewer security issues. Looking at Seconia, a security research company, I discovered Windows 2000 Server has had only 76 Advisories in all of 2003 and 2004. [10] Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 on the other hand has 101 Advisories [11] and it wasn't launched until November and looking at Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 I found a whopping 145 vulnerabilities. [12] That looks pretty bad, right?
I am sure that is what Microsoft would like us to think. If we would just ignore the elephants in the closet then we would come to their happy conclusion. I'm not going to do that though.
Microsoft Windows is but one component in a much larger Windows platform. What good is the operating system without remembering productivity software, anti-virus software, instant messengers, media players, software to burn CD and DVDs, and the list goes on and on? These are all things that Red Hat and every other Linux distribution includes as part of the package. Usually they go so far as to include multiple applications for each function. It would be, therefore, completely unfair if we didn't compare a comparably equipped Windows platform to a comparable Linux platform. How do you add it up though? Whose products do you pick and whose products do you ignore? It's a horrible can of worms. I tried to do it. To build the comprehensive list so that we could compare a Microsoft Windows that's fully equipped like a Linux distribution and I was able to exceed the number of advisories. I just felt dirty doing it and in the process of doing it. Besides, I came to the realization that the bug count isn't what really mattered.
What really matters is that the bugs are getting fixed so you aren't online without protection and that the updates were easy to track and install. Both of which Microsoft is in serious trouble with.
With Linux all of the updates for all of the different types of applications come through a single path and in an automated way. It is a process very much like the Windows Update service. The key here is that one update service covers all of the products. On the Windows platform you can get the Windows updates this way but what about all of the third party applications we needed to have the same functionality as Linux? Each of those need to be searched for or are hidden inside the application themselves.
In my research I found one particularly nasty Microsoft bug that really emphasizes this point. I am talking about the GDI+ buffer overflow with JPEG processing [13]. They put out a security bulletin and they released a patch for each of their affected products but they never identified who put the SDK library in their products and each of those products linked to it individually. Not only did this mean users had to be experts that researched the update on their own, but they also had to manually install it in each location. You have to admit, that sure isn't as nice as the centralized updating that Linux has. It seems more like a tidal wave to me.
Then there are the issues related to actually fixing the bugs that are known. Again, Secunia makes it really easy to see. Of the 76 advisories Microsoft 2000 Sever still had a whopping 20% outstanding and one of them was rated "Highly Critical". Red Hat Enterprise Linux had fewer than 1% outstanding and it was rated only "Moderately Critical". So much for fewer security updates meaning you are more secure and let's not even talk about the Internet Explorer Web browser. Because it is so insecure that the United States government, through the Computer Emergency Readiness Team, had to issue a warning to use any browser besides IE. [14] Yet, to use Windows Update you have to use IE. It's just not fair.
Then there is the issue of design. Linux was designed to be in a hostile Internet centric world. As people were programming it they knew this and it no doubt played a role in the designs of their products. With Linux you will find that firewalls are enabled by default, users rarely login as administrators, server applications run as users that have limited rights, etc. In Windows these obvious things were an afterthought. Finally put into Windows XP with the creation of SP2, well mostly. I think it's because of the mindset that Windows is for end users on either private networks or no network at all that Microsoft has been hit so hard by security issues. It's of course equally possible that the issue is entirely different. Maybe they don't fix the security holes because it's considered a feature. I know they said as much about the Windows Messenger Service [15] even though it was being actively used to send banner advertisements to desktops around the world.
Perhaps Microsoft is finding that the standard software wisdom about bugs [16] being less expensive to fix before a product ships is true because after several years of having security as the number one focus they are as plagued or more plagued by security issues than ever before. Maybe pouring money on the problem won't fix it? I mean come on Even before Windows XP [17] - we knew these things but it still shipped with the stupid default settings and we STILL have 20% of their advisories unfixed. How can anyone feel safe running on a Microsoft platform?
Linux provides a better paradigm. It costs less, it is more secure, and perhaps most importantly of all it isn't controlled by a single vendor. While Red Hat is the largest distributer of Linux and does provide a comprehensive support system and legal protections for their customers, they aren't alone. Major companies like IBM, HP, and Novell are all deeply involved with Linux but none of them are in control of it.
Because of Linux, the future of computing is commodity. By the year 2000, Linux already represented billions of dollars worth of development effort [18] and it's owned collectively by each one of us. The savings will follow and you can count on getting what you pay for or there will be someone else that is there for you on the terms that you want. The tide has turned and Microsoft is going to get wet. From my perspective they already are all washed up.
It's all an issue of attitude. Linux follows the share and share alike [19] mindset where as Microsoft seems to have the greedy mindset of it's all mine and I want to get paid for it now [20]. Well Bill, Steve, and talking parrots, that's not very nice. As I have shown there are good reasons for using Linux as the better alternative to Windows. Give my friends at Red Hat a call. I am sure they could comp. you a copy. Anyway.....
Like I said: It's time for anyone running a Windows PC to switch to Linux.
I really appreciate you taking the time to read my letter and I hope that it gets you motivated to make the switch or, if you already have, that it just makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
Sincerely,
Chris Spencer
chris at digitalfreedoms dot org
http://www.linuxworld.com/story/47536.htm
Weby, you are too kind...
How do I think Apple fits into the "TCG Paradigm" (that has a nice ring as a coined phrase)?
Let me first say that I know this (below) is reported as a server-centric solution. However, I suspect we might see it at the client side. After all, running multiple OSs solves a number of problems regarding interoperability.
Then, with the music and movies (remember Pixar) being distributed over the web with an IBM service provider and Apple appliances, DRM becomes a service run by IBM and implemented by Apple on an interoperable platform controlled by all. Below is a primative thought on it:
Apple To Use Multi-OS Chip in Future Macs, IBM Reveals, 12.22.04, 3:36 PM ET
The Mac Observer
Apple Computer will use a new PowerPC 970 processor in future Macs that will run multiple operating systems simultaneously, an executive of IBM's server technology division has revealed. Development of the new processor is close to being finished and will ship sometime in 2005, the company said.
Karl Freund, vice president of IBM eServer pSeries, told CNET News.com in an interview on Tuesday that its next generation PowerPC 970 chips, closely developed with Apple Computer, will use 'partitioning' technology known as virtualization. The virtualization technology, which has existed on mainframes for years, is a combination of software and hardware technologies that allow enterprises to run as many as ten 'virtual' servers on a single microprocessor.
Mr. Fruend said the goal is to incorporate virtualization technology into all its PowerPC processors.
But don't look for this new technology to appear in a Mac for some time. Currently, the technology is only available in certain models of IBMs blade servers and following testing and manufacturing, it would be at least another year or more before an Apple server product uses the technology, industry experts say.
At present, Apple uses the PowerPC 970FX in its desktop and server computers.
http://www.forbes.com/technology/feeds/general/2004/12/22/generalmacobserver_2004_12_22_eng-macobser....
---
Therefore, my thoughts on the "TCG Paradigm" is one of services managed by firms like IBM and Wave. Interoperability will be moved to the processor implemented by the OEMs. I don't think its elegant, but I do think this ugly system is what will be patched together.
What I'm about to write will be very unpopular and I expect to be torched (or ignored) as the board idiot.
Over the years I have always believed that we should listen to the customers - what do consumers want and need? The US automobile manufacturers in the '70s actually believed the consumer would buy what they produced. They got fat, arrogant, and the Japanese automobile manufacturers ate their lunch (and dinner). When the hegemony is broken is forces the gorilla to change or risk become extinct. I believe we are at that point with some of the OEMs.
I think the WSJ article below is dead-on the mark. Listen to what the CUSTOMERS in that article are saying. Content is Queen and the customer is King. Only the arrogant think the customer will buy because they have no choice. I believe in the freedom of choice.
Please notice the importance of viruses and ease of use in this article.
I submit to the board that the giant OEMs lack nimbleness and responsiveness and they have taken the marketplace for granted. As a result, I believe, they have lost touch with what consumers want. They don't hear the agony of the customer. As a result, trusted computing has slogged along (and us with it).
The OEMs believe they have the power to tell consumers what they want. They only have it as long as we give it to them and their is no other choice in the marketspace.
I have been watching this trusted computing space 'evolve' for YEARS now with folks like Lark Allen and SKS leading the evolution.
The delay has been costly to the end-users. Listen to their cries below. How many of you reading this have experienced this agony? In my opinion, trusted computing is the only initiative that can stop the hemorrhage. It ain't over by a long shot, BUT competition is good and I posit that this WSJ article underlines what will have more to do with TPM deployment than anything else - competition. Yes, competition is good...
iPod "halo" effect according to WSJ...
REAL TIME EXCHANGE
By TIM HANRAHAN AND JASON FRY
Readers Weigh In on Apple
And Possibility of 'Halo Effect'
December 23, 2004
In Monday's column, we predicted that the combination of the iPod's popularity and the increasing worry over viruses, security holes and spyware in Windows PCs will lead to the second coming of Apple Computer as a home-computing power.
To say that struck a chord would be putting it mildly. Boy, did we ever get mail -- including a significant number of people who said that the iPod, Windows security concerns or a combination of the two had made them switch to a Mac or plan to do so. We also got letter from readers who disagreed with our hypothesis.
On to the letters, some of which have been edited. You can always drop us a line at realtime@wsj.com2 -- comments will be posted here in Real Time Exchange on Thursdays. Thanks to everybody who wrote in. Remember: If you don't want your comments considered for Real Time Exchange, please make that clear.
* * *
You want your halo effect? Here's your halo effect. (Note to Apple: People named Michael seem particularly willing to switch.)
