A headline like that is bound to draw the ire of the Macintosh faithful. After all, since Microsoft, which can marshal its forces and target competitors at will with lethal precision, hasn't finished-off Apple after all these years (and I'm not saying that this was necessarily a Redmond goal), how on earth can an operating system like Linux spell trouble for Apple?
After putting down the Mac last year because of a failed attempt to try the switch (incompatibility with my company's virtual private network was the culprit), I'm giving it another try and can report that -- thanks to the recent Panther OS (I was on Jaguar before) -- I've been nearly Windows-free for long enough to say the switch is technically possible for most people (more on that later).
For any technology to finish off the Mac -- and by the Mac, I mean OS X -- it will have to wipe out demand for the desktop version of OS X. Apple has some very cool OS X-based servers, but they haven't been key to Apple's survival. Apple's desktop devotees have played a critical role in helping the company achieve some success with a blend of desktop and notebook systems and entertainment solutions. Judging by the toll that Linux has taken on Windows on the server side, it only stands to reason that it could do similar damage to other desktop encampments.
However, rattling the foundations of desktop Windows and Mac OS X (aka: Unix) will prove far more challenging for Linux than undermining the server versions of the two operating systems. Although it plays a role, ease-of-everything (use, software installation, management, etc.) is hardly the factor in a server operating system's success that it is for desktop operating systems. In fact, the many hardcore server administrators would just as soon do away with a lot of the ease-of-anything frills in return for a mean, lean, simple, command-prompt driven Web, database, email, directory or database application server. Compared to Windows, the way Linux can be deconstructed and reconstructed in a way that allows server administrators to achieve the perfect balance between bloat and function for whatever itch needs scratching is a winner. Compared to Unix, in which such a balance can also be struck, cost has been Linux's primary driver.
My own "datacentre" has two Linux-based servers running in it -- one as a Web server, and the other as a database server. Both are old Pentium IIs with a little extra memory. In the name of performance and simplicity, I haven't taken the time to strip them of their unnecessary fat (I'm not an expert at this) such as unnecessary daemons and other processes that load at boot time. I know that they could lose about 70 percent of their "weight." Since these are machines that were long ago donated to the recycling heap, the cost of this part of my datacentre has been near zero (not counting my time).
Talkback
I thought it raised some interesting points but I don't know how you could miss that awful IBM 'pointing' nipple on a notebook! The trackpad is 100x better..but I digress, Real basic on Mac OS X is the equivalent of VB and they have an area on their site specifically for porting VB apps;
http://www.realsoftware.com/realbasic/guides/portingvisualbasic/
Though you might like to know :-)
"It's about what happens when desktop Linux reaches that point where it provides an experience that meets or beats the one that that sets the standard for *ix-based desktop operating systems: OS X."
Lay off the Crack pipe, David - don't hold your breath.
I sit in front of 3 machines every day - Mac OS X Panther, Red Hat Enterprise 3 (and sometimes Windows XP SP1, running under VMware), and Solaris 9. While RHE3 may not be the most up-to-date, sophisticated desktop for Linux going, it's big in the we-just-want-something-stable-and-supported corporate world, and so it's a good comparison point. Linux on the desktop is so far behind OS X in useability it's not even funny - we love Linux in our server rooms, but every one of us in my IT group sits primarily in front of a Mac. There's a good reason for that.
Fascinating article. My advice to you (as if you asked for it!) is to go back to Wintel. Most Mac users are not powerusers such as yourself. Most Mac folks are Mac users BECAUSE they aren't power users.
I remember just before the release of Windows 95 a friend (and superior) at the media company we both worked for ridiculed the Mac GUI. He was a power user whose fingers tickled his DOS keyboard and wonderful things happened on screen. The day after Windows 95 came out, he stole to my office, sniffed at the Mac on my desk (I was able to fight a rear action and keep Macs in the corporate fold, for awhile) and said, "My PC works just like a Mac! Just like it!" A month later I discovered he had returned to tickling his keyboard, working in DOS. He just loved the action.
Mac users, and non-power users in general, are not going to leave Apple for Linux until it "works just like a Mac!" and probably not even then. Windows has never really worked like a Mac and it is there Linux will score because, unlike Mac users who are willing to pay for what they get, the "price of everything, value of nothing" folks on Wintel will jump ship because Linux is close to free.
Ah, now there's a bargain!
