« January 2006 | Main | March 2006 »

February 25, 2006

Apple and the reseller equation

My most recent post got me to thinking about how much better Apple products would perform in small businesses if there was some local support.  In the early eighties when I helped run a small regional chain of resellers, providing local support was the way you got customers to use your technology.  Things have evolved over time as technology customers have become more savvy. Apple, since their fall from grace in the mid-nineties, has been in more of an adversarial position with their resellers than in a partnership one.  Many resellers got very frustrated with Apple, their margins declined, and they ended up in a losing battle with mail order catalogers who often could provide the same product at better prices.

As resellers abandoned Apple, Apple eventually had to open their own stores so some Mac experts could be readily available.  The problem is that this only worked in the larger population centers.  Many small towns were left with no reseller who really could support Apple products.  Apple had some programs such as their Apple Specialist program which was designed to keep Apple expertise alive and well in the reseller channel. 

I'm not sure how that has worked but I suspect that being an Apple reseller is still a challenging proposition.  You know in your heart that the Apple Stores are going to get the product first.  Even when our Federal Team at Apple decided to partner with the Apple Stores and allow our federal customers to buy at Apple's federal prices at the store, we soon learned that the Apple Retail Stores has sophisticated ways of bundling product that often made our "deal" to the federal customer look a little lacking.

It's a little bit of a chicken and egg question.  What came first, under performing resellers or Apple treating their resellers poorly?  I'm not sure I can shed light on that, because when I came down from Apple Canada to work for Apple USA, the decline was well under way.  I was appalled at how good resellers were treated.  In Canada we had tried very hard to help the resellers build a strong business proposition. We had been very successful in doing that.  I had some great resellers across Maritime Canada, they were mostly Apple only.   In Apple USA the operative theory was open as many resellers as possible and see who survives.  At one time Apple had some exceptional resellers in the Washington, DC area.  As I remember there was probably $35M in business just going through five or six stores, and there were a number of strong smaller ones.  That was not to last long with resellers being opened on every corner.

The interesting thing is that those good resellers were selling to businesses and government.  They had been doing a pretty good job of it, but Apple efforts to authorize large national chains with little commitment to Apple product spelled the end of most of them even before the mail order houses put the survivors on the road to extinction in the mid nineties.

At the very least, this was a contributing factor to Apple's demise in the enterprise and business.  Whether Apple, a company whose products need some help often to fit in, can afford to have very few resellers is a question yet to be answered.  It doesn't matter with iPods but computers are a different things.

I know one thing. Apple's philosophy on resellers is completely different from what we're doing at Webmail.us.  Our reseller program allows our resellers to deliver the same email hosting service that we do to our enterprise customers.  We still take care of the backend services, the difference is that whereas we provide customer support to our enterprise customers, our resellers provide support to their customers.  They're even able to use their own private-label version of our interface.  If they find an enterprise before us and can handle them, more power to them.

To us a really successful reseller is a wonderful thing for our whole company. Resellers allow us to address markets that we just don't reach. They also have specific knowledge which makes them experts in particular markets that might be something other than geographically bound. It is unlikely we would ever have that market specific knowledge.

Though it is a little hard to compare selling a service to selling a product, there are still some valid criticisms of Apple's approach.  Structurally a reseller for Apple became competition for other parts of Apple.  At the highest levels of Apple, there was a belief that channel conflict was good because it made for a more aggressive sales force at Apple.  In fact the worldwide VP of Sales used to encourage Apple sales people to become "sales animals."  The unfortunate thing is this often set different divisions against each other.  What was good for the reseller division wasn't necessarily good for the direct enterprise sales people, the Apple Online Store, the Apple catalogers or the Apple retail stores.  The result was an unhealthy competition for Apple customers. We used to call the strategy moving "apples" from one internal basket to another.  It was a good way to rotate success among organizations without figuring out a real formula for success.  Perhaps Apple has sorted that out by now, but I haven't seen a great resurgence of Apple resellers.

There are some great Apple VARs and Specialists that have been able to survive in very specific markets where their expertise gives them a leg up.  To a certain extent many technology companies, with the exception of Dell have faced this same problem with resellers.  Though even Dell has some success stories. Cyberline Computers here in Roanoke seems to exclusively sell Dell products through some sort of Dell affiliate program, and they appear to be thriving.  To be fair after many years, Apple finally has a reseller in Roanoke, Computer Pros.  To my knowledge they are the only authorized Apple reseller outside of our universities in Southwest Virginia.