Michael D. Sullivan writes: Our household is solidly Windows-centric, with five Windows XP systems in place. We've never had an Apple computer. In the past year, we have bought four iPods (one to replace a stolen one), and I wouldn't be surprised if Santa brought a fifth one. The free iTunes software for Windows is the best advertising Apple could want. It's easy to use and intuitive, unlike much of the Windows software from other companies. Our three iPod users use iTunes, of course -- but so do I, the lone non-iPod user. It's much better than the alternatives from Nero and Microsoft for my purposes. As a result, I have been much more open to Apple computers than I was before. My wife is getting an iBook for Christmas, and we will consider Apple computers when we replace our Windows machines. The iPod has successfully breached the Windows-centrism of our family.
Michael P. Walton writes: As a lifelong Windows user, I was tired of the constant barrage of viruses and spyware. It got to the point where I felt like I needed to be a programmer to keep my Windows PC operational. After receiving an iPod as a gift, I was inspired to research other Apple products. In the last two months I've purchased an iMac G5 for my office and an eMac for home, both replacing Windows machines. I'm amazed at the elegance, simplicity and ease of use of these products.
Michael Borch writes: I have four kids and four iPods, including my own. I also own a Sony camera and video products and am increasingly frustrated by their inability to talk to my H-P PCs. (I own three of those.) Just yesterday I made the decision to buy an Apple laptop to marry the music and the video components.
Gary Bradt writes: I am a 48-year-old life-long PC guy who made the switch to Apple this year because PC Armageddon is here: Despite diligently loading it with antivirus, antispyware, antieverything protection, my PC flailed and crashed as consistently and reliably as those balsa gliders that I made as a kid. I've made the switch to Apple, I'm happy, and I'm never going back. I should add that my 13-year-old daughter and most of her friends have an iPod at the top of their Christmas lists this year. These are the same kids who will be computer consumers in the very near future.
Rick Duffy writes: Last year when I purchased a new PC I gave serious consideration to buying an Apple. The cost was the major hurdle for me at the time. Since then I have used iTunes for ripping and organizing my CD collection and with my new iPod Mini under my Christmas tree I'll get even closer to Apple. I have three-year-old twins who will soon be learning how to use a computer, and I feel my home network will be safer with the kids using a Mac vs. a PC. The main reason for my PC purchase last year was for editing photos and video and creating my digital-music library. I've tried many different software packages trying to find something like the Apple iLife package, but nothing comes close. My next PC purchase will be a Mac.
Dale Adrion writes: Just yesterday I was talking to a friend about the iPod: how brilliant it was, how there really was no competitor for it, and how it makes me think that it's time to switch to the Mac. As this discussion was taking place, my Windows-based PC with the P4 and 512MB of memory, etc., etc., was struggling to send a graphics job to my "professional series" color printer. I know that somehow I have once again picked up something causing the computer to run slower and slower, something that my antispyware program, antivirus program and firewall cannot find. Who needs it? The reality is that for what I and most others do at home the Mac makes perfect sense.
William Vaughan writes: This past year I had a friend with an iPod who was absolutely in love with it along with his PowerBook. Although I constantly told him that there was nothing special about the iPod as opposed to other related products, I couldn't help but be amazed by the ease of use of both machines. I eventually purchased an iPod just to see what the big deal was and I was amazed. It has become an integral part of my life. No longer is there a CD changer in my car nor in my home. No longer do I struggle to write down tons of meeting notes -- I use my iPod with iTalk to catch those details so that I can concentrate on the bigger picture.
But the more important insight is that now I want other Apple products because I am so impressed with how the iPod not only revolutionized the music industry, but also simplified different aspects of my life. The iMac is my next major purchase, I can't wait to get it, and it's all because of the iPod.
Tracy Clark writes: I have been a PC user for the last 20 years. Windows has always been fine for me as I did not use a computer for much more than the Internet. However, in the last three months I have purchased and iPod as well as an iBook and truly love them both. I will never return to the world of Windows, except at work where I have no say in the matter. I have even considered switching my HP iPAQ 4155 handheld (the name is still pretty cool) to a Palm-based unit as it works better with the Mac.
Jason Sindler writes: I've owned an iPod for two years now and love it -- even more so now that I've installed iTunes on my PC and now have a commute (and books from audible.com). However, my home PC (a laptop) is fading from lack of hard-drive space and a smorgasbord of Windows patches and other security-software installs. Having convinced my wife that the home PC is toast, I'm ready for a desktop. The only answer is the Apple. Why? Because 90% of what we use it for at home is pictures (50%+), Internet, and music. the other 9% is money management (via Microsoft Money). So why get a PC and have to spend a inordinate amount of time to fix it when I can buy the Mac and have a PC designed for what I use it for? I can then use my work laptop (Windows, of course) for hardcore spreadsheet work.
Dan Decker writes: I was a total PC user who often made fun of the granola crowd that always sung the praises of their precious Apple computers. I was offended when my dad, a college professor, made his first computer purchase seven years ago -- a Mac. I was so ready to teach him all about the wonderful world of PCs and all they had to offer. Well, I hate to admit it, but in this case, father really did know best.
I bought my first iPod about a year ago. This brought me into the Apple store, where I learned of the brave new world of Macintosh computers. Computers in my universe serve two functions. In business, I spend 99% of my time in either the Microsoft Office suite (Word, Excel, and PowerPoint) or Lotus Notes. On a home computer, I utilize digital photography and Internet browsing. I also like to do online banking and my taxes with the computer. I knew that Apple set the standard with respect to the digital entertainment world, but when I found out that both Lotus Notes and all of the Microsoft Office suite could now be utilized seamlessly between Macs and PCs, the entire paradigm changed.
With those hurdles cleared, now I could address things like the spyware, worms and viruses that I found myself constantly battling with my PCs. I had four PCs networked at my house, and even though I ran the latest version of Norton and AdAware, I still found my machines clogged with spyware and pop-ups to the point that I had to reformat the hard drives every couple of months. A task I appreciated doing about as much as cleaning the gutters. I discovered that with a Mac, these irritating and frankly dangerous problems were all but eliminated.
So I did it. I took the plunge and bought an eMac for my son to replace a two-year-old Dell. At first he complained and begged his older sister to switch, as she had a almost-new Sony PC. After about three days I noticed his complaints had gone silent, as he made the switch from a Windows XP environment to Mac OS X. I too was learning how similar yet different these to machines were to operate. By the end of the week, he was singing the praises of his new Mac, and getting his older sister's attention -- her system was starting to slow down due to a nasty worm. By the end of the month, she was ready to jettison her PC.
Ten months later, I have just installed my fourth Mac, donating the PCs to my son's school. I couldn't be more satisfied. The bottom line is, they just work. Plug them in and they do what they say they can do. I no longer dread the thought of spending half my weekend trying to find reinstallation disks.
* * *
Other readers reported switching to the Apple world, but not for iPod-related reasons.
Greg Chirpich writes: My wife and I don't own an iPod. We did just get our new G5, replacing a Windows-based machine. The reason was a confluence of events: the proliferation of viruses and spyware; the sleek, quiet, space-saving design of the G5; the Bluetooth wireless; and the desire to experiment with digital photography. Our 23-year-old has asked for an iPod for Christmas. Myself, I like iPhoto. Note to self: Research/buy Apple stock.
John Parsons writes: My wife and I each have our own PCs at home, and we're sick of the viruses, spyware and crashes. Sixty days from today we'll be using two 20" iMac G5s. By the way, neither of us has an iPod. We're still lost in the 90s playing CDs.
Seth Weinberger writes: For 20 years I have purchased countless PCs for our family of four, each of whom wanted each successive wave of Intel and Windows innovations. We knew there were Macs out there, but they never were much of a consideration, because we were connected to a PC world at work, at school and with friends and family. In the last few weeks, three of us have switched to a Mac, and the fourth will do so soon. In the blink of an eye we have gone from all-Redmond to all-Cupertino, and we are not looking back.
As you correctly pointed out, the switch is not the result of one factor; it is a confluence of factors. The biggest factor is the spyware and viruses in the PC world that this year turned me into an almost-full-time computer maintenance man in my own home.
Michael Wyatt writes: I recently stood in a CompUSA store in Colorado Springs for 30 minutes on a Saturday. I had gone to browse the Mac software section and ended up converting two PC users (one with three PCs at home) to Macs. Both had the same issues you've outlined: fear, uncertainty, and doubt caused by the tidal wave of viruses, spyware, and malware. They were already ready to convert -- it's easier when you hear it from an user rather than a salesperson.
Mike Nemeth writes: A year ago if you told me that I would ever be using a Mac instead of a PC I would have told you that you were nuts. I had just purchased a top-end, name-brand PC with all of the bells and whistles and looked forward to all the neat things I could do with all of the new capabilities. Once I installed the virus protection, the firewall protection, the spyware sniffers, and pop-up blockers I had a system so unstable and requiring so much support that I never had time to use the new capabilities! In desperation I looked for an alternative and a friend showed me his Mac. Since then I've purchased a Mac for the home and haven't had a single regret.
Gerald Artman writes: I work on a college campus and all I see are iPods. Those iPods have initiated the purchase of iBooks, iMacs and Powerbooks. After all, Apple ran a promotion last year that if you bought a Mac you would get $200 towards an iPod. Furthermore, what would make parents happier than buying only one computer that will last for the four or five years when their son or daughter are away at school and does not require dad to make a trip up to campus to fix it every other weekend? I can clearly see the emergence of Apple and a shift in the power paradigm.
Herman A. Johnson writes: This fall I purchased my college-senior daughter an iBook after three years of doing phone support on a troublesome Windows ME/laptop combination -- a version of Windows which lasted only a short time, and I know why.
Dealing with the Apple computer and the company has been a real pleasure after years of Windows machines. The Apple OS X operating system is what Windows would like to be. The free support at the Apple store (a lot of in-store free training) make the higher price an easier pill to swallow and the fact that the operating system, the hardware and a majority of the application software is from Apple has been a real relief. File portability has been a cinch.
