Opinion: Apple -- Here to Stay

MacCentral ^ | March 08, 2005 | Don Tennant

[r5boston]

Nearly a decade ago, just a few months after Microsoft shipped Windows 95, I asked Bill Gates if it was a conscious decision in the development of that product to give Windows more of a Mac look and feel. Of course I knew he'd say it wasn't, but I couldn't resist asking. "There was no goal even to compete with Macintosh," Gates proclaimed. "We don't even think of Macintosh as a competitor."

That was a crock, so I pressed the issue a little. I asked him how he accounted for the widespread perception that Windows 95 looked a lot like Mac 88, and whether the similarity was just a coincidence. I didn't expect a sobbing confession of mimicry, but I thought it would be cool to see how he'd respond. Surprisingly enough, Gates shifted gears and became more forthcoming.

[antiRepublicrat]

ME: Yet the packaging of firmware (without which it wouldn't be firmware) is considered hardware.

YOU: Too bad all the technical definition of the word firmware disagrees with your definition

Sorry, nice try, a blank EPROM is definitely just a piece of hardware.

ALL SOFTWARE resides on what is considered hardware. ... What a silly statement. ALL SOFTWARE is packaged on hardware - not just firmware.

Then why don't we call the programs on the hard drive "firmware"? Because they're not firmware.

Taken from a computer-oriented encyclopedia: "Firmware is a combination of software and hardware. ROMs, PROMs and EPROMs that have data or programs recorded on them are firmware."

Get it? Firmware is a combination of software and specific hardware. You can scream "it's software" all you want and try to compare it to what's on my hard drive, but the terminology changes once it's on that EPROM.

A Linux router/firewall running off my hard drive is called software. Now take that and burn it to an EPROM (like in a Linksys router), and it's now called firmware. Its nature didn't change, but its location necessitates a change of terminology.

So, going way back to the beginning of this, I did use the wrong terminology during some lazy typing. The essence still stands: Compaq's reverse-engineering freed the software. The factual occurrence beneath the hood was that they reverse engineered source code (software) in order to achieve it. They did not reverse-engineer firmware, since they were going off the IBM technical manuals, not the chip. If you think about it, they didn't just reverse-engineer software either, they reverse-engineered an entire specification.

Firmware is only in the discussion to the extent that the software they reverse-engineered was meant to be placed on a ROM (or EPROM, can't remember) to become firmware, thus when people talk about it they tend to say the "firmware" or "BIOS" was reverse engineered. But to dispute someone saying this is to get anal and purposely difficult unless you're just leaving a clarifying side-note.

[antiRepublicrat]

I honestly can't say which format is better, since I haven't spent any time evaluating them; however, 14K is a reasonable place to start thinking about cutting off, since higher frequency sound is probably going to be distinguishable only to dogs...

I'm sure that's why Microsoft chose 14K as the cutoff -- that's sound not too many will miss, although the audiophiles who do hear it won't be very happy. It's the same compression reason Fraunhofer chose their cutoff, but we all trash MP3 for it. AAC cuts off at about 20K.

Still, you should try them together. In addition to more accurate audio reproduction, the AAC just sounds clearer.

[antiRepublicrat]

Before you go off, change that, freed the hardware.

[antiRepublicrat]

Nah. It's your fetish for pretty shiny plastic that makes you like Apples .

You mean this plastic:

(love the little drive covers to break off)

or this all-aluminum model

[pageonetoo]

People have a history of buying overpriced products if they are hyped - just because people buy it does not prove it is not overpriced.

I started in retail in 1964. By 1970, I was a manager. In 1972 +/-, Texas Instruments began marketing handheld pocket calculators. I spent a lot of time figuring, but the things debuted at more than $200 in 1972. Late in the summer, there was a sale at $125, but it was still too much for my pockets. Then it dropped to $99.95, and I was so tempted, but still couldn't part with the money.

Just before Christmas, it went on sale for $75 and I snapped it up!

It was a brick, but fit in a shirt pocket. It had to be plugged in every night to keep the red LED's showing, but it did what I expected it to do.

Value is when people part with their money. Your conception of "they spend too much because of hype" is inconsistent with the facts of history!

Apple pays the Chinese around $60 for the unit, I believe. Anything you pay over that is spread afar! It ain't just Apple that gets a bite! The Japanese use them as jewelry, and they have access to great electronics! And, they probably pay more..