However, as is often the case with Apple, it all goes back to Steve Jobs.  Steve Jobs does not believe in sales people and resellers would just be a further extension of sales people.  It seems to be hard for Steve to be inclusive with his success.  Any success is due to the great products (read product of Steve's mind) not the people who work hard to sell them in what is often a hostile market at least compared to the world of iPods.  You get a good feel for Steve Jobs' character in the Wired article, "Jobs vs. Gates: Who's the Star?"

Rather, he uses social issues to support his own selfish business goals. In the Think Different campaign, Jobs used cultural figures he admired to sell computers -- figures who stuck their necks out to fight racism, poverty, inequality or war.

The point is that the Steve Jobs' ecosystem is very small even within Apple.  It certainly doesn't include resellers or even Apple sales people.  If you don't believe me, talk to some Apple sales people most of whom have not shared nearly as much in the wealth created by Apple as people at other technology companies.

Whatever tactics will sell the most computers in Steve's mind at the least cost are the best.  If that means turning Apple into a place where reseller partners have a tough time being successful, then so be it.  After all it was Jobs' brilliance alone that made the computers sell in the first place.  The rest of how it happens doesn't matter at all.

When I contrast Steve Jobs to our CEO, Pat Mathews, the differences are huge.  While they are both intensely focused on success, Pat is absolutely committed to creating an environment for success for everyone in the company, our partners, and our customers. It's a quantum shift in attitude especially when it comes to dealing with resellers.

We actually have a close enough relationships with some of our resellers that we sometimes push customers to them and they push customers to us.  It's not a very complex strategy underlying those actions.  We live in a very competitive world, if you don't do what is right for your customers, you're probably going to lose them.

We have a dedicated team of people calling on resellers.  Their success doesn't mean that another part of the organization fails.  The branding opportunities that we have created for Resellers allow for a strong business proposition.  We also have Pat out leading the choir as it were, telling people about the shift to email hosting.  Pat's posts and references in his blog such as this one, "The future is hosted, online e-mail" help pave the way for success in our whole ecosystem.   Pat recently referred in one of his posts to an article, "What's the true cost of running email in-house?"  His efforts to get the message out are good for our business and for the business of our resellers.

So when is the last time Steve Jobs went out on a limit and told us publicly that having Macs with OS X is a better alternative to the Windows world especially for small business, and MacWorld doesn't count because the reality is that MacWorld is a risk free world.  If Steve wants Macs and OS X to have greater market share then he should start talking about the Mac advantage in places where people don't already know about it.  Then maybe he could build an organization where resellers can be successful without another part of the organization seeing reseller success as their failure.  I know it is possible because there are a couple of small examples where it has worked in Apple over the years.

I'm not going to hold my breath for this to happen.  Steve doesn't have to share the success even though he has more than enough to go around, maybe if you believe the Wired article he doesn't even care to.

What I do know for sure is that our business model at Webmail.us is built around creating a company, resellers, and customers that all share in the success.  If we can deliver better and better services to our customers and do it without channel conflict, then we all win.  Maybe as our market matures that will be impossible, but right now there is plenty of opportunity for us and our resellers.  Actually I wish I had some of those great Apple resellers that I've been affiliated with in the past selling our email hosting services.  They were as a good bunch of business partners as I've ever seen.  The ones I worked with in Canada accomplished some amazing feats often turning small towns into virtual Apple outposts.

If any of them are still around and want to figure out a new revenue stream that can deliver real value to their customers, get in touch with us at Webmail.us, we would love to have new partners who can take our products where we don't have the time or resources to go. And if you're a small business yourself and interested in email hosting and don't have a reseller partner, we're also glad to help you.  You can check out our pricing here.

Working together is the way a reseller and a company with resellers ought to work, not the way Apple has it set up.

February 24, 2006

Heterogenous Apple nirvana, well almost

A few days ago I wrote a post, "The Apple value proposition?"  which was my way of weighing the pros and cons of buying a MacBook Pro or a Sony Vaio.  At the time I was a little frustrated with software availability for the Mac and the pricing differential that I believe Apple is maintaining on their new Intel based products.

As is often the case in the technology world, when the digital ink quickly flows onto you screen, it even more quickly gets out of date. 

Just so you know that I wasn't picking exclusively on Apple this time, I had also written an article, "Linux Revisited in 2006, a missed opportunity," over on one of my other blogs. In it I was complaining about not being able to get my wireless connectivity going on my Ubuntu Linux that I run on my Dell laptop.