I am a practicing engineer and use many programs, including AutoCAD, which are a long way from ever running on an Apple. (I need to try the Apple PC emulation.) If the business software were not a problem, I would have converted to an Apple for personal use already.
Ack! Windows ME! Bad flashbacks!
Tom Williams writes: My family went from being a Windows household to a Mac household over the past two years. The dénouement was the hideous crash-prone Windows 98 operating system. The system gradually developed virtual arterial sclerosis and slowed to a crawl, in time becoming useless. New PC software upgrades became impossible as the system became increasingly unstable despite gobs of memory. The system would crash several times a day and have to be rebooted.
We started by getting a 700 Megahertz iBook for our son to take to France for a school-year-abroad program. It only crashed twice in three years! I was so impressed that I bought an iMac for our home which has never crashed over the last 18 months. Then I bought a new iBook a few months ago for my wife and daughter, and am actively considering getting another iMac for personal use.
If our company's accounting software were ever available in an OSX version, I would switch our 10 PCs to Macs in a heartbeat as well. I estimate that it costs $900 per year just to maintain each of the Windows PCs.
Ack! Windows 98! Bad flashbacks!
Some folks sound like they want to switch, but still have reservations:
Dave Friedman writes: You are absolutely right about Apple. But I still use Windows. I have numerous old Access databases that I've used, and still use from time to time and there is no equivalent product (of which I am aware) out there for the Mac. I keep hoping that the Virtual PC emulator available for the Mac will speed up so that memory intensive programs like Access (which can rival Photoshop for memory demands) can be used on a Mac. But, alas, that has not happened yet.
Jeff Taylor writes: My wife and I recently "switched" to the Mac and we are loving it. I love the stability and elegance of the operating system as well as the great bundled applications. My wife loves the iTunes music store and is becoming quite proficient at purchasing her music online and burning her own mix CDs. We both love our iPod and enjoying taking nearly our entire music collection with us whenever we travel or are otherwise away from home. The only problem I have is that I still can't seem to get away from the Microsoft hegemony due to the pervasiveness of MS Office and the fact that I have to use Windows at my work. Lest you think I'm a complete Mac bigot, there are still problems with the Mac due to its almost cult status. Software drivers for common peripherals seem to take much longer, if they are available at all. There is a lot of software that is PC-only which is also frustrating. I can run Virtual PC, but that defeats half of the purpose.
Neema Aghamohammadi writes: I believe that a small but significant number of Windows-iPod users will make the switch. But it will be delayed. I think that may people purchased computers in the 2000-2002 time period. Their iPod purchase will make some realize that their machines are not up to the task of encoding their CD collections. At the same time, they may be playing with digital cameras. This will lead to a short-term increase in upgrades. Most will not switch to a Mac at this time and will proceed with another Windows-based computer.
However, the iPod and repeated exposure to Apple portals (iTunes, iPod, Apple stores) will slowly make them more receptive to the Apple brand. The continued security and virus risks will continue to influence their thoughts on Windows computers. Over time (three to six months), they will conclude that maybe the Mac may be worthwhile. However, they just upgraded their computer so they will not be in the market for a new computer.
For this reason, I believe that while there will be a halo effect, it will be gradual and occur later than most analysts predict.
* * *
Of course, not everybody agreed with our hypothesis.
Santo Cuollo writes: I am looking to replace my aged Windows 95 machine, and the Apple products are attractive for many reasons. The problem with moving to an Apple? I can get a Windows machine from Dell, also reliable and reputable, for half the price. And when I visit an Apple store, or the Apple Web site, I see nothing to ease my wallet pain: no financing, no discounted bundling. Apple will not become a household name until they are willing to drive out cost from their processes and offer a "value" machine, and something more attractive than the years-old eMac. They have the better product -- now they need to offer the better value.
Doug Williams writes: The iPod won't make Apple PCs cheaper and won't help Apple PCs match the software selection of Windows machines. If I changed to a Mac, I would have to change professions too.
Charles Weaver writes: I haven't felt the need to buy a music player yet, but I do buy music online. I have stopped buying from iTunes because its songs can only be played on iPods and with iTunes. I would never buy an iPod for the same reason: I could only play music that I bought from iTunes on it along with MP3s that I ripped from CD's. When Apple decides to join the rest of the world, separate its hardware and software, and embrace open standards, it will become truly successful. If it continues its elitist approach it will continue to appeal mainly to, well, the elite.
Michael Burns writes: Did you contact Dell and ask them how the Dell DJ is selling? Currently they are on a one-month back order on all of their players and the are sold out of refurbished players. Oprah may have helped more than you suspect. I think Apple has a better chance of becoming the new Sony then it does of taking away significant market share from Microsoft.
Dave Chomas writes: You have succumbed to marketing hype. Apple preaches openness, but they're more closed than Microsoft. They will never learn -- they blew it by keeping everything in house with the Mac and now they're doing it again with the iPod. They need to let people buy music from anywhere, not just iTunes. They make next to nothing on the songs anyway -- if you could buy AAC-formatted songs from Amazon, Wal-Mart, etc. they would truly own the market for years to come. Once people truly begin to buy a lot of music online, they'll begin looking at other technology/players. Eventually, the other guys will get it and come up with cool designs: The Rio Carbon and Creative Zen Micro are getting there. While bigger hard drives may not be cool enough for you, removable batteries like the Zen Micro's should be. Apple, are you listening?
Mike Pisarczyk writes: In 1992, as a senior in college, I bought my first Dell. It was the computer that nearly every company I was interviewing with used, and by then ran all the latest games. I just couldn't stomach the idea of buying a Mac and having to buy new Apple software to replace my old Apple software. Since then I have bought another three or four Dells and had a raft of PC-compatible computers at work. Color me converted.
Until Apple licenses their designs and allows for some competition, they will languish with a small portion of the market. The cost difference is still too real. You might be right, Apple might have a real renaissance, but I will be following the revolution. Apple and its sometimes-foolish internal decisions fooled me once. I'm going to be waiting a long time to make sure that they don't fool me again.
Thanks to everybody who wrote in.
iPod "halo" effect according to WSJ...
REAL TIME EXCHANGE
By TIM HANRAHAN AND JASON FRY
Readers Weigh In on Apple
And Possibility of 'Halo Effect'
December 23, 2004
In Monday's column, we predicted that the combination of the iPod's popularity and the increasing worry over viruses, security holes and spyware in Windows PCs will lead to the second coming of Apple Computer as a home-computing power.
To say that struck a chord would be putting it mildly. Boy, did we ever get mail -- including a significant number of people who said that the iPod, Windows security concerns or a combination of the two had made them switch to a Mac or plan to do so. We also got letter from readers who disagreed with our hypothesis.
On to the letters, some of which have been edited. You can always drop us a line at realtime@wsj.com2 -- comments will be posted here in Real Time Exchange on Thursdays. Thanks to everybody who wrote in. Remember: If you don't want your comments considered for Real Time Exchange, please make that clear.
* * *
You want your halo effect? Here's your halo effect. (Note to Apple: People named Michael seem particularly willing to switch.)
Michael D. Sullivan writes: Our household is solidly Windows-centric, with five Windows XP systems in place. We've never had an Apple computer. In the past year, we have bought four iPods (one to replace a stolen one), and I wouldn't be surprised if Santa brought a fifth one. The free iTunes software for Windows is the best advertising Apple could want. It's easy to use and intuitive, unlike much of the Windows software from other companies. Our three iPod users use iTunes, of course -- but so do I, the lone non-iPod user. It's much better than the alternatives from Nero and Microsoft for my purposes. As a result, I have been much more open to Apple computers than I was before. My wife is getting an iBook for Christmas, and we will consider Apple computers when we replace our Windows machines. The iPod has successfully breached the Windows-centrism of our family.
Michael P. Walton writes: As a lifelong Windows user, I was tired of the constant barrage of viruses and spyware. It got to the point where I felt like I needed to be a programmer to keep my Windows PC operational. After receiving an iPod as a gift, I was inspired to research other Apple products. In the last two months I've purchased an iMac G5 for my office and an eMac for home, both replacing Windows machines. I'm amazed at the elegance, simplicity and ease of use of these products.
Michael Borch writes: I have four kids and four iPods, including my own. I also own a Sony camera and video products and am increasingly frustrated by their inability to talk to my H-P PCs. (I own three of those.) Just yesterday I made the decision to buy an Apple laptop to marry the music and the video components.
Gary Bradt writes: I am a 48-year-old life-long PC guy who made the switch to Apple this year because PC Armageddon is here: Despite diligently loading it with antivirus, antispyware, antieverything protection, my PC flailed and crashed as consistently and reliably as those balsa gliders that I made as a kid. I've made the switch to Apple, I'm happy, and I'm never going back. I should add that my 13-year-old daughter and most of her friends have an iPod at the top of their Christmas lists this year. These are the same kids who will be computer consumers in the very near future.
Rick Duffy writes: Last year when I purchased a new PC I gave serious consideration to buying an Apple. The cost was the major hurdle for me at the time. Since then I have used iTunes for ripping and organizing my CD collection and with my new iPod Mini under my Christmas tree I'll get even closer to Apple. I have three-year-old twins who will soon be learning how to use a computer, and I feel my home network will be safer with the kids using a Mac vs. a PC. The main reason for my PC purchase last year was for editing photos and video and creating my digital-music library. I've tried many different software packages trying to find something like the Apple iLife package, but nothing comes close. My next PC purchase will be a Mac.
