Your premise left me cold until I paraphrased this line.
...maybe the urge to copy Apple will be so ingrained by then that (Microsoft) won't know how to do anything else.
History repeats itself?
The Beatles disbanded in what, 1970? Two of the Fab Four have died. We know that Michael Jackson owns (or owned) the Beatles catalogue. So what purpose does Apple Corp. serve, besides defending a defunct brand?
Although, MacRumors has just posted confirmation that (Snow Leopard) will be Intel only.
I'm pretty sure this has been stated from the beginning, have people forgotten? It would be pretty hard to remove the legacy Carbon API's and still run on PowerPC!
Microsoft should be thanking Apple, in the ads PC comes across as affable yet ineffectual boob, as opposed to the real Microsoft - nasty convicted monopolists who thwart their competition and have cost the world untold billions in lost productivity.
Warm fuzzies :)
I don't care about hardware specs or price, the fact is I use Windows at work and for that reason alone I will never have it in my home. Apple is thriving and has diversified its portfolio to the point that talking about whether it will "survive" or not is moot. It's pretty obvious that Apple has deliberately avoided certain areas of the market, it disappoints some that there is no mid-range headless Mac, but that is the commodity market and not desirable.
In the end the arguments are similar to: left brain/right brain, red/blue states, left handedness/right handedness, etc., ad nauseum. The choice is personal and not always rational.
Well sirch, your argument is much the same as the one that Chris presents in the airplane analogy. It depends on your "measuring stick". For the majority of buyers the lure of the $500 PC is stronger than the arguments over TCO, battling viruses and spam, etc. These are "intangibles" whereas the price tag in front of their faces is not, and usually, because they have not tried a Mac they don't know that they can live without these intangible yet "pricey" items. For diehard Mac users the so called "intangibles" matter and are factored in at time of purchase, making the Mac, in their minds the better deal. Apple, of course, does not cater to those who put price above all else. As long as sales growth continues to outstrip the PC they likely never will.
"When I started this website over 6 years ago Apple was coming out of a dark period." So to question whether Apple "Matters" or not was relevant. Six years on the question is moot.
Playboy re-issued 1984 interview with Steve Jobs gives an insight into his thought processes and his prescience for the future of the industry is remarkable.
Of course at the time he saw IBM (Big Blue) as the threat that would put the tech sector in the Dark Ages for twenty years, ultimately Microsoft supplanted IBM in that role.
So, Steve is on an extended leave, away from the "day-to-day" operation of running Apple, he has the opportunity to take the long view and focus on the future. Excellent!
Where is the puck going to be, Steve?
Why It's Okay to Loathe the iPhone
October 8, 1991: Apple Settles Beatles Lawsuit
What's in a Name: Snow Leopard Examined
WWDC: Christmas in June
Why is Apple Letting the PC Guy Be My Hero?
What if Windows 7 is Actually Half-Decent?
Apple Low End Laptop? Call Me Back When You Sober Up
Macs: Round Pegs in Square Holes
Are Macs More Expensive?
Reflections on 25 Years, Does Apple Still Matter?
Reflections on 25 Years, Does Apple Still Matter?
Reflections on 25 Years, Does Apple Still Matter?
Leave Steve Jobs Alone
Steve's Break is Apple's Opportunity to Shine
Steve Jobs' (and Apple's) Biggest Mistake