It my mind, I was getting to point of thinking why fight it anymore?  Just buy the Sony and quit carrying my Powerbook to work. Get reconciled with it, lose my soul and get on with this dark side stuff.  After all it was looking like we might settle on something like ACT! as opposed to SalesForce.com for our sales team.   The first thing that happened to change this was our CEO, Pat Mathews.  Basically he wanted something less complex and web driven for the sales force.  He was worried about having to maintain specific software on our sales people's hardware.

That sent me out looking at more basic web CRM tools, but it also opened the door for me to explore using a very simple Filemaker Pro web driven solution that would fit us exactly. 

This quickly has focused us away from platform specific applications.  That's a very good thing since Webmail.us is a web driven company.

The next thing that happened is that Kirk Averett, our Director of Customer Service & Support, saw my post on Linux and just happened to have some time to fix the wireless problem I was having with Ubuntu.   Kirk is one of the people who uses Linux as his operating system of choice.  He's a KDE Ubuntu user/fan, and certainly someone who has at least expressed interest in the Mac world and how it interacts with the Linux world.  While he was fixing my wireless problem, I mentioned the problem I was having with our Dell 1600N printer which I was trying unsuccessfully to use as a Bonjour printer.

Being an Apple guy I was more interested in seeing the Bonjour technology work.  I had lost sight of the simpler goal of just getting printing going.  Kirk suggested just using the Dell printer as an IPP printer with generic Postscript drivers.  Of course it worked.

So here I am in a multi-platform office with everything that I need actually working on three different platforms. Well, everything except we're still wrestling with a strange bug in one Linux program that I just decided to replace with another one. So ignoring that I can't use my first choice Linux program for this one task, we're very close to that nirvana, and we didn't have to go to a single platform to get the false illusion of it.

I've heard many CIOs over the years talk about the advantages of a single platform.  I was pretty close to buying into the idea.  Now there might be some good reasons to go single platform such as cost, but I suspect that just depends on how you figure the cost.

There are some better reasons not to go single platform.  As a CTO of very important federal agency once told me, "Managed diversity has great value in an organization."  In our case and the case of many organizations like us, it needs to be part of our DNA.

At Webmail.us we provide leading edge hosted email solutions to over 16,000 businesses.  Among those businesses there is every possible variety of platforms, email clients and browsers using our services.  You can try as hard as you want through testing to uncover all the things that don't work in a particular situation, but it is nearly impossible to do.  If, however, you have actual users of a particular client, browser, or platform actually involved in day to day use inside your company, I believe it builds a better product which of course helps you become a stronger company.

We really don't care what platform you use. What we want you to have is an unparalleled experience when using our email services either with your regular email client or accessing your mail through our web interface.  We want Mac and Linux users to have the same great experience as Windows users.  Any business that doesn't is just writing off a portion of their market or just too lazy to address it.

Having people in house at Webmail.us who love particular platforms helps us create better products and services.  So here I am wondering how many companies out there don't have some sort of customer facing web presence? Probably very few these days.  Certainly I know that almost all government agencies have a strong focus on having successful customer facing web presences.

So here's a thought for all those companies and agencies who want to move more and more to the web for a variety of reasons from cost savings, to increasing their reach and customer loyalty.

Wouldn't it also benefit your organization to have a few Mac and Linux users around if for no other reason than to test your services and to create the same kind of unparalleled experience that we strive for here at Webmail.us.

Then for you Mac users that are in similar situations to me, surrounded mostly by Windows users with a few Linux users, I have just given you a good reason to go to your boss and ask for one of those new MacBook Pro systems.   I believe have created a very good self-sustaining hardware upgrade justification for those of us who remained hooked to the Mac platform in spite of the challenges that might come out of Cupertino. Just consider it a sales tool to getting new hardware on your desk.

Of course there are other benefits to platform diversity, the chief one being that people are just more productive and innovative when you let them use the tools they know and love. 

Then again some places don't care about either productivity or innovation.  Fortunately we do, and it is at the heart of our success in getting new customers and keeping the ones we have very happy.

February 20, 2006

The Apple value proposition?

So here I am trying to figure out whether or not I want to buy a MacBook Pro.  I'm certainly not going to order one for a few months, but I am starting to think about my next laptop as my PowerBook approaches two years of age.  After all I'm down to one memory slot at this point with the recent failure of my bottom memory slot.  The real question in my mind now that I'm working in a company that is essentially Windows with a couple of Mac users and a similar number of Linux users sprinkled around is whether or not a Mac laptop is worth the extra hassle.