Dale Adrion writes: Just yesterday I was talking to a friend about the iPod: how brilliant it was, how there really was no competitor for it, and how it makes me think that it's time to switch to the Mac. As this discussion was taking place, my Windows-based PC with the P4 and 512MB of memory, etc., etc., was struggling to send a graphics job to my "professional series" color printer. I know that somehow I have once again picked up something causing the computer to run slower and slower, something that my antispyware program, antivirus program and firewall cannot find. Who needs it? The reality is that for what I and most others do at home the Mac makes perfect sense.
William Vaughan writes: This past year I had a friend with an iPod who was absolutely in love with it along with his PowerBook. Although I constantly told him that there was nothing special about the iPod as opposed to other related products, I couldn't help but be amazed by the ease of use of both machines. I eventually purchased an iPod just to see what the big deal was and I was amazed. It has become an integral part of my life. No longer is there a CD changer in my car nor in my home. No longer do I struggle to write down tons of meeting notes -- I use my iPod with iTalk to catch those details so that I can concentrate on the bigger picture.
But the more important insight is that now I want other Apple products because I am so impressed with how the iPod not only revolutionized the music industry, but also simplified different aspects of my life. The iMac is my next major purchase, I can't wait to get it, and it's all because of the iPod.
Tracy Clark writes: I have been a PC user for the last 20 years. Windows has always been fine for me as I did not use a computer for much more than the Internet. However, in the last three months I have purchased and iPod as well as an iBook and truly love them both. I will never return to the world of Windows, except at work where I have no say in the matter. I have even considered switching my HP iPAQ 4155 handheld (the name is still pretty cool) to a Palm-based unit as it works better with the Mac.
Jason Sindler writes: I've owned an iPod for two years now and love it -- even more so now that I've installed iTunes on my PC and now have a commute (and books from audible.com). However, my home PC (a laptop) is fading from lack of hard-drive space and a smorgasbord of Windows patches and other security-software installs. Having convinced my wife that the home PC is toast, I'm ready for a desktop. The only answer is the Apple. Why? Because 90% of what we use it for at home is pictures (50%+), Internet, and music. the other 9% is money management (via Microsoft Money). So why get a PC and have to spend a inordinate amount of time to fix it when I can buy the Mac and have a PC designed for what I use it for? I can then use my work laptop (Windows, of course) for hardcore spreadsheet work.
Dan Decker writes: I was a total PC user who often made fun of the granola crowd that always sung the praises of their precious Apple computers. I was offended when my dad, a college professor, made his first computer purchase seven years ago -- a Mac. I was so ready to teach him all about the wonderful world of PCs and all they had to offer. Well, I hate to admit it, but in this case, father really did know best.
I bought my first iPod about a year ago. This brought me into the Apple store, where I learned of the brave new world of Macintosh computers. Computers in my universe serve two functions. In business, I spend 99% of my time in either the Microsoft Office suite (Word, Excel, and PowerPoint) or Lotus Notes. On a home computer, I utilize digital photography and Internet browsing. I also like to do online banking and my taxes with the computer. I knew that Apple set the standard with respect to the digital entertainment world, but when I found out that both Lotus Notes and all of the Microsoft Office suite could now be utilized seamlessly between Macs and PCs, the entire paradigm changed.
With those hurdles cleared, now I could address things like the spyware, worms and viruses that I found myself constantly battling with my PCs. I had four PCs networked at my house, and even though I ran the latest version of Norton and AdAware, I still found my machines clogged with spyware and pop-ups to the point that I had to reformat the hard drives every couple of months. A task I appreciated doing about as much as cleaning the gutters. I discovered that with a Mac, these irritating and frankly dangerous problems were all but eliminated.
So I did it. I took the plunge and bought an eMac for my son to replace a two-year-old Dell. At first he complained and begged his older sister to switch, as she had a almost-new Sony PC. After about three days I noticed his complaints had gone silent, as he made the switch from a Windows XP environment to Mac OS X. I too was learning how similar yet different these to machines were to operate. By the end of the week, he was singing the praises of his new Mac, and getting his older sister's attention -- her system was starting to slow down due to a nasty worm. By the end of the month, she was ready to jettison her PC.
Ten months later, I have just installed my fourth Mac, donating the PCs to my son's school. I couldn't be more satisfied. The bottom line is, they just work. Plug them in and they do what they say they can do. I no longer dread the thought of spending half my weekend trying to find reinstallation disks.
* * *
Other readers reported switching to the Apple world, but not for iPod-related reasons.
Greg Chirpich writes: My wife and I don't own an iPod. We did just get our new G5, replacing a Windows-based machine. The reason was a confluence of events: the proliferation of viruses and spyware; the sleek, quiet, space-saving design of the G5; the Bluetooth wireless; and the desire to experiment with digital photography. Our 23-year-old has asked for an iPod for Christmas. Myself, I like iPhoto. Note to self: Research/buy Apple stock.
John Parsons writes: My wife and I each have our own PCs at home, and we're sick of the viruses, spyware and crashes. Sixty days from today we'll be using two 20" iMac G5s. By the way, neither of us has an iPod. We're still lost in the 90s playing CDs.
Seth Weinberger writes: For 20 years I have purchased countless PCs for our family of four, each of whom wanted each successive wave of Intel and Windows innovations. We knew there were Macs out there, but they never were much of a consideration, because we were connected to a PC world at work, at school and with friends and family. In the last few weeks, three of us have switched to a Mac, and the fourth will do so soon. In the blink of an eye we have gone from all-Redmond to all-Cupertino, and we are not looking back.
As you correctly pointed out, the switch is not the result of one factor; it is a confluence of factors. The biggest factor is the spyware and viruses in the PC world that this year turned me into an almost-full-time computer maintenance man in my own home.
Michael Wyatt writes: I recently stood in a CompUSA store in Colorado Springs for 30 minutes on a Saturday. I had gone to browse the Mac software section and ended up converting two PC users (one with three PCs at home) to Macs. Both had the same issues you've outlined: fear, uncertainty, and doubt caused by the tidal wave of viruses, spyware, and malware. They were already ready to convert -- it's easier when you hear it from an user rather than a salesperson.
Mike Nemeth writes: A year ago if you told me that I would ever be using a Mac instead of a PC I would have told you that you were nuts. I had just purchased a top-end, name-brand PC with all of the bells and whistles and looked forward to all the neat things I could do with all of the new capabilities. Once I installed the virus protection, the firewall protection, the spyware sniffers, and pop-up blockers I had a system so unstable and requiring so much support that I never had time to use the new capabilities! In desperation I looked for an alternative and a friend showed me his Mac. Since then I've purchased a Mac for the home and haven't had a single regret.
Gerald Artman writes: I work on a college campus and all I see are iPods. Those iPods have initiated the purchase of iBooks, iMacs and Powerbooks. After all, Apple ran a promotion last year that if you bought a Mac you would get $200 towards an iPod. Furthermore, what would make parents happier than buying only one computer that will last for the four or five years when their son or daughter are away at school and does not require dad to make a trip up to campus to fix it every other weekend? I can clearly see the emergence of Apple and a shift in the power paradigm.
Herman A. Johnson writes: This fall I purchased my college-senior daughter an iBook after three years of doing phone support on a troublesome Windows ME/laptop combination -- a version of Windows which lasted only a short time, and I know why.
Dealing with the Apple computer and the company has been a real pleasure after years of Windows machines. The Apple OS X operating system is what Windows would like to be. The free support at the Apple store (a lot of in-store free training) make the higher price an easier pill to swallow and the fact that the operating system, the hardware and a majority of the application software is from Apple has been a real relief. File portability has been a cinch.
I am a practicing engineer and use many programs, including AutoCAD, which are a long way from ever running on an Apple. (I need to try the Apple PC emulation.) If the business software were not a problem, I would have converted to an Apple for personal use already.
Ack! Windows ME! Bad flashbacks!
Tom Williams writes: My family went from being a Windows household to a Mac household over the past two years. The dénouement was the hideous crash-prone Windows 98 operating system. The system gradually developed virtual arterial sclerosis and slowed to a crawl, in time becoming useless. New PC software upgrades became impossible as the system became increasingly unstable despite gobs of memory. The system would crash several times a day and have to be rebooted.
We started by getting a 700 Megahertz iBook for our son to take to France for a school-year-abroad program. It only crashed twice in three years! I was so impressed that I bought an iMac for our home which has never crashed over the last 18 months. Then I bought a new iBook a few months ago for my wife and daughter, and am actively considering getting another iMac for personal use.
If our company's accounting software were ever available in an OSX version, I would switch our 10 PCs to Macs in a heartbeat as well. I estimate that it costs $900 per year just to maintain each of the Windows PCs.
Ack! Windows 98! Bad flashbacks!
Some folks sound like they want to switch, but still have reservations:
Dave Friedman writes: You are absolutely right about Apple. But I still use Windows. I have numerous old Access databases that I've used, and still use from time to time and there is no equivalent product (of which I am aware) out there for the Mac. I keep hoping that the Virtual PC emulator available for the Mac will speed up so that memory intensive programs like Access (which can rival Photoshop for memory demands) can be used on a Mac. But, alas, that has not happened yet.
Jeff Taylor writes: My wife and I recently "switched" to the Mac and we are loving it. I love the stability and elegance of the operating system as well as the great bundled applications. My wife loves the iTunes music store and is becoming quite proficient at purchasing her music online and burning her own mix CDs. We both love our iPod and enjoying taking nearly our entire music collection with us whenever we travel or are otherwise away from home. The only problem I have is that I still can't seem to get away from the Microsoft hegemony due to the pervasiveness of MS Office and the fact that I have to use Windows at my work. Lest you think I'm a complete Mac bigot, there are still problems with the Mac due to its almost cult status. Software drivers for common peripherals seem to take much longer, if they are available at all. There is a lot of software that is PC-only which is also frustrating. I can run Virtual PC, but that defeats half of the purpose.