[Last Visible Dog]

Yet the packaging of firmware (without which it wouldn't be firmware) is considered hardware or it is firmware is some magic matter that is in-between software and hardware. That's why they call it "firmware" instead of "hardware" or "software" -- they needed a new term since it falls under both sets. But, unless someone is being purposely obstreperous as you are now, people will accept calling firmware either hardware or software depending on the context.

To sum up - you are not even close. Clearly you are "ad-libbing" in a subject of which you only have cursory knowledge

Clue: firmware derives its name from the fact it is read-only not because it is packaged on hardware. All software is packaged on hardware. Firmware is not some mystical stuff that is somewhere between hardware and software - it is software stored in read-only memory. It is not a new group - it is software. Firmware is never ever ever hardware. There is no context when firmware can be called hardware unless the one speaking is Bozo the Clown or a facsimile

Yet the packaging of firmware (without which it wouldn't be firmware)

It is not the "packaging" - it is the fact it is read-only.

software stored in read-only memory = firmware

[Bush2000]

Too bad you can't sex with those machines. Oh, wait...

[Last Visible Dog]

Sorry, nice try, a blank EPROM is definitely just a piece of hardware.

An EPROM or PROM is not firmware - it holds software just as a hard drive holds software. A PROM is always hardware and is never software and is never firmware - the software written in the PROM (or any other read-only memory) is the firmware. Just as a hard drive is always hardware but it does HOLD software. PROM's HOLD software - Hard drives HOLD software.

Then why don't we call the programs on the hard drive "firmware"? Because they're not firmware.

Because the software on a PROM is read-only and the software on the hard drive is not - please refer to the eight technical definitions I posted earlier. The term Firmware is to point out the software can not easily be changed - not that is some magical thing between hardware and software. Firm refers to inability to change it easily.

"Firmware is a combination of software and hardware. ROMs, PROMs and EPROMs that have data or programs recorded on them are firmware."

Now you are turning to dishonesty - tisk, tisk. You left off the first line of the definition on purpose I see. Here is the complete definition:

Software (programs or data) that has been written onto read-only memory (ROM). Firmware is a combination of software and hardware. ROMs, PROMs and EPROMs that have data or programs recorded on them are firmware.

Funny, the first line is the definition I have been using all along - could that be the reason you left it off? hmmm.

The definition is a bit misleading to newbies. The PROM's are hardware but PROM's by themselves do nothing and are not firmware. The only value of firmware is the software. The hardware part of firmware is what it is stored on. All software is stored on hardware so this does not make firmware unique.

A Linux router/firewall running off my hard drive is called software. Now take that and burn it to an EPROM (like in a Linksys router), and it's now called firmware. Its nature didn't change, but its location necessitates a change of terminology.

Close. It is the fact it is read-only that makes it firmware. firm = unable to change easily.

Firmware is software stored in read-only memory.

It is not "something in-between software and hardware" - that was my point through this entire debate - thanks for presenting supporting evidence for my point.

[Last Visible Dog]

Firmware is only in the discussion to the extent that the software they reverse-engineered was meant to be placed on a ROM (or EPROM, can't remember) to become firmware, thus when people talk about it they tend to say the "firmware" or "BIOS" was reverse engineered. But to dispute someone saying this is to get anal and purposely difficult unless you're just leaving a clarifying side-note

Close but no cigar

Nobody reverse engineered the PROM which is the hardware (most modern PROM's are not erasable). They reverse engineered the software. As I pointed out earlier - part of the software in the original BIOS firmware was reverse-engineered into a non-firmware executable (ROM-BASIC).

I see you are turning to dishonesty again. This all started because you claimed they reverse-engineered the hardware and then you tried to claim firmware was hardware.

[Bush2000]

Value is when people part with their money. Your conception of "they spend too much because of hype" is inconsistent with the facts of history!

No, you're describing "subjective value"; the notion that you're getting value from a given product or service without regard to objective criteria. LVD and I are talking about "objective value"; wherein, a product or service is compared to the broad market and weighed using competitive criteria that can be quantified in tangible terms (ie. cost, weight, size, etc). Based on objective criteria, the iPod is overpriced relative to its competition. There are numerous competing players that provide greater capacity and better power management -- and equivalent audio fidelity.

Many MacHeads can't explain why they like Apple products more. They simply do. Their subjective judgement is based on emotion. Not objective reality. So what accounts for this difference in definition of quality? Entire books have been written by Deming, Juran, Ishikawa, and others to define quality. Everyone has a different standard. So what do you guys do? You resort to intangibles: "I like the iPod interface much better ... It looks nicer ... I think it sounds better ... etc".

[LibKill]

So? This is news?