Now it's easy to say that everything is seamless.  I have no problem with our Samba file server.  It's true that all the platforms can work together without any problems if you really work at it.  It works that way in my basement office because I went to a lot of trouble to figure out how to do it. 

Now I'm in a different environment and many things work great.  Printing isn't one of them, and there is no one who has the mission to make my Mac work seamlessly.  We have a Dell 1600N printer which shows up as a Xerox Bonjour printer on my Mac which also seems to have the right drivers.  Yet when I print to the 1600N the Mac always thinks the printer isn't working.  I can rotate 30 degrees and use my Dell Laptop to print to the same printer without any problems. 

There are some other things that I need to factor into my consideration. Once in a while there is something a little odd on a spreadsheet, perhaps just the background color on a cell I want someone to fill out, nothing big, just something irritating. Also for our fast transaction based business, I'm considering moving the sales people from Salesforce.com to ACT!  Salesforce is web based but we're experiencing some terrible problems with Salesforce availability, and we use only a small subset of Salesforce's features so the ACT! client based solution might be better and cheaper for us.  The problem is that it only runs on Windows machines.

The other software that I use is pretty simple and available on both platforms.  MS Office, Dreamweaver, Photoshop, the Firefox browser, and Filemaker Pro are the products I rely on these days.  Right now some of these packages will likely run on the Windows platform a little better until developers get everything ported to Intel for the Mac.

Then there's is the big important feature for small businesses, price.  Right now the Sony VAIO® FE590PB Notebook is significantly less expensive than the MacBook Pro.  To start with the Sony comes with a gig of ram while the MacBook Pro comes only with 512 megs which borders on ridiculous these days. When my current Powerbook had to live on that little memory while I was waiting for a 1 gig dimm, it was not a very fun system. The Sony also comes with a 100 gig drive, and you can order a dock for it.  The MacBook Pro has a little better screen resolution but the Sony has the XBRITE-HiColor™ Technology.  The MacBook Pro is a little lighter, but the Sony has three USB 2.0 ports compared to two on the Mac.  The Sony comes with on site repair, and the MacBook Pro has Apple's standard PowerBook depot service.  The Apple specifications are impressive but so are the Sony's.  They both are also very nice looking systems.

When you add memory and hard drive size to make the systems relatively similar along with a modem which I still use a couple times a year in strange spots like the Outer Banks, the MacBook Pro ends up being priced at $2,348.  The Sony's price is $1,899.  So the price differential is $449 for buying a Mac. Put in other words, the Mac is 23.6% more expensive than the Sony.

I would have to buy a $69 subscription for Virus protection for the Sony, but you may have to start doing that for the Mac. I'm not sure how the OS "upgrade" prices would factor into the equation. I haven't lived long enough in the Windows world to comment intelligently on that.  You could probably give the Mac an edge on software, but until I have used the Sony software suite, I'm not willing to concede that point, especially based on my needs.

Of course the biggest problem for the Sony is that it isn't running OS X.  However, given the software and printing challenges, it might make more sense for me to move to the Sony especially given what may be a long and protracted schedule for making my favorite software Mac Intel native. I remember how long it took the last time around.  Even then I'll still be missing ACT! and hoping someone figures a way for it to run on a Mac.  Some of the website analytic software I'm considering for the company also only seems to come in Windows versions, and then I already went to a small business version of Quicken that only runs on Windows.  There are ways around all of those challenges (like carrying a second laptop) but do they make my life even more complicated?

I am disappointed that Apple seems to once again have made the decision to take its loyal customers to the cleaners on price.  It's just going to reinforce all the subtle price comments that I've heard since joining a basically Windows world.  My favorite is "Not all of us can afford to run a Mac." I've given up pointing out the obvious that iMacs are pretty competitively priced.   

As to Apple software included with the MacBook Pro, the only item in the iLife suite that I really use is iPhoto with iDVD and iMovie distant second and third place apps. I like Keynote and what it can do, but it's really an app that I won't die without or pay extra for consider I end up with Page which I don't use.   I'm convinced that the replacements for the iLife suite in the Windows world aren't so bad these days.  They've come a long way.  For my one or two iMovies a year, there will still be a desktop Mac at home.   Also as is usual these days,  most new interesting technology comes out first for Windows machines.  A good example of this is the new Photomatix HDR photo product which is already shipping for Windows.

I would be very interested in hearing pro and con arguments on the Sony and MacBook Pro products. I'm certainly on the fence right now.  Of course it will be interesting to see both products reviewed by the same person.  I'll be glad to volunteer.