Neema Aghamohammadi writes: I believe that a small but significant number of Windows-iPod users will make the switch. But it will be delayed. I think that may people purchased computers in the 2000-2002 time period. Their iPod purchase will make some realize that their machines are not up to the task of encoding their CD collections. At the same time, they may be playing with digital cameras. This will lead to a short-term increase in upgrades. Most will not switch to a Mac at this time and will proceed with another Windows-based computer.
However, the iPod and repeated exposure to Apple portals (iTunes, iPod, Apple stores) will slowly make them more receptive to the Apple brand. The continued security and virus risks will continue to influence their thoughts on Windows computers. Over time (three to six months), they will conclude that maybe the Mac may be worthwhile. However, they just upgraded their computer so they will not be in the market for a new computer.
For this reason, I believe that while there will be a halo effect, it will be gradual and occur later than most analysts predict.
* * *
Of course, not everybody agreed with our hypothesis.
Santo Cuollo writes: I am looking to replace my aged Windows 95 machine, and the Apple products are attractive for many reasons. The problem with moving to an Apple? I can get a Windows machine from Dell, also reliable and reputable, for half the price. And when I visit an Apple store, or the Apple Web site, I see nothing to ease my wallet pain: no financing, no discounted bundling. Apple will not become a household name until they are willing to drive out cost from their processes and offer a "value" machine, and something more attractive than the years-old eMac. They have the better product -- now they need to offer the better value.
Doug Williams writes: The iPod won't make Apple PCs cheaper and won't help Apple PCs match the software selection of Windows machines. If I changed to a Mac, I would have to change professions too.
Charles Weaver writes: I haven't felt the need to buy a music player yet, but I do buy music online. I have stopped buying from iTunes because its songs can only be played on iPods and with iTunes. I would never buy an iPod for the same reason: I could only play music that I bought from iTunes on it along with MP3s that I ripped from CD's. When Apple decides to join the rest of the world, separate its hardware and software, and embrace open standards, it will become truly successful. If it continues its elitist approach it will continue to appeal mainly to, well, the elite.
Michael Burns writes: Did you contact Dell and ask them how the Dell DJ is selling? Currently they are on a one-month back order on all of their players and the are sold out of refurbished players. Oprah may have helped more than you suspect. I think Apple has a better chance of becoming the new Sony then it does of taking away significant market share from Microsoft.
Dave Chomas writes: You have succumbed to marketing hype. Apple preaches openness, but they're more closed than Microsoft. They will never learn -- they blew it by keeping everything in house with the Mac and now they're doing it again with the iPod. They need to let people buy music from anywhere, not just iTunes. They make next to nothing on the songs anyway -- if you could buy AAC-formatted songs from Amazon, Wal-Mart, etc. they would truly own the market for years to come. Once people truly begin to buy a lot of music online, they'll begin looking at other technology/players. Eventually, the other guys will get it and come up with cool designs: The Rio Carbon and Creative Zen Micro are getting there. While bigger hard drives may not be cool enough for you, removable batteries like the Zen Micro's should be. Apple, are you listening?
Mike Pisarczyk writes: In 1992, as a senior in college, I bought my first Dell. It was the computer that nearly every company I was interviewing with used, and by then ran all the latest games. I just couldn't stomach the idea of buying a Mac and having to buy new Apple software to replace my old Apple software. Since then I have bought another three or four Dells and had a raft of PC-compatible computers at work. Color me converted.
Until Apple licenses their designs and allows for some competition, they will languish with a small portion of the market. The cost difference is still too real. You might be right, Apple might have a real renaissance, but I will be following the revolution. Apple and its sometimes-foolish internal decisions fooled me once. I'm going to be waiting a long time to make sure that they don't fool me again.
Thanks to everybody who wrote in.
Wow! IBM and Apple....oops, its OT...
Apple To Use Multi-OS Chip in Future Macs, IBM Reveals
, 12.22.04, 3:36 PM ET
The Mac Observer
Apple Computer will use a new PowerPC 970 processor in future Macs that will run multiple operating systems simultaneously, an executive of IBM's server technology division has revealed. Development of the new processor is close to being finished and will ship sometime in 2005, the company said.
Karl Freund, vice president of IBM eServer pSeries, told CNET News.com in an interview on Tuesday that its next generation PowerPC 970 chips, closely developed with Apple Computer, will use 'partitioning' technology known as virtualization. The virtualization technology, which has existed on mainframes for years, is a combination of software and hardware technologies that allow enterprises to run as many as ten 'virtual' servers on a single microprocessor.
Mr. Fruend said the goal is to incorporate virtualization technology into all its PowerPC processors.
But don't look for this new technology to appear in a Mac for some time. Currently, the technology is only available in certain models of IBMs blade servers and following testing and manufacturing, it would be at least another year or more before an Apple server product uses the technology, industry experts say.
At present, Apple uses the PowerPC 970FX in its desktop and server computers.
The Mac Observer: Daily Mac News, Reviews, and Tips. You'll Get Your Mac news Here From Now on. <a href=http://www.MacObserver.com</a>" target="_blank">http://www.macobserver.com>http://www.MacObserver.com</a>
Copyright 2004 The Mac Observer, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Or it could mean...
...that he had to leave in order for the next thing to happen. Notice that he was not replaced.
I think an acquisition is in the works.
This is interesting...
Form 8-K for PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORP
22-Dec-2004
Change in Directors or Principal Officers
ITEM 5.02 DEPARTURE OF DIRECTORS OR PRINCIPAL OFFICERS; ELECTION OF DIRECTORS; APPOINTMENT OF PRINCIPAL OFFICERS.
Due to time constraints, Donald Bernier resigned as Director and Chairman of the Board of Patriot Scientific Corporation effective December 20, 2004. Pursuant to the Company's by-laws, the Board of Directors has elected to defer any appointment of a replacement Chairman.
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/041222/ptsc.ob8-k.html
yukonwookie, I haven't the foggest idea...
...I'm sorry. But your thoughts seem accurate to me.
Wave Systems Corp. is offering certain purchasers (the "Purchasers") 5,484,790 shares of its Class A common stock pursuant to this prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus. The Class A common stock will be purchased at the negotiated price of $1.05 per share.
Our Class A common stock is traded on the Nasdaq National Market under the ticker symbol "WAVX." The last reported sales price of our Class A common stock on December 15, 2004, was $1.28 per share.
In connection with this offering, we will pay fees to JPC Capital Partners, Inc. (formerly known as Corpfin.com, Inc.) (the "placement agents"). See "Plan of Distribution" beginning on page S-6 of this prospectus supplement for more information regarding these arrangements.
Per Common Share Total Offering
Offering Price $ 1.05 $ 5,759,030
Placement Agent Fees $ 0.042 $ 230,361
Proceeds before expenses to us $ 1.008 $ 5,528,668
We estimate the total expenses of this offering, excluding the placement agents' fees will be approximately $65,000. The first delivery of the shares of Class A common stock being offered under this prospectus supplement was made to the Purchasers on December 17, 2004.
We may be unable to raise the $11.5 million of additional cash flow, which is necessary to continue as a going concern for the next twelve months.
Based upon our current expense forecast, we estimate that our current available capital, including the proceeds from the sale of 5,484,790 shares of common stock from this offering, is sufficient to fund Wave into April, 2005. In addition to our efforts to begin to generate revenue sufficient to fund our operations, or complete one or more commercial or strategic transactions, Wave is evaluating additional financing options to generate additional capital in order to continue as a going concern, to capitalize on business opportunities and market conditions and to insure the continued development of our technology, products and services. Furthermore, in May of 2003, we significantly reduced our cash burn rate, and although we have since had to increase expenditures to meet specific market demand, we may have to further reduce our cash burn rate if we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow to fund our current and forecasted operations. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow from revenue and other sources, we will likely pursue additional capital through equity or debt financings. We do not know if additional financing will be available or that, if available, it will be available on favorable terms. If we issue additional shares of our stock, our stockholders' ownership will be diluted, or the shares issued may have rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of our common stock. In addition, if we pursue debt financing, we may be required to pay interest costs. If we are not successful generating sufficient cash flow or obtaining additional funding, we will be unable to continue our operations, develop or enhance our products, take advantage of future opportunities, respond to competitive pressures and continue as a going concern.
THE OFFERING
Class A common stock offered 5,484,790 shares
Class A common stock to be outstanding after this offering
76,177,617 shares
Use of Proceeds
We intend to use the net proceeds from the sale of the securities offered by this prospectus supplement and the related accompanying prospectus to provide working capital for our business.
Nasdaq National Market symbol
WAVX
The information above is based on 70,692,287 shares of Class A common stock and 205,725 shares of Class B common stock outstanding as of October 31, 2004, and excludes:
•
11,522,357 shares of Class A common stock reserved for issuance upon the exercise of employee and director options outstanding.
•
6,715,596 shares of Class A common stock reserved for issuance under existing option plans.
•
184,365 shares of Class A common stock reserved for the exercise of warrants issued to consultants.
•
65,789 shares of Class A common stock reserved for the exercise of warrants issued to the holders of Wave's Series H Convertible Preferred Stock.
•
931,309 shares of Class A common stock reserved for the exercise of warrants issued in November 2003.
•
161,595 shares of Class A common stock reserved for the exercise of warrants issued to placement agents.
•
4,411,765 shares of Class A common stock reserved for the exercise of warrants issued on July 30, 2004.
To the extent that any of outstanding options are exercised, new options are issued under our stock incentive plans or we issue additional shares of common stock in the future, there will be further dilution to new investors.
USE OF PROCEEDS
We estimate that the net proceeds we will receive from this offering will be approximately $5,528,603, after deducting the estimated offering expenses. We will retain broad discretion over the use of the net proceeds from the sale of our Class A common stock offered hereby. We currently anticipate using the net proceeds from the sale of our Class A common stock hereby primarily for working capital.
