Apple marginalization: Macintouch has an ongoing report about all the things that don't run on Mac. It's a little annoying when public entities like government agencies decree a. that you have to access their services online, and b. you have to use a PC because they chose to use some Windows-only technology. Sheesh... why bother with open standards?
But at least part of the problem on the commercial software side is self-inflicted, IMHO. Apple ships free or cheap software for almost every major business or consumer use of the Mac: Safari browser, Mail application, iCal calendar, Address Book, iPhoto, iTunes, iWork, iMovie, iDVD et al. Apple even has its own media standards in QuickTime and AAC.
So what incentive is there for commercial developers to develop on the Mac? It's pretty hard to beat free, and Apple has a head start because they own the operating system, and their app developers work side by side with their OS developers. It's a mini-Microsoft situation.
So, of course Google isn't bothering to port the very nice Picassa photo management application to Mac, because iPhoto ships free on every Mac HD. Which means no competition, so there's no incentive for Apple to fix the performance of iPhoto. It also means I'm stuck paying $100 a year for 220 MB on .Mac to share family pix, instead of enjoying a free 2 GB over at Google. Ditto for Yahoo Music and iTunes.
There's also Apple's rather ugly grab of ideas like Watson and Konfabulator (which became Sherlock and Dashboard widgets). Doesn't seem to be a good way to build a developer community. Apple has even managed to annoy the open source community, which seems to be really dumb, considering that the whole operating system sits on FreeBSD. Apple missed being Microsoft by holding their technology too closely, and they may be holding back the Mac now by limiting the choices available to Mac users...
Comments
8:19:49 AM
|
|