6 posts • joined 24 May 2010
Two versions of Windows.
Sometimes I think that the glitchy demonstration was designed to distract everyone from the real issues.
2012 is the 10th anniversary of Windows unification. Before that, there was Windows, Windows 95, WIndows 98 and Windows ME on the one side; and Windows for Workgroups, Windows NT, and Windows 2000 on the other side. The two tracks were only semi-compatible. NT did not have the dlls to run games, media entertainment, and other consumer apps; 98 did not have the stability to run business apps all day without crashing.
XP put a temporary end to those days. Microsoft found it wasn't easy to advance beyond XP while maintaing that unity. Vista, anyone? Many business users decided to stick with XP. Now Microsoft is going with two families of hardware WITH different processors, different peripherals, and different operating systems. In the past, Microsoft had its hands full with two operating systems on the same processor.
The MacBook Air and the iPad have different processors, peripherals, and operating systems as well; however, Apple does not try to mislead anyone into believing that the two are software compatible. I have a suspicion that anyone who believes that Windows 8 RT and PRO will be compatible will be buying a bag of hurt.
Re: "OEMs, please pay attention. This is how you build a PC.”
You mean, they invented a top heavy notebook computer with an innovative hinge that doesn't hold the screen up without a kickstand.
Kickstand - Check.
Training wheels - Real Soon.
App Store not curated enough for you?
Most Register articles about the App Store complain about all the App Store rejections and the arbitrary rules that cause them. This article complains about the lack of rules and the misguided App Store approvals that result from this lack.
Congratulations, Register, for landing squarely on both sides of the fence.
This could work extremely well for cash-rich Micro$oft!!!
For a measly two billion dollars, M$ could offer all iOS developers a two-for-one deal. They could offer to pay developers two dollars for every one dollar they earned through Apple's iOS App Store. Apple just announced that iOS developers have earned one billion dollars; clearly it's not too late yet.
Another idea: Micro$oft could offer developers the big end of a 100%:0% split on app revenues. This beats the hell out of the 70%:30% split that Apple offers. IF one billion dollars is the 70% that Apple paid, then the extra 30% is less than a half billion ($429M).
Here is the best idea of all. Microsoft could pay developers to port their apps, offer them 100% of app store revenues, and offer W7P phone owners a 100% discount on ported apps (total cost < $3.5G)
That's how the big boys flex their power!
Open vs. Curated
Safari / HTML5 vs The App Store / Apps: the war between "open" and "curated" comes into focus.
Now is the time for all App Store critics to come to the aid of the "open" web.
Can't have it both ways!
It's hard for Apple to get it's suppliers to increase production at the same time that it is telling them to fire all the underage workers, cut back on excessive overtime, not deal with environmental bad guys, clean up their reporting procedures, etc.
Twenty years ago, Apple had the opposite problem. Too much production created excess inventory, that became obsolete while still in the warehouse - due to the speed at which new components were being research and developed by suppliers and competitors [cough]Intel[/cough]. Apple was trashing obscene amounts of inventory - so much so it was losing money, not making money.
A responsible employer doesn't gear up for a spike in demand, because that only leads to layoffs later. A diversified manufacturer can re-allocate resources between product lines, but Apple only has a few products - unlike companies like HP and Dell.