We may also use a portion of the net proceeds to acquire or invest in businesses complementary to Wave's business, products and technologies. Although we have no specific arrangements with respect to acquisitions, we evaluate acquisition opportunities and engage in related discussions from time to time.
PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION
We have entered into a securities purchase agreement dated as of December 15, 2004 with certain purchasers (the "Purchasers") pursuant to which, subject to certain conditions, we have sold to the Purchasers, and the Purchasers purchased from us, 5,484,790 shares of Class A common stock offered hereby at $1.05 per share.
JPC Capital Partners, Inc. (formerly known as Corpfin.com, Inc.), referred to as the placement agents, has entered into a placement agency agreement with us in which they have agreed to act as placement agent in connection with the offering. The placement agent is using its best efforts to introduce us to selected institutional investors who will purchase the shares. The placement agent has no obligation to buy any of the shares from us.
The placement agency will be entitled to a fee of 4% of the gross subscription proceeds of this offering. We may not sell the entire amount of our Class A common stock offered pursuant to this prospectus supplement.
We negotiated the price for the Class A common stock offered in this offering with the Purchasers. The factors considered in determining the price included the recent market price of our Class A common stock, the general condition of the securities market at the time of this offering, the history of, and the prospects, for the industry in which we compete, our past and present operations, and our prospects for future revenues.
The placement agent may be deemed to be an underwriter within the meaning of Section 2(a)(11) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, and any fees or commissions received by it and any profit realized on the resale of the securities sold by it while acting as principal might be deemed to be underwriting discounts or commissions under the Securities Act. As underwriter, the placement agent would be required to comply with the requirements of the Securities Act and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, including, without limitation, Rule 415(a)(4) under the Securities Act and Rule 10b-5 and Regulation M under the Exchange Act. These rules and regulations may limit the timing of purchases and sales of shares of Class A common stock by the placement agent. Under these rules and regulations, the placement agent:
•
may not engage in any stabilization activity in connection with our securities; and
•
may not bid for or purchase any of our securities or attempt to induce any person to purchase any of our securities, other than as permitted under the Exchange Act, until it has completed its participation in the distribution.
The placement agency agreement with JPC Capital Partners, Inc. was included as an exhibit to our Current Report on Form 8-K that was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 2, 2004.
The transfer agent for our Class A common stock is American Stock Transfer Corporation.
We may be unable to raise the $8.5 million of additional cash flow, which is necessary to continue as a going concern for the next twelve months.
Based upon our current expense forecast, we estimate that our current available capital is sufficient to fund Wave into July, 2004. In addition to our efforts to begin to generate revenue sufficient to fund our operations, sell some or all of our marketable securities valued at $6.3 million as of December 31, 2003, or complete one or more commercial or strategic transactions, Wave is evaluating additional financing options to generate additional capital in order to continue as a going concern, to capitalize on business opportunities and market conditions and to insure the continued development of our technology, products and services. Furthermore, in May of 2003, we significantly reduced our cash burn rate, and although we have since had to increase expenditures to meet specific market demand, we may have to further reduce our cash burn rate, if we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow to fund our current and forecasted operations. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow from revenue and other sources, we will likely pursue additional capital through equity or debt financings. We do not know if additional financing will be available or that, if available, it will be available on favorable terms. If we issue additional shares of our stock, our stockholders' ownership will be diluted, or the shares issued may have rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of our common stock. In addition, if we pursue debt financing we may be required to pay interest costs. If we are not successful generating sufficient cash flow or obtaining additional funding, we will be unable to continue our operations, develop or enhance our products, take advantage of future opportunities, respond to competitive pressures and continue as a going concern.
USE OF PROCEEDS
Except as may be otherwise set forth in the prospectus supplement accompanying this prospectus, we will use the net proceeds we receive from sales of the securities offered hereby for general corporate purposes, including the development and support of our sales and marketing organization, support for our continuing research and development efforts and the funding of acquired related businesses and technologies.
DESCRIPTION OF CAPITAL STOCK
Following is a summary of the material terms of our capital stock, including our Class A common stock. The summary is not complete and should be read in conjunction with our Restated Certificate of Incorporation, filed as Exhibit 3.1 to our Registration Statement on Form S-1 (SEC File No. 33-75286).
Authorized and Outstanding Shares
Our authorized capital stock consists of 120,000,000 shares of Class A common stock, $.01 par value per share; 13,000,000 shares of Class B common stock, $.01 par value per share; and 2,000,000 shares of preferred stock, $.01 par value.
As of March 1, 2004, a total of 67,133,415 shares of our Class A common stock and 205,725 shares of our Class B common stock were issued and outstanding.
Common Stock
Wave's Class A common stock and Class B common stock are equal in all respects except for voting rights, conversion rights and restrictions on transferability, as discussed more fully below.
Voting Rights
The voting powers, preferences and relative rights of the Class A common stock and the Class B common stock are identical in all respects, subject to the following provisions. Holders of Class A common stock have one vote per share on all matters submitted to a vote of the stockholders of Wave. Holders of Class B common stock have one vote per share on all matters submitted to a vote of the stockholders, except that holders of Class B common stock will have five votes per share on the following matters: (i) any election of directors where one or more directors has been nominated by any person or persons other than Wave's Board of Directors or in the event of an "Election Contest" (as described in Rule 14a-11 promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) or other solicitation of proxies or consents by or on behalf of any person or persons other than Wave's Board of Directors for the purpose of electing directors; and (ii) any vote on a merger, consolidation
10
or reorganization of Wave or similar business combination or transaction, or any sale, lease, exchange or other disposition of all or substantially all of the assets of Wave to or with any other person, if the particular business combination or other transaction has not been recommended by Wave's Board of Directors. In addition, holders of Class B common stock will have five votes per share on all matters submitted to a vote of the stockholders of Wave in the event that any person or group (within the meaning of Section 13(d)(3) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) acquires beneficial ownership of 20% or more of the outstanding voting securities of Wave (provided that this provision will not apply to any person who beneficially owns 3% or more of the outstanding voting securities at the time of the closing of this offering or any group including any such person). No class of outstanding common stock alone is entitled to elect any directors. There is no cumulative voting with respect to the election of directors.
http://www.secinfo.com/dVut2.114uw.htm
Weby, I'm not so sure...
...now I freely admit that I could be wrong on this, but it seems to me that this is not as much a web-service as it is authentication and encryption. That they are using the CAC card as a token for access leads me to believe this.
There may be web-services involved, but based upon what I know (in a very limited sort of way) it seems to fall into the CAC world.
Best Regards for sure!
OT...Despite spinoff of PC group, IBM to scale up PC manufacturing
[bolds are mine]
12/20/04
By Susan M. Menke,
PostNewsweek Tech Media
When IBM Corp. spins off its PC design, sales, support and management teams to Lenovo Group Ltd. next year for about $1.75 billion, IBM will retain a 19 percent share in the new manufacturing business.
"There will be a large number of collaborative elements," including IBM research, said Bob Galush, who will leave his vice president post in the IBM PC division to assume a similar role with Lenovo.
"IBM will provide many services" to the new enterprise, which will be located in Armonk, N.Y., with manufacturing as before in Raleigh, N.C., he said. "Lenovo is the No. 1 PC company in China, and it has a very effective manufacturing platform and scale. But its business is desktop, not notebook, PCs so we will make a stronger whole."
Also, Galush said, Lenovo’s Chinese products use processors from Advanced Micro Devices Inc. of Sunnyvale, Calif., whereas IBM products have used only Intel Corp. chips.
"Federal buyers should not see a change," he said. "Buyers determine what a manufacturer ships." IBM’s hard drive protection system and embedded security will continue in the Lenovo PCs.
Galush said he has already met with existing Army, Navy and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency customers about the change.
Robert McCann, sales vice president of IBM reseller iGov of McLean, Va., said, "We’re a premier IBM partner and will continue to be so. We’re not concerned" about the Lenovo sale, set to take place in midyear.
IGov sells IBM products on several governmentwide acquisition contracts including the General Services Administration IT Schedule, the National Institutes of Health Electronic Commodities Store III and NASA’s Science and Engineering Workstation Procurement III.
The reseller’s most recent deal was an Air Force Standard Systems Group blanket purchasing agreement, signed last week, for IBM desktop and notebook PCs and servers as well as Tablet PCs from Toshiba America Information Systems Inc.
http://www.washingtontechnology.com/news/1_1/daily_news/25178-1.html
OT...The Second Coming Of Apple [bolds are mine]
12/20/2004
Dow Jones News Services
(Copyright © 2004 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
By Tim Hanrahan And Jason Fry
Of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE
NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Apple Computer Inc. (AAPL) has been reborn - and now it's on the verge of a renaissance.
Yes, we know Apple's share of the PC market remains little more than a rounding error: According to market-research company International Data Corp., its share of PC shipments hovers around 2% in both the home and commercial sectors, with more than half the commercial numbers coming from educational sales. But we see a confluence of events that we think will substantially change some of those numbers, ushering in an Apple tidal wave that will remake the home PC landscape.
Like a lot of commentators, we grew up during the Apple-Microsoft holy wars, in which you were either a Mac person - caricatured as an arty, anticorporate granola - or a Windows person - a troglodyte with a high tolerance for crashes. The idea that one could be both? Borderline perversion.
In those early days, hardware and software standards all but ensured the camps stayed apart. File formats for documents were different, and you'd have as much luck hooking a Mac up to a Windows network as you would using it to communicate with an alien spaceship. (Oh, wait, that worked in "Independence Day.") Like a lot of computer users of the time, we wound up as Windows people by default: Our friends and colleagues had Windows PCs, so if we wanted to share documents with them, we had to have a Windows PC too.