Berlind/Dvorak - what genius!
Apple is on the way up, not out.
Linux on the desktop will threaten Windows, not OSX. The user interface of Linux will continue to emulate Windows, not OSX.
As open source is, by definition, designed by committee, and the committee will always form a consensus based around the most used interface to make migration for the most common user as easy as possible.
OSX, on the other hand, is designed to be superior to what's out there, and as such, appeals to the "alpha geeks" in both the Windows and Linux camps.
Apple will draw from the top 10% of all computer users, and when Linux is able to offer a better Windows than Windows, as well as when major applications ported to Linux reach a critical mass, then Linux will start to draw from the the bottom feeders buying $399 Windows boxes now.
Over time, as Linux distributions are offered as a lower cost option by major OEM's like Dell, HP, and Gateway (if they still exist) then Linux may eventually take half of Microsoft's pie.
All during this time Apple will still take many new users from the top 10% of users from both Windows and Linux. Apple's growth and profitability are guaranteed by slowly gaining marketshare and expanding their niche as the premier computing environment.
Just when APPLE seems to be shipping away at the dominance of MICROSOFT through the halo effect of the run away sales iPod, which is prompting for PC users to take a fresh look at the MAC and its superior OS, comes a commentary that looks like it could have been written ten years ago. Apple on the way out? Are you out of your mind? Go back to Wintel where you belong.
Yawn! you guys must be smoking bad weed.
God, this guy's an idiot. Apple's business has nothing to do with Linux. Nothing. At all.
It has to do with Sony and Microsoft and Virgin Media. And Pepsi and Spin magazine.
See, Apple's in the cool hunting game now. Apple will always sell a small number of systems to computer dorks like me who dig their OS and hardware design (their silly unwillingness to make a two-button mouse/pad notwithstanding). They don't worry one bit about us dyed in the wool MacGeekFreaks, no matter what they QuickTime broadcast during those Nazi rally MacWorld keynotes.
What they worry about is treading that fine line between the ubercool and the consumer consciousness. Apple won't ever be too cool, because that would mean sacrificing the ease of use and ease of marketing combo that's helped the iPod take over the world.
What they will do, for as long as they can, is continue to keep their fingers just ahead of the pulse of mainstream America (yes, America, with Tokyo running a close second ... sorry to Europe, but your tastes are too refined and your tendency to flock to all things hip and American is too predictable, anyway). That way they can wait for early adopters to put out overly complicated, crappy mp3 players, get a whiff of the consumer response, and then put out a sleek, dumbed-down (i.e. "Easy to Use") $400 walkman that everybody wants.
Apple will die out when they can no longer do this. Home computers aren't hip anymore. They were for awhile, and that let the iMac get Apple back in the game. The business systems market was never Apple's thing, and the creative sector died out with the dot com boom/bust of the late 90s.
What's hip now is digital entertainment. Linux is no threat to the iPod. Right now, nobody is a threat to the iPod. So the threat to Apple will come indirectly from the early adopters who put out the crappy early versions of whatever's clever in the future of our digital world.
If media center PCs are it, then Apple has a few months to out-Media Center Microsoft's Media Center 2005. If portable video is it, then Apple has a good six months or so to out-Korean all those Korean companies churning out PMPs (iRiver, Archos, etc).
If you ask me, none of those things are it. I personally have no idea what's next. Apple does. If they're right, they continue to reinvent themselves as a digitally-driven entertainment company -- which is sort of what they've been ever since they lost the education market 15 or so years ago. If they're wrong, they die in the hands of MS, Sony, or whoever capitalizes on the next big thing.
But it's not Linux, man. You've missed the boat entirely. Computing is a consumer commodity. Apple is not about consumer commodity. They're about hip and the premium consumers are willing to pay for the exotic nature of hip.
Wow, you're dumb...
The author makes many sound points, but his conclusions are off.
Linux is getting close on the desktop--Ubuntu is even more cutting-edge and more user-friendly than Gentoo or Xandros--but these are going to eat into Windows market share, not Mac.
Go ahead, show off The GIMP to a Mac-head graphic designer. "That's pretty cool for a free tool. So you say it doesn't have those really cool wizards for web-export? No CMYK? Well, lemme know when it's ready for prime-time and I'll give it another looksee." Do you think any Dreamweaver addicts are going to go ga-ga for Bluefish or Mozilla's web-authoring environment?
