By Beam Tracer (Beamtracer) (203.109.241.109) on Tuesday, January 07, 2003 - 06:16 pm:

This was the fist time I can think of that the Mac LW forum was not full of speculation about the MacWorld expo.

Apple's release of new consumer apps makes me curious about their game plan. A lot of these new apps are alternatives to ones that already exist from Microsoft. They seem to be gearing up for the possibility that Microsoft may withdraw all their apps from the Macintosh platform.

*Safari Web browser instead of Internet Explorer
*Keynote instead of Powerpoint
*Appleworks instead of Microsoft Word

By the way, although it wasn't announced at Macworld, Apple is working on a total rewrite of Appleworks, making it much more sophisticated and Cocoa based.

Also, the Safari web browser is super fast. It really is noticeably faster than all the other browsers. I'm very impressed.

But why would Apple develop it? There are other free alternatives, though most Mac users are surfing the web with Microsoft's browser.

As it stands, it's been in Microsoft's interests to keep developing apps for the Macintosh. Microsoft could easily wipe out Apple if it wanted to, but it allows Apple to retain its niche market to keep the anti-trust monopoly police at bay (though political donations seems a more effective method).

If Apple ever separated its software and hardware businesses this could turn Microsoft against them. OSX running on AMD? Even if Apple doesn't plan to do this, they are "keeping their options open" as Steve Jobs says. Just as the Marklar project (OSX on AMD) is actively kept alive, could the Microsoft alternative iApps may also be insurance for such an event?

By Plotz (Plotz) (68.58.118.150) on Tuesday, January 07, 2003 - 07:37 pm:

Apple writes the iApps for the same reason they build computers...because they can. They love to innovate.

How many simple, consumer based, DV and DVD solutions existed on the Wintel side before iMovie and iDVD made their debut? Not many.

How many windows progams made it as easy to download digital pix from your camera as iPhoto did? Not many.

Apple continues to push for a simple user experience.

I think Apple had to make a browser. When you're trying to get PC users to switch to a Mac, having them surf a page in Mac IE is not the best sales tactic.

Showing Windows users that suring on a Mac can be as fast as on a PC is. It also throws down the gauntlet to other developers. "We can do it...why can't you?"

The "Keynote" presentation software was an odd one...I don't really get it. Are they doing it to show off what Quartz can do? Lets face it Powerpoint in Office 10 isn't that bad. And the fact that it integrates with word makes it much more valuable than a stand-alone ap IMO.

I think the first developer to drop a product for Mac is going to be adobe...not MS. Lets face it premiere is a dog compared to FCP. It's no secret sales have been sliding, even though the price was lowered. The next step is for Adobe to say "it's just not worth it to develop this for Mac anymore."

If it weren't for Apple continually trying to develop new markets, I don't think we'd see much in the way of innovation in the PC industry.

The Linux crowd is spending their time just getting it to work. (Business model, not the PC's) The windows crowd is too busy coming up with overly complicated security and "content delivery" inniatives.

Despiste slower machines and a sliding market share you have to admire Apple for continuing to throw curve balls

By Beam Tracer (Beamtracer) (203.109.241.109) on Tuesday, January 07, 2003 - 07:56 pm:

Apple has been in the browser business before. Anyone remember CyberDog? This pup only had a short life before Apple euthanased it, deciding it wasn't worth going up against MS Internet Explorer. So it's a curious thing that Apple has returned to this turf.

You've got a point about Adobe. The more Apple moves into the content creation niche, the more it impacts on Adobe's existing products.

There is a lot of speculation that Adobe has already stopped development of Premiere on the Mac. As you say, they can't compete with Final Cut Pro, and the new Final Cut Express will just slaughter them. Let's see how Adobe reacts if Apple slashed the price of Shake.

By js33 (Js33) (12.237.176.146) on Tuesday, January 07, 2003 - 08:03 pm:

What is Final Cut Express missing compared to Final Cut Pro in features? It looks tempting but I assume your final product has to render.

Cheers,
JS

By John A. Johnson (Johnny) (65.56.134.252) on Tuesday, January 07, 2003 - 10:09 pm:

Safari rocks! Especially considering that it's a beta effort.

Another viewpoint on why Apple is whippin' out the iApps: to combat the still-prevalent view that 'no good apps are written for Apples!' I mean, apps that joe average wants.

by writing their own, they dispel that fallacy, and ensure that they work on Macs, are Mac-like and are optimized for G4 and for OSX.