But that hasn't been true in years. The file formats most people use in their daily computing lives are now standard and universal, and Apple and Windows machines co-exist happily in countless corporate and home networks. As time marches on, fewer and fewer computer users remember Apple's Soviet-leader-style parade of leaders or care about ancient debates over who ripped off the graphical user interface from whom.
Steve Jobs's 1997 return to Apple restored the company's business focus and revived its reputation for making easy-to-use products with great style. That's the one-two punch that powers Apple's legendary brand, and without it none of what's followed would have happened. But the first big wave hinting at what's coming wasn't the iMac or the G4 Cube - nice machines that signaled the company was here to stay, but weren't the stuff of revolutions. It was - and is - the iPod.
For all intents and purposes, the iPod is digital music. Apple has more than 90% of the market share for hard-drive-based digital-music players, and both the iPod and iPod Mini are in short supply this holiday season, and with good reason. The iPod embodies everything Apple's always claimed to be: Its cool design makes it a must-have accessory for hipsters, and its ease of use makes it the default choice for newcomers intimidated by digital music. With the success of the iPod mini spinoff, other ideas are generating excitement: While Apple has rejected the idea of a video-player iPod, other rumors being batted around with varying levels of credibility - include an iPod that uses flash memory, a satellite-radio iPod and even an iPod/iTunes phone.
As Apple keeps innovating, its challengers keep competing like engineers, thinking that advantages in storage capacity or battery life can make silk purses out of ugly, hard-to-use sows' ears of machines. When people would rather spend more than $130 above list price on eBay for your product than buy someone else's comparatively priced or cheaper product, you own the category. (Even a holiday endorsement from Oprah Winfrey hasn't appeared to help Dell Inc.'s (DELL) DJ music player dent iPod's dominance.)
The iPod has drawn well-deserved raves, as has the multimedia suite of iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto and iDVD. Still, the company's share of the desktop PC market has remained stalled, leading some to wonder if Apple isn't rmorphing into a digital-entertainment company, with the computers that made it famous becoming an afterthought. To us, that's a strange way to look at it. After all, home computing itself is morphing into digital entertainment, with all the usual suspects trying to provide software and hardware for managing music, photos and movies and marrying the PC with various pieces of consumer electronics. While nobody's found the perfect formula just yet, so far Apple's done a better job than anyone else has.
Right now that success has meant big gains for Apple stock but hasn't translated into a big jump in sales of Apple PCs - but iPod's success is part of the reason that jump may be coming. One of the more-interesting bits of recent speculation has been about the "halo effect," which holds that the runaway success of iPods could drive sales of Apple computers: In a Piper Jaffray survey conducted last month, 6% of iPod users said they'd moved from PCs to Macs after buying the digital-music players, and another 7% said they planned to do so in the next 12 months. We believe in the halo effect: While there are always some people making such the PC-to-Mac switch, we think the iPod is making many more people consider a move to the Mac world. Its success has meant Apple products in what were once Windows-only homes, paving the way for other products - where iPods lead, wireless-networking products tend to follow.
Still, iPods and wireless networking are on the periphery of digital entertainment, whose center remains the Windows-dominated PC. Apple's operating system and machines are generally hailed as superior to their Windows counterparts, but much as it'll pain the Appletistas to hear it (again), that superiority isn't enough to cause enough people to switch camps. For things to truly change, there has to be a fundamental and widely perceived problem with Windows, one that goes beyond geekspeak about operating systems.
Guess what? There is such a problem. In fact, it's the biggest issue in tech today: the drumbeat of viruses, spyware and other maladies that plague Windows and are practically nonexistent in the Apple world. It's true that this perceived immunity is partially a reflection of Apple's small market share, but that won't matter to consumers tired of computing anxiety and pain. Sure, it's a lot to ask folks who've lived in the Windows world for years to switch - Apple tried that campaign a couple of years ago, with little success. The difference between then and now is that the combination of Windows' security woes and greater familiarity with Apple products, a combination we think will be what Apple needs to unlock that market. It's happening slowly right now, but it's happening, and it'll gain momentum in the months to come. While it won't alter the commercial-PC landscape at first, it'll put Apple in a position to consider whether it wants to try to make inroads into that market as well.
If we can channel our new "Return of the King" DVDs, the board is set and the pieces are moving. The endgame's a ways off, but we think we it'll be a shocker: the second coming of Apple as a home-computing power.
(Are we right about Apple's computing renaissance, or have we finally drunk the Kool-Aid the Appletistas have been offering us all these years? Write to us at realtime@wsj.com, and we'll post selected comments this Thursday. If you want to share your thoughts but don't want your letter published, please make that clear.)
-Write to Tim Hanrahan and Jason Fry at realtime@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
12-20-04 0834ET
Pursuant to the order, Wave will receive approximately $80,000 within thirty days.
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/041220/wavx8-k.html
helpfulbacteria, you might be interested to know...
...that coincident to this, the IEEE endeavor - Baseline Operating System Security (BOSS) WG was suspended because the NIST pulled out.
And there was a meeting at West Point only a few months ago:
http://bosswg.org/meetings/index.html
kantbleveit, yes. Awk and I just had a brief discussion early this morning regarding the rumor that Apple and Motorola are teaming on a mobile phone (iPhone) that will play iTunes music from both the PC and Mac. A number of folks here are anti-Apple so please take any further questions to me privately and I will try to answer them or refer them to others who might be able to.
Awk, you might be interested in the component list...
...for the current iPod:
per Barron's:
Component's Manufacturer / Component's Cost
PortalPlayer / $6.18
Texas Instruments / $5.24
Samsung / $5.23
Hitachi Semi / $2.39
Philips Semi / $2.37
Cypress Semi / $2.04
Sharp / $1.49
Synaptics / $1.34
Wolfson Micro / $0.80
National Semi / $0.36
Linear Technology / $0.27
I wonder how many of those component suppliers will carry over to this new MOT phone? I wonder about NSM, TI, and a couple of others in that group in particular.
This Barrons list is from another board and I do not guarantee accuracy:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=4872547
Cheers!
Apologies if already posted...Forbes article on iPhone
Get Ready To Call ITunes
Arik Hesseldahl, 12.16.04, 2:00 PM ET
NEW YORK - Apple Computer and Motorola could soon show us the mobile phone they are developing to play music purchased from Apple's iTunes online music store.
"We've said we have something coming on this in the first half of 2005 and we're definitely on schedule for that. Hopefully you'll be able to see more about it soon," says Eddy Cue, vice president in charge of applications at Apple (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ).
If the phone is as far along as Cue suggests, then Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs would be likely to announce it during his annual keynote speech at MacWorld Expo, scheduled for Jan. 11, 2005 in San Francisco.
In true Apple style, Cue declined to say whether Jobs will indeed address the phone at that event. "What we've talked about is a something that is valuable for the mass market," Cue says. "It has to be a phone in the middle-tier of the market, not a $500-tier phone. It has to be very seamless to use. And we're very happy with the results."
Apple announced its intentions to bring music from its iTunes Music Store to Motorola (nyse: MOT - news - people ) mobile phones on July 26 (see: "Ringing And Singing"). Jobs appeared at Motorola's suburban Chicago headquarters by video link at an event hosted by Motorola Chairman and CEO Edward Zander. At the event, Jobs took pains to point out that the phone would not compete with Apple's popular iPod music player, but should viewed as an iPod accessory. "Wouldn't it be great if you could take a dozen of your favorite songs with you" on a cell phone, Jobs said at the time.
The companies said they plan to release a phone that will connect locally to computers running Microsoft's (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ) Windows as well as Apple's Macintosh computers using a cable or a Bluetooth wireless connection.
The direct PC connection would likely bypass wireless data networks owned by large wireless carriers such as Verizon Wireless, the joint venture of Verizon Communications (nyse: VZ - news - people ) and Vodafone (nyse: VOD - news - people ), and Cingular Wireless, the joint venture of BellSouth (nyse: BLS - news - people ) and SBC Communications (nyse: SBC - news - people ). Consumers wouldn't be required to pay network fees to download music.
That fact has raised concerns among some industry observers that carriers, eager to convince consumers to boost their usage of expensive data networks, might object to phones that don't need a network connection to download music. Those carriers, who are generally very picky about the phones they sell in their retail stores and what features they support, can easily veto a feature they don't like.
One recent and much criticized example is Motorola's V710 mobile phone (see: "A Great Phone, Tied Down"), carried by Verizon Wireless. The carrier required Motorola to disable certain features, such as the ability to sync with a PC via Bluetooth.
Connections between Motorola and Apple exist. When it was still in the semiconductor business, Motorola was tapped repeatedly as a chip supplier for Apple's computers, going all the way back to the original Apple II in the 1970s. Its former semiconductor unit, now known as Freescale Semiconductor (nyse: FSL - news - people ) supplies microprocessors for Apple's Powerbook G4 and iBook G4 lines.
In recent years Motorola has seen its share of the mobile handset market relative to Finnish rival Nokia (nyse: NOK - news - people ) improve. But in the third quarter of this year, market research firm Gartner said that South Korea's Samsung had eclipsed Motorola for global market share by slight margin. Samsung accounted for 13.8% of the market while Motorola accounted for 13.4%. Both trailed Nokia's 30.9%, according to Gartner.
Word of progress on the phone with Motorola comes as Apple announced today that it has sold 200 million songs on its iTunes Music store since the store's launch. Cue notes that while it took Apple nearly a year to sell its first 50 million songs--before it opened the service to customers on Windows--it took only another four months to break the 100 million barrier, three more to break 150 million, and then two months to break 200 million. Says Cue: "We like the way this curve is looking."
http://www.forbes.com/technology/2004/12/16/cx_ah_1216aapl.html
OT, for awk...
http://www.forbes.com/technology/2004/12/16/cx_ah_1216aapl.html
[I wonder where MOT stands regarding TCG?]
[The bolds are mine.]
