Ben Markwardt's Profile

  • Aug 24, 2006
  • 6
  • 4

Latest comments made by: Ben Markwardt

  • Unfortunately I think that most people (non-computer people that is) will always see Gates as linked with the invention of the personal computer. I took a history of technology class in my last semester of college this past year - we got the personal computer and they didn't even mention Jobs and Woz. There was a brief mention of the Altair - then it was straight to pictures of a young Bill Gates and early Microsoft. In business classes Microsoft is constantly used as an example of a "great, innovative new idea." I mean, I agree with some other posts that Gates did play an important role and he should be remember as an amazing business man. But that's all he is - he didn't invent the PC or anything at all for that matter. He was great at bringing other people's innovative ideas to a wide market - no matter how poorly he implemented them.
    Ben Markwardt had this to say on Jun 23, 2006 Posts: 6
    Bill Gates' True Legacy
  • One thing you're missing here - the person that buys a 299 dell doesn't care about Aero, Vista, Mac OS X or anything. All they want is that "program with the big blue e" (also refered to as "the internet" by some) and Microsoft Word.
    Ben Markwardt had this to say on Jun 23, 2006 Posts: 6
    Why Is Vista So Resource Hungry?
  • What's wrong with the two finger scroll? I love it. My girlfriend has an older iBook and when I go to use it I am constantly trying to do the two finger scrolling and it drives me nuts that her machine doesn't have it - it's so easy. And I think it's a lot better than the way most windows notebooks do it - with the side of the touchpad for scrolling only.
  • On the subject of the intel switch and continuing support for the ppc platform. I won't be surprised if Apple continued updating the ppc versions of all their software for a very long time - at least behind the scenes in cupertino like they did with the intel version of OS X. I know Steve Jobs has said that the cell processor isn't all that great - but still, a lot of people seem to be thinking it's the next generation of microprocessors and since it is (according to my info) at least loosely based off PowerPC (and supposedly OS X could run on it). Seems like a good idea to always have that as a backup option. Since, OS X is microkernal based - keeping it cross platform should be much simpler than everyone makes it out to be. I think that would give Apple a lot more flexibility than say somebody like Microsoft. Now on the otherhand, while I have a hunch they will continue to keep OS X on PPC development going - I don't know if they will release it to the public. That is a different topic
  • I don't really think that yesterday's media event was supposed to be as large or publically known as the "One more thing" and ipod Nano events. I think that the Apple community just goes so crazy when a media event is announced that they assume it's a huge groundbreaking event when it might be intended to be less than huge. Here is my reasoning, apparently Steve Jobs didn't even host the event. The presentation was instead given by David Moody, Apple VP of Worldwide Product Marketing (source: Also, that same web site has pictures up and the event appears to have been held in a pretty small room. Finally, they didn't even post a quicktime video of the event on the apple web site like they have for the past two events. So I think it was intended to be a smaller event, maybe get a little press, but it doesn't appear that they put nearly the time and effort into it that made the "one more thing" and ipod nano events huge. In fact, I think the big push of the event was to get photographers at the photoplus (think that's the name of it) convention interested in Aperture.
    Ben Markwardt had this to say on Oct 20, 2005 Posts: 6
    Mac Laptop Market Share Poised to Spike?
  • Nyadach made the key point here: this is half-hearted effort on Apple's part because they are protecting their iPod sales. Everyone seems to agree that Apple makes very little (some suggest they even lose money) on the iTunes Music Store. iTunes however is important because once someone purchases music from ITMS they are locked into using an iPod. Apple makes ALL money from iPod hardware sales not iTunes. So if this is the case why would they want to allow devices from other companies (like this motorola phone) to replace iPods as the iTunes compatable music player of choice? This phone is simply there to prevent somebody else from getting their first and to get more people using iTunes so they'll buy an iPod when they realize that 100 songs on a crappy phone isn't enough. This is why everyone is suggesting that Apple might try to make their own phones eventually - they wouldn't have to give any money to some other company like Motorola. Hardware sales of iPod are what Apple is making the most money on.
    Ben Markwardt had this to say on Sep 13, 2005 Posts: 6
    The Apple Phone Roadmap