Not bad stratgey, IMO

J

By derek (Marble_Sheep) (67.3.9.129) on Tuesday, January 07, 2003 - 10:10 pm:

js33: Final Cut Pro has to render as well. The only (big) difference that I can see is the ammount of formats that each app supports. I amagine they removed support for the cards that let you use other formats (such as the HD cards).

And, IMO, this is an awesome move by Apple. This is a great alternative for all those people who only need DV support. All in all, a fairly impressive day! (No word on new Desktop machines, tho. grrrr....)

By arthur argote (Archiea) (68.164.66.82) on Tuesday, January 07, 2003 - 10:26 pm:

Hey guys...
all great points..

Beam, I think the reason why you haven;t heard about mac speculation iss because people are still speculating on LW 8!!!

I think all of this great software is because of this whole processor hitch. remember the old pentium busting ads? that was apple's main push 6years ago. Belive or not, I think this Motorola problem had perfect timing. think about it. without processor speed, how does apple push inferior hardware? Great software! And with the introduction of OS-X at the peak of this motorola fiasco, what better way to push it than with software..

I believe this change in stradegy made apple so much stronger. they had to sit down and make macs better without a hardware advantage. I think they succeeded. The integration of these aps have really presented a milestone in computing. Sony tried it, but IMHO, Sony's stuff is too uninviting and cumbersome.

As far as this browser safari, (which I'm using now!) I think its a way to make a browser that is finally tailored for the mac. No more waiting for IE to be compatable. No issues with integration. I think a web browser is enough of a commodity now for apple to have their own. Its long overdue to have one built in.

Adobe has troubles in several fronts. Combustion 2.1 is now $995, with most of AE's production bundle and more. The thing with Adobe is that they have alot of users weaned on adobe. Photoshop, premiere, After Effect. I know alot of people who have worked mostly with adobe who, when approached with shake or combustion, were very resistant. This is something that can be dangerous in this business. Adobe was a self contained universe for them, and they didn't want to leave their bubble.

what Combustion's $995 price does is make all of the new and entry level FX users consider it. So a good portion of what would have been future AE users will consider Combustion now. Price was such a huge barrier in this area....

The same goes with fincal cut express and premiere. actually it has happened already with final cut pro and iMovie.

Plotz, your summation...
"The Linux crowd is spending their time just getting it to work. (Business model, not the PC's) The windows crowd is too busy coming up with overly complicated security and "content delivery" inniatives. "

Perfect.

Js33, here's a snippet from apple's site regarding the difference between fincal cut pro and express..

http://www.apple.com/finalcutexpress/

While Final Cut Express offers many professional capabilities, Final Cut Pro is the software of choice for demanding professional applications.

Here are some of the reasons why:
Capture and edit footage from just about any source: film, HD, SD, DV and Analog video
Used by professional editors for commercial use
Professional workflow: online and offline
Flexible, scalable and comprehensive
Broadcast, film and multimedia editing

By js33 (Js33) (12.237.176.146) on Tuesday, January 07, 2003 - 11:01 pm:

Hi all,

Thanks for pointing out the differences between FCP and FCE. I've been tempted to get into FCP but I don't even own a DV cam yet. But my brother has one of those new Panasonic DVX100 that I might be able to borrow. Now I just need to see if FCE supports 24P editing.
Off to the Apple site to check it out.

Cheers,
JS

By Beam Tracer (Beamtracer) (203.109.241.109) on Tuesday, January 07, 2003 - 11:52 pm:

People are cutting major feature films on FCP now, such as the upcoming Cold Mountain. I believe that FCP4 won't be too far away, and brings much more extensive 24p support.

There are some interesting possibilities around the corner involving Apple, Panasonic and Firewire800 (FW2). Apple and Panasonic are collaborating to bring Firewire800 cameras to market, with far higher resolution than what can be obtained with Firewire400 and MiniDV.

The great thing is you can learn the interface by using a miniDV camcorder with Final Cut Express, and when you're ready for the other stuff you can upgrade.

The innovation is happening at Apple. Competitors such as Adobe and Avid can only be reactionary.

By Mike Drinks (Ekimsknird) (141.157.11.251) on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 11:16 pm:

Check this out:

Safari can't seem to load the Apple home page!!!

Anybody else having trouble with this?

By Beam Tracer (Beamtracer) (203.109.241.109) on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 12:14 am:

By Plotz (Plotz) (68.58.118.150) on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 10:05 pm:

Sarari calls up apples page just fine for me.

Here's an interesting read on the iAp strategy.

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030109.html