I'm just not certain that I'm willing to pay that much extra to be a Mac user. Even with the unknown cost, challenges, and potential benefits of Vista on the distant horizon, it doesn't necessarily make the Mac a better choice. The little challenges in being a Mac user in the almost all Windows business world just make it that much easier to finally give up and buy that Sony and all those Windows versions of my favorite software and be done with it.  Carrying two laptops to work each morning isn't a very exciting long term prospect. 

Of course if I bought the Sony, I wouldn't get to agonize over the decision whether or not to stay a Mac user every two years.

February 17, 2006

A few blemishes on the Apple

There was some good news for Apple in the last few days. The MacBook Pro (arguably the worst name ever for a computer), started shipping with faster than promised processors. I still haven't seen a review of the MacBook Pro even from folks like Walt Mossberg who normally get preferential treatment.  I hope someone like David Pogue gets one and reviews it.  His review of the Intel iMac, "Intel Inside. Huh?!," is one of the best that I have seen.  Pogue has this to say.

The best news, though, is yet to come. It comes in two parts: first, the increasing speed as more and more programs are Universalized.

Second, in principle, with the assistance of a driver kit that someone will surely write, Intel-based Macs can be restarted in Microsoft Windows. Everybody wins: Microsoft can sell more copies of Windows, Apple makes the only computers on earth that can run both consumer operating systems at full speed, and the masses don't have to sacrifice the huge library of Windows-only software.

How's that for an outlook?

Mostly I agree with the rosy outlook that Pogue paints except for one point.  I want to know why it is okay for Apple to be the only manufacturer to have computers that "can run both consumer operating systems at full speed?"

Imagine Microsoft fixing Vista so it wouldn't run on Macs.  Bill would be crucified. Now before the Apple apologists start attacking.  The idea that Apple cannot survive without the Digital Millennium Copyright Act protecting its "tenuous" business position just doesn't hold water.  Apple has proved that it can survive on 2% market share.  Their hardware market share is now 4% and growing. Most of Apple's success has come from iPods so the crocodile tears for Apple's inability to survive without a lock to their hardware is completely bogus.  Just the fact that Apple recently shut down sites providing illegal technical information lends credence to the idea that plenty of folks would provide more than enough unauthorized support for Mac OS X in the wilds of non-Apple Intel hardware.

I've been down this road before so there is little to discuss on this other than what will likely be increasingly aggressive Apple tactics to keep OS X tied to their hardware.  This is really a shame since there are some real consumer benefits to having Apple hardware as well as Dell (and other) hardware run multiple operating systems.  I'd personally like both my Apple and Dell hardware to run Linux, MS, and Apple operating systems.

In spite of my thoughts on this, it is good that the MacBook Pro is shipping on schedule.  Maybe it will give people something to talk about besides some obvious challenges that Apple must face if they are really go to be remembered for anything in the 21st century besides the iPod.

First in my mind was the news that in spite of all the wishful thinking from some in the Apple camp, Dell still isn't dead.  In fact they seem to be doing quite well at least according the the WSJ.

For the fiscal year that ended Feb. 3, Dell said it earned $3.57 billion, or $1.46 a share, compared with $3.04 billion, or $1.18 a share, a year earlier. Revenue rose 14% to $55.91 billion.

Of course Dell's growth doesn't have to be bad news for Apple.  Hard on the heels of that announcement comes, "Virus for Mac OS X System Found."  Then we hear that Apple is using one of my least favorite laws, "DMCA," to prevent people from even talking about how OS X could be run on Intel system from manufacturers.

Then comes the news that Amazon dot com is entering the fray in pursuit of unseating the iPod monopoly. 

I really think that all of this fits under the category of tempests in a pretty small teapot.  What worries me more than anything is what I perceive as on the one hand Apple fighting to hold onto the crown jewels, "OS X," and on the other hand letting the crown jewels deteriorate right in front of them.  Now perhaps Apple has been so busy porting stuff to Intel that a few things might have slipped through the cracks, but this has been going on for a long time.

I think my concerns came to head when I had lunch with one of the brightest computer people that I know. He's been a huge Apple friend over the years.  In fact if I slipped and mentioned one of his most recent accomplishments, his identity would immediately be known.  It's been hard to put my finger on what's been bothering me about Apple's software.  I have written about my frustration with the wandering export command and some other things like search, iWeb, and Pages.

