The Nokia that I know doesn't cater to niche market.

Looking at the NIT prices and quantity (subjectively judged by their popularity online and in real world sightings), well I have very big doubt that it's a very successful product so far.

Maybe not very successful, but successful enough to warrant the release of 3 successors.

a) as an absolute statement, you've just shown an amazing amount of naivete. Apple truly groks the needs of software users in their marketplace, it's what they're known for, and why they have such a strong and loyal following. The only people who deny that are people who don't pay attention. That doesn't mean that they don't also have a huge and successful marketing machine, but to say that it is more responsible for their success than the quality of their product and the understanding of the software needs of their customers... that's an absolutely ignorant statement.

b) as a relative statement... compared to whom? What other company out there is winning its marketshare through quality more than marketing, and doing so better than Apple? I can go down a list (MS, RedHat, Canonical, Sun, HP, IBM, QNX, Suse), and the ONLY one of those that stands out as a possibility is ... QNX (assuming they're doing better in their market than Apple is in theirs, which I actually kind of doubt ... QNX is probably being hurt the most by the arrival of embedded linux). IBM _maybe_. I hope Canonical is, but I'm not sure one way or the other. The others? Absolutely not.

Im getting one also.
A 16 Gb in black.

I suspect you're guilty of that which you accuse in your second sentence above. By no means does Apple consistently, flawlessly understand the needs of their customers and deliver products to meet them. With Compressor, for instance, Apple has a history of attempting both a "simple, basic compression tool" and the "best of breed" simultaneously. Philip Hodgetts, whom it would be difficult to accuse of not paying attention to Apple, has certainly had words with the application's developers on this topic.

Also, as Apple doesn't offer beta versions of their software for testing, it's not uncommon for significant bugs to make it into shipping versions. DVD Studio Pro featured a bug that generated still menus with incorrect field ordering. If I recall correctly, it took Apple more than a year to release an update that squashed the bug.

In the consumer space, iMovie '08 was so universally reviled that Apple made the previous version available for download so users could downgrade.

As a generalization, which is what I was responding to, I stand by what I said. Sure, every company has its moments of stumbling, and miscalculations. Especially on their side-products and in the details. But as a generalization, as a statement of their performance in the big picture, over the long haul, and with their primary product lines, I don't have any problem with the statement I made. Even after reading what you wrote.

The only real exception would be during the mid-90's, when they really did have a lack of .... everything (leadership, focus, marketing, technical success, understanding the needs/wants of their users, etc.). But before that, and definitely since then, I think my statement fits just fine for the context that I was replying to.

A couple of points:
1. Apple has a small share of the (desktop) computer OS market, but only compared to Microsoft.
2. Arguably, the vast majority of software professionals that are familiar with both believe that the OSX is superior to Windows, one reason being the BSD underneath. (Surely the linux techies here can appreciate that).
3. If Apple would sell OSX independent of the hardware, I believe its market share would skyrocket.

Actually it probably wouldn't sell that much better. (No skyrocketing) Apple's benefit is it can control everything in its platform. Which is why they try to lock things down, lock the user down, lock everything to their liking.

(which is why I can never see using Apple products myself since I like the ability to modify or tinker whatever I want. As well do whatever I want).

However, this has benefits for Apple, as they can ensure things work as smoothly as they want.

For example their OS is designed specifically for that hardware set. If they opened it up for any system like Linux or Microsoft Windows then they would face the same problems those two currently face (massive amounts of hardware differences of any shape, size, and configuration). Effects may work on one computer, yet maybe not the other. There would be no more "just works".

This extends to all their products as well (iPod, iTouch) they want everything under Apple's control. For example, their application store. Why not go the Google Android route and allow the user to install anything he/she wants from anywhere AND have an application database/store? Apple doesn't offer this option because they want control and money (money of course being obvious but control being more important). Which is also why they discourage getting around their road blocks and they'll make it difficult for people to get around them.

It reminds me of a book I recently finished reading called "Cult of the Mac" where there's this one line talking about Wozniak and Jobs (the people who founded Apple). When it talked about their first computers Apple made it talked about the differences in how they were made (computers of course were made by hand back then).

Wozniak's was easy to open, had plenty of open slots. Jobs' had to be open by a proprietary screwdriver and once inside there were very few open slots.

Don't make me say it...

I like turtles.

Actually, in skimming through this circle jerk of a discussion, to all the Apple fanboys who think that Apple software is the "holy grail" - get real. Apple is exactly what the "cognescenti" (read: reactionaries) accused Microsoft of in the 90s - a profit-obsessed, marketing driven "tech company" that tries it's level best at every turn to lock consumers into their product line. Their entire business model is about controlling what people can purchase to run on their hardware.. Their BS encoding of sound files via iTunes is a freaking joke, their BS encoding of Quicktime movie files... not even worth discussing. There is nothing they have ever done software wise that is not intended to direct the user to proprietary tools. They are in fact worse in every way than Microsoft ever was.

As for Apple hardware - meh. Whatever.

What I think about SJ:s and Iphone presentation


+ Great speaker, as allways
+ Usefull application tools, have to try these
+ Me.com,really exiting, but... $99 per month 60 days free trial
+ For company user, M$Exchange connectity
+ Safari is very fast, also on Windows platform
+ Rotaiting features
- But is't only Game platform?, lots of game examples..., application for concumers, no Voip, something about IM?

Price and OS REALLY openess is questions, as far I know SJ

On the Nokia point of view, (BTW, this is what I think, I'm not Nokia employer)
- What is really going Hildon/Troltech and other mobile platforms on tablets (also on phones)?
- What is Maemo.org features? Now its really mess
- mosh.nokia.com?
- ovi.nokia.com?
- And the nokiaá other ones?

Sim@n

Apple user since 1982