On the other hand, I haven't met any old-time DOS-hacker programmers who didn't feel that Linux had "put the fun back into computing." As the office/relative/neighbor geek gets more and more into Linux, the circle of newbie Linux desktop users will grow.
Apple will stay strong, through music business if nothing else, and will continue to pioneer ultra-hip, next-level gadgets for the discerning cutting-edge high-tech consumer. And we will continue to love them for it.
You miss an important point. OSX is equivalent to a Linux distribution because Apple just takes open-source software and packages it nicely. Safari is like that, the whole OS is like that, and I expect they have considered repackaging one of the open-source office suites too.
This is why OSX has developed so quickly in recent years: the hard work is done for free by the BSD community, and Apple just ads some nice stuff on top. There's no reason why that concept should stop working in the future.
Brain damage. A brain damaged Editor is the only way to explain this drivel. Suitable for the National Equirer or The Sun - not Ziff-Davis "where technology means business."
Lack of vertical growth is not a sign of utter doom. What's David Berlind's background? Tech Sales? Used Car Sales? What?
The time scale that Berlind must be taking about is well over 5 years away. That is, if you buy into what he's written. Any attempt to view more than 5 years out is fret with the unknowns, such to the point of verging on lies. Ergo Berlind is talking FUD.
Oh wait! You mean the Toyota Prius is catching on?!? Uh-oh, that means Apple is toast!
What does not seem to be mentioned here is the antiquity of the X86 platform. 64 bit is the future and OSX is arguably in the best place right now. The PowerPC platform is clearly making major inroads while Intel is closer to the end of the road than the beginning. The AMD solution to 64 bit is a bandaid approach and will buy a few years. However, with everything from the Mac to Playstation, Xbox, Nintendo…did I miss any… avoiding X86, the smart money has clearly displayed that the future is 64 bit and the preference is PowerPC. Apple, Motorola and IBM designed the PowerPC and Apple knows the platform as well as or better than anyone. IBM has the pull to insure the future of the chip. IBM is has a grudge and they want to make waves.
OSX and Linux are far more likely to get along as friendly and cooperative cousins than bitter enemies as with Windows and, well, anyone else.
Many geeks will tell you that it is nice to just go home to their Mac and not fight with another computer after a long day of jousting.
Funny this article was posted the same day Apple's profit doubled lol!
Some good points, but if you look at the "core" Apple users and Linux users, they are not the same. Sure there will be swtches, but the os that Linux will threaten more is Windows.
David, FUD will get you nowhere these days. It looks as if you have not been paying attention to the current Apple market. It is headed up. It may be a niche computer, but it is still a better choice for many people than Windows or Linux. Have you read Forbes or Business Week recently? Didn't think so.
The beleagured Gateway will fall long before the
formerly "beleagured" Apple.
I don't agree with the assessment that Apple (in OS X) will not survive the onslaught of Linux. The OS game is Microsoft's game to loss, not Apples. Apple makes an OS to sell Hardware. If Linux does well in the OS game the only that will happen is them taking share from Microsoft. It is amusing that everyone likes to use the term "niche" market to paint Apple into a box, but if they take that stand then they should also understand the flip-side. If Apple is a "Niche" market then they are safe. Linux no doubts want to be the next Microsoft, not the next Apple. IN fact the more the OS market gets mixed up the sooner you will see people realize they have options and a more diversified computer market. Then as market share splits into three you might even see developers HAVE to make software for more OS's.
Hahahaha, when will these douchebag journalists learn?
I won't even comment on this ridiculous article.
On the day that Apple earnings blew away everyones expectations and the fact that Apple has some 92 percent marketshare in hard drive based Mp3 players, you decide to write a flame inviting column that makes no sense.
The reason that there are a billion choices for PC laptops and boxes is because anybody can make a clone for a few bucks and sell it. Apple sells units fully loaded. Complaining that you don't have the most insidious pointing device (aka the IBM pointer) is just stupid. Saying that you don't need the performance of a G4, when G5 boxes are here is misinformed and hypocritical. PC types have bashed Apple for underperforming for years.