None of this was much of a concern until my long time Apple friend put his finger on the problem. The real problem is that Apple no longer follows user interface guidelines which according to my friend means that you often end up in an Apple application in a place that doesn't make any sense for what you want to do or in situation where the supposedly intuitive Apple user interface just doesn't seem intuitive.

My friend's example was iTunes.  He loves what the program does but believes it is poorly designed.  He also talked about iWeb being a total mystery.  I'm not a big iTunes user.  iPhoto however is critical to me. I do know that now when I import a series of photos I'm forced to click on a photo not in the set in order to select one that is in the set.  It doesn't make any sense.  I also found iWeb counter intuitive and actually so different that I don't like to come back to it after putting it away. It reminds me of Keynote, great potential but poorly executed.

Given that Apple is going to force us to buy their hardware in order to get OS X running, I would hope that they take the position that they will produce the absolute best software in the world. I just hope they remember that thinking it is the best and making it the best are two different things.  I believe they've taken their eye off the ball when it comes to software applications. Maybe my first ever Apple customer survey is an indication they're trying to mend their ways.  I hope so.

If Apple can't get back on track with a renewed focus on delivering software, excellency, consistency and true productivity, then they'll end up just being another petty monopolist in a very small pond.

At least with Microsoft and Linux, I get a few choices.  With Apple I have to take what they throw over the wall or do without, at least that is the case if I want to use OS X which I plan to do as long as I can.

 

February 07, 2006

Whither Apple?

My father once said that you should never have money in the stock market that you can't afford to lose.  You could probably add another caveat, never count on understanding what drives Apple stock up or down.  Apple is a volatile company.  A company driven by hit products.  Right now they are riding the greatest hit in the company's history.  None of us is smart enough to know long the positive ride is going to last.

On November 1 last year I wrote a post, "The Apple bubble."

There have been new computer products and a seemingly endless positive run of news for Apple.  Yet I wonder if all of this isn't creating a bubble of expectations which Apple will never be able to meet.

I've not been watching Apple's stock recently so I was caught by surprise when an Apple employee told me that he was going to have to wait until the stock went back up before he sold his options.  A quick check of Macsurfer turned up this article, "Apple sheds $17 billion in market value in four weeks."

February 6, 2006 - Shares of Apple skidded more than 6 percent Monday in heavy volume to $67.30, their lowest level in more than two months, on concern that the company's expected growth for the year has already been factored into the price. The stock is down 22 percent from the highs it reached last month...

So where is Apple headed?  Unfortunately it doesn't matter as much what Apple is doing as is does what the market and investors perceive that Apple is doing.  Right now there are enough worries about the Apple Intel transition that investors are nervous about Apple.

Apple is also a cyclical company.  When it's hot, it can do no wrong.  When Apple starts to cool it can do no right.  I don't think we're there yet since there is still plenty of positive Apple news out there.  The challenge is that at some point Apple either has to come up with another iPod like hit or figure out how to sell a whole lot more computers.

I'm no longer convinced that selling computers is part of Apple's DNA. They're absolutely great at making them, but selling them is a totally different skill set.  It's always hard to tell how Apple is doing, but one of the measure that I always use is television advertising.  When Apple is actually worried enough to pay attention to its computer business, they often begin running television advertising for computers.  They did it with the iMac and with the original G3 products.  Perhaps it is just a coincidence, but I've seen several Apple ads telling us about Macs and Intel processors.

In another week we'll be half way through a very critical quarter for Apple.  I'm not pulling back yet on my 6 million Macs forecast this fiscal year, but if Apple doesn't ship at least 1.4 million Macs this quarter, I think we may have to re-evaluate how the transition to Intel is going for Apple.

Being successful in the computer industry is always a matter of timing.  The windows of opportunity are always smaller than a company might wish, and Apple doesn't have a great history of being successful in marketing Macs to anyone other than Mac users.

If Vista comes out and is a strong success, Apple may have missed their window to grab a much larger chunk of the desktop operating system market.  I'm doing a lot of analysis on our website traffic at the company where I work.  I'm seeing the Mac share of visitors regularly come in at 5%, surprisingly the Linux desktop is actually showing at  less than 1%.  Of course the rest is Windows.

There is no doubt that Apple has made progress in market share, yet the challenge now is turning that progress into support for Apple stock prices.  The next six weeks should be very interesting for Apple watchers.



February 06, 2006

How much longer will operating systems really matter, even to Apple?