Get Ready To Call ITunes
Arik Hesseldahl, 12.16.04, 2:00 PM ET
NEW YORK - Apple Computer and Motorola could soon show us the mobile phone they are developing to play music purchased from Apple's iTunes online music store.
"We've said we have something coming on this in the first half of 2005 and we're definitely on schedule for that. Hopefully you'll be able to see more about it soon," says Eddy Cue, vice president in charge of applications at Apple (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ).
If the phone is as far along as Cue suggests, then Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs would be likely to announce it during his annual keynote speech at MacWorld Expo, scheduled for Jan. 11, 2005 in San Francisco.
In true Apple style, Cue declined to say whether Jobs will indeed address the phone at that event. "What we've talked about is a something that is valuable for the mass market," Cue says. "It has to be a phone in the middle-tier of the market, not a $500-tier phone. It has to be very seamless to use. And we're very happy with the results."
Apple announced its intentions to bring music from its iTunes Music Store to Motorola (nyse: MOT - news - people ) mobile phones on July 26 (see: "Ringing And Singing"). Jobs appeared at Motorola's suburban Chicago headquarters by video link at an event hosted by Motorola Chairman and CEO Edward Zander. At the event, Jobs took pains to point out that the phone would not compete with Apple's popular iPod music player, but should viewed as an iPod accessory. "Wouldn't it be great if you could take a dozen of your favorite songs with you" on a cell phone, Jobs said at the time.
The companies said they plan to release a phone that will connect locally to computers running Microsoft's (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ) Windows as well as Apple's Macintosh computers using a cable or a Bluetooth wireless connection.
The direct PC connection would likely bypass wireless data networks owned by large wireless carriers such as Verizon Wireless, the joint venture of Verizon Communications (nyse: VZ - news - people ) and Vodafone (nyse: VOD - news - people ), and Cingular Wireless, the joint venture of BellSouth (nyse: BLS - news - people ) and SBC Communications (nyse: SBC - news - people ). Consumers wouldn't be required to pay network fees to download music.
That fact has raised concerns among some industry observers that carriers, eager to convince consumers to boost their usage of expensive data networks, might object to phones that don't need a network connection to download music. Those carriers, who are generally very picky about the phones they sell in their retail stores and what features they support, can easily veto a feature they don't like.
One recent and much criticized example is Motorola's V710 mobile phone (see: "A Great Phone, Tied Down"), carried by Verizon Wireless. The carrier required Motorola to disable certain features, such as the ability to sync with a PC via Bluetooth.
Connections between Motorola and Apple exist. When it was still in the semiconductor business, Motorola was tapped repeatedly as a chip supplier for Apple's computers, going all the way back to the original Apple II in the 1970s. Its former semiconductor unit, now known as Freescale Semiconductor (nyse: FSL - news - people ) supplies microprocessors for Apple's Powerbook G4 and iBook G4 lines.
In recent years Motorola has seen its share of the mobile handset market relative to Finnish rival Nokia (nyse: NOK - news - people ) improve. But in the third quarter of this year, market research firm Gartner said that South Korea's Samsung had eclipsed Motorola for global market share by slight margin. Samsung accounted for 13.8% of the market while Motorola accounted for 13.4%. Both trailed Nokia's 30.9%, according to Gartner.
Word of progress on the phone with Motorola comes as Apple announced today that it has sold 200 million songs on its iTunes Music store since the store's launch. Cue notes that while it took Apple nearly a year to sell its first 50 million songs--before it opened the service to customers on Windows--it took only another four months to break the 100 million barrier, three more to break 150 million, and then two months to break 200 million. Says Cue: "We like the way this curve is looking."
Yang believes IBM will continue to bundle traditional PCs as part of its higher-end service business and will work closely with Lenovo as a supplier and partner.
[skipping ahead]
Yang says one area the two haven't talked about in terms of working together is microprocessors. That will disappoint some electronics industry analysts who have speculated otherwise. Yang says Lenovo currently plans to use only Intel (nasdaq: INTC - news - people ) and Advanced Micro Devices (nyse: AMD - news - people ) products.
[IBM is the maker of RISC processor]
http://www.forbes.com/enterprisetech/2004/12/17/cz_rf_1217lenovo.html?partner=yahoo&referrer=
I have similar sentiments. I do want to hear/see the other individual support his/her position against this stance.
Good point and one I'd like to know the answer to as well. eom
Awk, is he really talking about VPNs? eom
Jay, and then there is the EU. eom
barge, re: Wave's mission...
First, I'm no expert on Wave's mission. There are others here who know far more about such things than I.
I think that Wave is about services. I usually categorize software and applets (non-firmware) as a service. But perhaps even firmware can be considered a service?
I think security is service when it is a package to secure the user experience.
Then there is metering, but I think that is no much of a consideration these days.
If IBM is moving toward services and utilities (are they one-in-the-same?) and the release regarding the sale gives logical reason for me to believe this; and if Wave and IBM have had a close working relationship over these many years (remember the juggler on the IBM site for a while many years ago), and based upon the release of the IBM sale of its PC business, I believe that IBM will maintain some kind of service footprint in its sold-off PC business, including its name. Further, I believe its relationship with NSM regarding the new TPM only a scant couple of months ago leads me to believe that IBM is keeping its connection to the computer services/utilities via this new TPM.
However, I defer to the wisest, including you, to discount completely any hypothesis I posit.
Best Regards!
barge, in my opinion...
...which ain't worth squat in most quarters, IBM is about to become a services/utility company.
whitewash...I concur.eom
dilleet, please accept my apology if this was previously posted. I did not have time to scan through the board.
Dabears4, that is real good DD. eom
Apple fights RealNetworks' 'hacker tactics'
Published: December 14, 2004, 10:27 AM PST
By John Borland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Apple Computer has quietly updated its iPod software so that songs purchased from RealNetworks' online music store will no longer play on some of the Mac maker's popular MP3 players.
The move could render tunes purchased by many iPod owners unplayable on their music players. For the last four months, RealNetworks has marketed its music store as the only Apple rival compatible with the iPod, following the company's discovery of a way to let its customers play their downloaded tunes on Apple's MP3 player.
Apple criticized RealNetworks' workaround, dubbed Harmony, as the "tactics...of a hacker," and warned in July that RealNetworks-purchased songs would likely "cease to work with current and future iPods." Apple offered no further statement Tuesday, but confirmed that the software released with its iPod Photo will not play music purchased from RealNetworks' music store.
The high-tech feud may be as grounded in public relations as it is in genuine technology development, but it highlights what remains a serious issue in the digital music business. Unlike CDs, songs sold by competing online stores are often not directly compatible with different brands of MP3 players.
Songs purchased from Apple's iTunes store can only be played directly on an Apple iPod, while songs purchased from Napster or MSN Music can only be played directly on a device that supports Microsoft's audio format, for example.
Record label executives, as well as rival technology companies, have repeatedly urged Apple to open up its iPod to play songs purchased from other music stores, but the company has declined to do so. Executives from several labels had applauded RealNetworks' attempt to create compatibility between its store and the iPod, even lacking Apple's permission.
RealNeworks said in a statement that it remains "fully committed to providing consumers with the freedom to use the music libraries they purchase from us on different portable audio devices they acquire, both now and in the future--including the iPod Photo."
To promote the release of its Harmony software, RealNetworks held a half-price sale in its song store in late August, charging just 49 cents per song. At the close of the three-week promotion, the company said it had sold more than 3 million songs during the sale.
RealNetworks said it did not know how many of those customers were iPod owners, however.
The changes Apple made were to the iPod's "firmware," which is the low-level software that powers hardware such as MP3 players or cell phones. This kind of software is often, but not always, updatable, and companies often use changes to provide new features or capabilities for devices.
Apple released its last update to the iPod software in mid-November, offering new versions for the iPod Mini as well as all fourth-generation click-wheel iPods.
The notes that accompanied the release mentioned several enhancements, but did not comment on Harmony. It was not immediately clear whether iPods older than the photo edition had as a result also been rendered incompatible with RealNetworks' technology.
CNET News.com's Ina Fried contributed to this report.
http://news.com.com/Apple+fights+RealNetworks+hacker+tactics/2100-1027_3-5490604.html
Toshiba unveils 80GB 'iPod drive'
[picture at link]
By Tony Smith
Published Tuesday 14th December 2004 10:05 GMT
Toshiba today paved the way for 80GB iPods when it said it will ship an 80GB 1.8in hard drive in Q3 2005 - a year after it introduced the 60GB version that can currently to be found inside the iPod Photo. Toshiba 80GB 1.8in HDD
The Japanese manufacturer didn't mention any customers by name of course, but having supplied Apple with micro hard drives to date, it seems likely the relationship will continue with the new, higher capacity.
The 80GB HDD - model number MK8007GAH - comes in a 7.9 x 5.4 x 0.8cm casing. Toshiba will ship a 40GB version - model number MK4007GAL - that's just 0.5cm thick in the second quarter. It's lighter, too: 51g to the 80GB HDD's 62g. Toshiba's current 40GB and 60GB (model numbers MK4004GAH and MK6006GAH, respectively) 1.8in HDDs are 0.8cm thick, so the new drive should make for thinner mid-range iPods.
Both drives spin at 4200rpm, offer an average seek time of 15ms and operate across an Ultra DMA 100 interface. They can take 500G operating shock and 1500G non-operating shock.
Toshiba claimed the drives mark the first ever use of a perpendicular recording system in which the tiny magnetic domains used to store each bit of information are aligned at right-angles to the plane of the disk, not parallel to it, as is traditionally the case with HDD platters. The upshot, said Toshiba, is a far greater data density - 206Mb per square millimetre - than anyone has been able to achieve so far in a drive of this class. ®
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/12/14/toshiba_80gb_1-8in_hdd/