I take this position. I earn a great deal of money in the tech sector and I use a Mac to do that. I don't worry about drivers or viruses or worms or why my port doesn't want to talk to my printer......on and on. I think I make more money using a Mac than I would with a PC, because I don't think about all the baggage associated with a PC. I think it is true that most Mac users earn more than PC users. It makes sense. I own a PC and I do not enjoy using it. I am all for more peoiple using PC's, and I have no problem with the fact that five percent of computer users are Mac users. Frankly, I don't want the competition. It benefits me that my competitors do business using a PC. As much as you may want to induce the ire of Mac users who want to "spread the word", I wish they would shut up as well.
I like that it is more expensive. If I wanted cheap, I would drive a Hyundia and wait for KIA to make a laptop. You also lost some credibility when you made the following grammatical error.
You should have written "just as soon" instead of "just assume". It sounds like you heard the saying once and remembered it wrong. I picture you having discussions in the office and people pissing themselves when you leave. I hope you switch back. I don't think you are smart enough to use a Mac.
My experience as a co-director of IT is that the switch to Linux comes from the Windows base not the Mac OS folks. Primarily, the switch also occurs because of the lack of security with MS Windows. It comes from people frustrated by a myriad of worms, viruses, explorer loop holes and poor MS programming.
They skin Linux to look like windows and go merrily on their way.(it is still only the high-end users though)
The ease of use offered by Mac OS X is still abolutely unparalleled. I don't see these people coming to me with Linux questions. I don't see these people asking me how to make their KDE desktop look like XP :)
I see MS as in trouble at this point. There's not much loyalty on the MS side.
As others noted, I think you made some good points. I do have one suggested alternate viewpoint for those coporations having a huge over head in salaries for the IT staff necessary to maintain the typical Windows server networks, and even the apparently less expensive linux networks. I understand that, in general, thest IT personel like 'tweakability' of the linux option and really don't need the 'ease-of'use' available in the Apple server option. I do wonder what the cost savings might be if we looked more closely at the alternate option of spending the additioinal money for the slightly more expensive Apple server option (more expensive than linux in the up-front hardware/operating system costs, generally, but in many cases actually less than the Windows option) and deleting the overhead for salaries of most of the now-unnecessary IT staff who won't be needed because of the 'ease-of-use in the Apple software? Interesting thought, maybe a bit scary for the IT guys? Sometimes I wonder whose 'best interests' they really have in mind; those of their company or their own personal interest?
Apple = simplicity, elegance and detail. Where the first one may be something that Linux is targetting for the coming years when it comes to User Interface design, the last two are things that a lot of people seem to overlook when it comes to the finishing of personal computers (and that relates to both the hardware/product design and what's on screen/user interface).
I have a design background, so maybe I'm a bit biased towards looking at product finishing, but one thing Apple has got going for them on the hardware and the software side is an eye for detail and I think more and more people will start to appreciate that (when they buy an iPod). There is a lot of electronic rubbish on the market these days, both hardware and software. I don't want to sound snobbish here, but spending that extra money on an Apple machine gets you that extra level of quality.
Linux is great in a lot of ways, but on the user interface side it's a different story (still trying to get that USB drive mounted without having to resort to the command line).
As long as the majority of Linux developers is playing catch-up with (or targeting as you call it) OsX, instead of targetting a positive user experience, things will remain complicated. Apple's OS has always been designed with the (end-)user in mind at that shows. I use Windows XP (no choice here, my employer does not allow anything else), Linux Fedora Core 2 and Mac OsX Panther on a daily basis and it's not very difficult to tell you what my preferred platform is (starts with an large 'A').
What matters in the end though is what the majority of pc users wants and that, In My Humble Opinion (I don't like acronyms), is simplicity in their computer experience. One of the points you note is the variety that people can choose from when they want to acquire a Personal Computer. Although variety of choice can be a very good thing, it can also make it a very frustrating experience. I bought a new Apple machine earlier this year and with their 'limited' offer of different models, it already took some thinking to decide which one was best for me (hundreds would have required a lifetime of research). What I want to point out here is that with apple, simplicity starts already with the shopping experience.
I don't want to sound like a Mac zealot and I can go on for quite while, but I'm pretty sure that Apple is certainly not on the way out and maybe even more on the way in (although time will have to tell). Apple has a huge installed base in the creative world and this won't change in the years ahead. People want to create, manage and enjoy content and Apple computers appear to be the most compelling solution here.
News Flash: Is Apple on the way out?
Apparently they have been, every year since they were founded.
What would be news, is telling us when that will be.
Please, enough already, let us know as soon as they go broke.
Thanks.