I've been speculating what would happen if my current Powerbook dies, and I'm forced to choose between ordering an old PPC architecture system and one of the first off the lines Mac Book Pro Intel systems. Even if you ignore the fact that Mac Book Pro is one of the worst cases of naming in a long series of confusing names, I'm still facing a tough choice on the surface.

Then again maybe that's not the case.  I was evaluating software today and got to look at software that was installed and ran as an application on my system.  Then I got to compare it to software that was hosted and worked through a web browser.  I just started using the hosted software and pretty soon I gravitated towards the hosted version. It was actually better software with more functionality.  It even felt zippier.  The user interface was very similar to what I'm accustomed to using with TypePad, the hosted blogging software that I use everyday.  I also have used other hosted programs such as Flickr which I still use for posting my photos.  There there is Writely which is available for word processing, Num Sum which does spreadsheets, Kiko which is for calendars and Furl whichused for storing documents. This is by no means a comprehensive list.

I believe strongly that faster connections and more intelligent programming make hosted software a strong contender for the desktop.  I think the question is how this will impact both Apple and Microsoft?  Will it make us less dependent on operating systems.  Already there are technologies in the mail world such as IMAP that make us computer independent when it comes to mail.  Why shouldn't it go one step further and let us be computer operating system independent?

I actually worked for a company, Webmail.us, whose whole business proposition is based on creating hosted software which offers a real alternative to system based software.   Of course the email works with my Apple mail program among other but it has other features built-in to the browser interface which are only available in the browser.  Webmail has a calendar, RSS, and a task list, all of which aren't in Apple's webmail solution.  Of course they aren't the only people doing this.  All you have to do is look at the popularity of Gmail which is doing for individuals what Webmail typically does for small businesses.

The improvements in web driven software are absolutely amazing.  However, it is one of those areas where Apple trails badly.  How long will it before other hosted software also reaches the same level of sophistication as our client email software?  Not long it present trends are any indication.

In the end, if web driven software keeps getting better and better, just maybe I won't feel so tied to a specific platform.  I think that's a good thing.

Of course having said all that I still don't see a hosted package that can yet beat Apple's iLife suite of tools so maybe there's still plenty of life in some desktop software categories.  That will be a good thing for Apple if they can make iLife better and better, since MS doesn't seem to even understand the iLife concept.

 

February 05, 2006

The downside of Apple

I had a little challenge with my Powerbook this weekend.  It seems the bottom memory slot no longer works.  It was working and now no longer works.  Everything else seems to be fine, so I guess I'm lucky in that respect.  It started me thinking about what to do if my PowerBook died.  It's out of warranty, and I'm pretty dependent on it right now since I commute to work and use it heavily there.

I was talking to a reseller that I've know for several years.  I mentioned fleeting thoughts of buying a new Mac Book Pro.  His very professional comment was, "Do you really want to own one of the first Mac Intel machines?"  Of course my answer was no.  Yet I don't want to buy an old PowerBook.  This weekend a friend forwarded me a NY Times article, "Good Luck With That Broken iPod."

Now you're reeling. You're furious. But what choice do you have? You
can't turn to a competitor's product, not if you want to keep using
Apple's proprietary iTunes software, where you've stored all the music
you love, including songs purchased directly from the iTunes Music
Store, which you'll lose if you leave the iTunes environment. So you
grit your teeth and buy a new iPod. Of course since it's a newer
machine, it has that cool video capability. But you're still angry.

The legacy work on my Mac is almost like my music library. It holds me in the Mac world.

Now I'm not angry at Apple about that or even the lower memory slot on my Powerbook dying.  Electronic things just break especially when they're hauled around alot.  Given the premium we pay for Apple products we might hope they last longer. Actually my experience shows that they often manage to do just that.

Yet, once you're in the Apple world, it's pretty hard to migrate.  I don't particularly like the idea of going out and trying to replace my software.  Of course that is minor compared to actually switching over to another operating system.  Apple actually has me in a bind.  I like OS X better, and I won't switch unless I have to do so.

There's an interesting perspective in "Will Apple do right with OS X?"

Those who've used the two operating systems largely agree that OS X beats the pants off of Windows, hands down. Yet, Apple's licensing policies have choked its business to a meager 4 percent market share, leaving Microsoft with a virtual monopoly. It reminds me of the Sony Betamax vs. VHS videotape wars of the 1980's.? Betamax was clearly the superior technology, but VHS won the war because of Sony's tightwad licensing and marketing policies.

