Eric Schoettle's Profile

  • Oct 28, 2006
  • 2
  • 0

Latest comments made by: Eric Schoettle

  • I think it is a great overstatment of the importance of the Mac market share to say that the itms/ipod closed system is more open than the windows only plays-for-sure system. That said, I completely agree with the author's problems about recent reporting this way. The primary concern with closed systems seems to be confusion of the consumer, according to everything I see. Now, according to this article, the consumer will be confused when he or she discoveres that plays for sure doesn't include macs. But that's a small market, and one that knows to watch out for incompatabilities. Recent articles seem to say this: you're going to get an ipod, and it won't work with the songs you purchased, or you're going to get songs on itms, and it won't work with your creative player-either of which lead to confusion. For this, apple is faulted. But that's a silly observation, because it is most likely, that if a consumer purchases songs online, they will be purchased from the itunes music store-and so all is well with the ipod, but plays-for-sure players, are actually unlikely to play with the music you've purchased. Likewise, if you buy a song that plays for sure, chances are, you're player is an ipod. Again, confusion and incompatability. So, perhaps Microsoft will beat Apple in the long run. But it won't be by compatability, just enough advertizing that the public thinks they should go with Microsoft, on account of compatability.
    Eric Schoettle had this to say on Aug 19, 2005 Posts: 2
    Plays-For-Sure... but only on Windows.
  • I must admit, that sounds like a lovely version of the future. However, there is one assumption required for the Uncle Ben's relevation to be valid, and I'm not sure it is. The assumption is, that the reason OS X market share isn't a majority now is because of hardware. If the reason most of the world doesn't buy a mac is the price or selection or some other hardware aspect, but otherwise the world is itching to get on OS X, then naturally, letting tiger loose would bring in loads of money at no additional cost, and surely apple could obtain 5% of harware market share, while they're at it. But, if people love those powerbooks, imacs, and other machines, and just aren't comfortable with a new operating system, need (or think they need) Windows only software, or simply don't want to think that much about their purchase, then apple would be screwed if the liscenced the OS. Without a huge influx of former Windows customers, we WOULD have the clone fiasco. If the reason people aren't on the mac platform has something to do with their not wanting to be on the platform, then the only market share the platform has is what it already has. And if that's the case, then liscencing the OS simply spreads the wealth of those on the platform more thinly, and Apple volunarily created competition for itself. So talk to your PC friends. If they are afraid of software, then you should be very afraid of clones. But if they want different hardware, then please, Apple, let them.
    Eric Schoettle had this to say on Aug 18, 2005 Posts: 2
    What Uncle Ben Taught Me About Mac Hardware