Apple is well known for pushing the limits of technology…sometimes too far, as can be seen from their much belated introduction of Thunderbolt/Ethernet & Firewire adapters when they were confronted with the ugly reality that the world was not ready for computers lacking those ports.
IMO it is because Apple continually pushes the envelope that they continue to exist. Apple has always been a technology leader. If apple were not
the technology leader they would long ago been subsumed as just another Windows PC. If you want to be a technology follower then you should be using a Dell computer running Windows 95. Being a technology leader means they will inevitably stumble from time to time. More often it is simply a matter of waiting for the rest of the industry to catch up with the new technology. Your complaint about Thunderbolt sounds almost exactly like what late adaptors were saying when Apple abandoned SCSI or when Firewire was introduced.
I've never criticized Apple for pushing new technology; it's what tech companies
must do. I've been critical only of some of their recent implementation decisions that seem to have been made either without much or with distressing forethought. (I wasn't around for the SCSI or FireWire transitions, and under any circumstances, I'm at a loss as to why anybody would have complained about FireWire, which added new, improved functionality with no loss of existing functionality.)
Just for the heck of it, though, I suggest a poll: How do you feel about Thunderbolt? (Check as many boxes as are applicable.)
- I need/anticipate needing its high-speed throughput.
- I need/anticipate needing its expanded connectivity capability.
- I want it to cut down on the number of cables plugged in to my Mac.
- I want it because it's the latest and greatest toy in its genre.
- I neither have nor anticipate having any need for it.
Further, Apple has, with its introduction of Internet Recovery, shown more or less complete disdain for un-technologically prepared users, so I'll guess that they're preparing to make a huge grab in the huge business computing market - where cutting-edge technology is demanded and money is readily available if its expenditure is justified - that has eluded it for so long…at the expense of us little guys who've only given it a 5% share of the computing market.
I pity Apple's measly 5% share of the computer market. Of course with only that 5% share Apple has vaulted past Microsoft, Dell, HP, etc to be the first or second most valuable corporation in the world.
You can't possibly be serious!
Do you really think Apple's position as a
*GIANT* makes their minuscule share of the computer market even the least little bit palatable?
As to your comment about cutting edge technology in business and industry, one of the reasons Windows is such a dog is because their business customer base demands compatibility with applications that in no few cases were originally written to run on MS-DOS. Updating those applications might cost business a few dollars they do NOT want to spend. In fact Wall Street will punish them for spending it. Apple has, I believe wisely, chosen to tell foot dragging users they have to move on. In the long run Apple's is the more cost effective path, but business and especially Wall Street is notoriously driven by short term goals and to &*!! with the future.
The days of corporate downsizing taught us that Wall Street rewards even huge losses when they hold out the promise of even "
huger" down-the-road benefit.
iPods made people stop and think about Apple, and iPhones elevated them from cult status to a real presence, but iPads have given them credibility in the corporate world, not only because 90% or more of the Fortune 500 are either testing or actively using them, but because even if only minimally, all those corporate execs and managers are actually experiencing Apple-style computing first hand.
I've got no doubt that Apple's vision of the world has an iPhone in every pocket, an iPad in every hand, and a Mac on every desk, and I'm guessing that they've got something in the works that is so seductive that the corporate world will spring for it, and offers so much down-the-road benefit potential that Wall Street will applaud the expenditure. And further, I don't doubt that they'd give every one of us in the 5% a free high-end PC and our walking papers if it would help them sink their hooks into the 95%.
Apple can't be accused of muddling around and introducing products and technology willy-nilly, indiscriminately; more so than any company I've ever seen, they've got a vision.
I would not hold my breath waiting on FIOS. AT&T has already announced a decision to cease installing fiber optic and to not offer their fiber optic service in any more neighborhoods. In fact, they are not planning on installing landlines of any type in new neighborhoods. Apparently their vision of the future is strictly cell phones and 4G.
My reference to FIOS was in no way meant to be taken seriously; it was a sarcastic, oblique reference to Apple's high-tech Internet recovery strategy - bothering friends, neighbors, relatives, or bosses - for users who haven't got high-speed Internet.
Your response got me wondering, though, how many people will have to give up their landlines in favor of cell-phones before there are too few paying customers to support maintenance of the infrastructure?