Apple has a superior technology but we are at their mercy for hardware. At a certain point you have to weigh the options.  If my PowerBook died right now, I might be tempted to switch to a Windows box.  Then again I'm not sure things are any better over there.  Would the Windows laptop that I bought day run the Vista that Microsoft will release tomorrow?  I've looked at Linux, and it just doesn't fit what I need to get done these days unfortunately.  It also breaks pretty easily with updates.

I think I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place.  I hope my PowerBook stays healthy.

February 02, 2006

The promise and heartbreak of Apple technology

I have written often of how the computer industry owes Apple for the many technologies that the company has either introduced or popularized over the years.  It's widely acknowledged so there little need to come up with a list.  Yet there's a darker side to Apple technology.  It's almost like a forbidden taste that you get but never really get to fully enjoy because it is limited to such a select group.

I think about Apple and the great advances that they have brought to market every time I log onto a wireless network or each morning when I plug my camera's memory card into a reader and effortlessly grab the digital photos that I post over at my View from the Mountain site.

Apple has done a very good job at spreading some technologies.  A good example is iTunes where Apple provided software which runs on Windows computers.  Doing software for Windows unquestionably has helped the iPod and iTunes Music Store be the great successes that they are today.

That ability to harvest money from a technology has made Apple successful even if it is in the entertainment world.  Yet there are some great technologies in Apple's bag of tricks that have never escaped the circle of Mac faithful.

The first to come to mind is iChat AV.  When it came out it was truly revolutionary.  We often used it internally when we needed to have someone in Cupertino speak in a customer briefing in our Reston, Va office near Washington, DC.  Apple iChat AV software produced better results than the proprietary video conferencing solution that we had and on top of that it was more reliable.  The other day our minister sent me a note asking me to participate in a seminar on healthcare since our family lived in Canada for a number of years.  My first thought was that it would be neat to have my friend who is a Doctor in Edmonton, Alberta video conference with our church.  Then it dawned on me that he doesn't have a Mac even though he is a tremendous iPod fan.

Last spring I got conned into buying a video conferencing camera for my Windows box by a friend in Halifax, NS.  We spent a week or so getting it working.  Still the quality was terrible.  At the end I told him to get a Mac if he wanted to talk to me by video conference.  Of course he didn't.

I'm hoping the migration to Intel chips doesn't slow down iChat AV.  I can't remember the details but somewhere in my mind there is the piece of information that it used the Altivec unit, but I could be wrong and for all I know the Intel chips have even better capabilities.

Yet the point is that Apple has wonderful video conferencing technology that is widely ignored because it is Mac only.

Another technology that Apple has developed is it address book and the syncing capability.  While there are things I would like to see different in Apple address book, the ability to have pictures of your contacts and sync those pictures with your bluetooth phone is definitely something that is outstanding technology. We've just hired a new young sales person in our company.  We're closing in on forty employees.  Having the ability to see a face to connect with contact information makes it so much easier for people to become productive

Yet even though I've taken the time to capture almost every employee's picture, so far I haven't been able to figure out how to share it with our new employee who uses Windows on Outlook.  I sent some vCards to my Windows laptop as a test, but the pictures didn't import into Outlook.  I'm not blaming Apple for this directly.  However, it does bring to mind an executive briefing that I once attended in Cupertino with some key people from NASA.  The NASA folks really wanted to see the Mac have more desktop share, and they suggested that Apple could make that happen by simply developing a Mail client and Safari for Windows.  I won't embarrass the Apple executive who pontificated on how that would be giving away the crown jewels to Windows users.  Of course it was a stupid argument, and the NASA people brought up the iTunes example.

In the end, there was no answer to their question.  The real answer is that Apple has chosen to put it's limited resources towards entertainment and not the enterprise.  Right now that looks like a wise decision, but only time will tell.  I just hope if Apple completely abandons the enterprise that some of those great technologies make it over into the corporate world where they can actually be used by a significant number of people.

Of course I can always dream about Apple figuring out how to do a really productive cross platform calendaring and email solution that would put MS on the run, but I just don't think that's going to happen.  I guess that is the heartbreak of Apple's technology promise.  We know what they could do it they wanted to, but sometimes they just choose not to do so.

Google Reader

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    NC Coast Info

    Profiles


    • View David Sobotta's profile on LinkedIn

    Real Estate

    FeedBlitz



    • Powered by FeedBlitz

    July 2009

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2 3 4
    5 6 7 8 9 10 11
    12 13 14 15 16 17 18
    19 20 21 22 23 24 25
    26 27 28 29 30 31  
    Blog powered by TypePad