Apple has been, will be, and mostly is has-been.

They had their shot at dominance but blew it.

[Last Visible Dog]

I started in retail in 1964. By 1970, I was a manager. In 1972 +/-, Texas Instruments began marketing handheld pocket calculators. I spent a lot of time figuring, but the things debuted at more than $200 in 1972. Late in the summer, there was a sale at $125, but it was still too much for my pockets. Then it dropped to $99.95, and I was so tempted, but still couldn't part with the money.

I believe this will happen with the MP3 market. Apple will have to lower their prices or lose market share (in the past they have chosen to lose market share)

Value is when people part with their money. Your conception of "they spend too much because of hype" is inconsistent with the facts of history!

You presented a story about a product going from $200 to $75 in a year and then you say people don't buy based on hype - whatever. Are you claiming people have never purchased items (over-priced) because of hype - yeah. right.

Value is not when people part with their money - not even close. Value is comparing your purchase with the rest of the market place - claims of value in isolation are merely hype.

The Japanese use them as jewelry, and they have access to great electronics! And, they probably pay more..

The Japanese do a lot of weird things - don't force me to post pictures.

[Bush2000]

I believe this will happen with the MP3 market. Apple will have to lower their prices or lose market share (in the past they have chosen to lose market share)

I agree. The marketing culture at Apple is too entrenched. They will not sacrifice premium pricing until they're literally forced into doing so.

[Petronski]

Every time you write firmware=software, YOU equivocate the two. They are not the same.

[Swordmaker]

The dealer had done all the prep work before I walked into the showroom.

Yeah -- and that's the point. He did the prep work AFTER YOU PURCHASED THE CAR but BEFORE YOU TOOK DELIVERY. That's precisely what I'm talking about. Get it through your head.

Pardon me, Bush, but the car I bought was sitting on the lot... prepped and ready for a buyer BEFORE I PLUNKED DOWN ONE THIN DIME. I went in, made them an offer, wrote out a check, did the paperwork, took the keys and drove it off the lot. NO MECHANIC LOOKED AT THAT CAR BETWEEN THE TIME I WALKED ON THE LOT AND THE TIME I DROVE IT HOME! Get it through YOUR head.

[1L]

>> Please cite the claim YOU think I can't back up<<

"I consider myself a "sex machine to all the chicks." A pretty silly claim.

>>Mr. OpenEndedMeaninglessAccusation.<<

???

>> Second, I never claimed to have purchased the iPod for the logo, but for the quality sound.

I never claimed you did.<<

You said, "sorry but UI and the Apple logo was not worth an additional $220," after I made it clear I bought it for the superior sound. Your only response to my point about it sounding better was the fact/opinion nonsense.

>> You views are ONLY opinion.<<

This is just idiotic and a time waster. First of all, at a basic level, its true, but so what? This is a discussion forum where (gasp!) opinions are going to be offered. I'm totally unclear as to what your point is, since we are discussing the relative merits of a product. If I said the iPod is white, would you call that opinion as well?

Second, this nonsense is used solely when one can't argue the merits or the issue, but needs a backhanded way of responding.

Stick to the issue: if you disagree with my views on the iPod sound, say so. If you never compared it, be honest. But my argument is neither less substantiated nor proven incorrect by you claiming its only my opinion.

>>Your ego has got you confused.<<

My ego has nothing to do with it.

>>All I said was all I would get for the additional $220 was the Apple UI and the Apple logo - it was not worth it. The Apple UI is better, but not that much better.<<

Fine, but my point still stands and you haven't refuted it. The point is that there are other reasons to buy it.

>> So why are you so defensive.<<

I'm hardly defensive, just confused why you are having such a hard time with a very simple concept: people have bought the iPod because it sounds better. Whether that can be measured objectively or its just what they think they believe, who knows. But since I'm very inclined not to purchase Apple products due to their being overpriced, whether I have any audio hearing ability or not, it should say *something* that I bought it. And it doesn't have anything to do with the UI or the logo.

[Swordmaker]

Let me guess. This guy is a "M$ shill", right? /SARCASM

NO, but he is reporting on difficulties OSX.0... a fact you can only learn by checking the copyright date of his website. Epson did not release any drivers for OSX until at least OSX.1 I had an Epson SC740 and printed from both OSX and OS9 (Classic mode) with absolutely no problems... After OSX.1 and after Epson finally wrote a proper driver for OSX. Classic mode uses the OSX print routines... you do not use the OS9 drivers but you do need to set up the printer in OS9 so the classic apps can see a printer... the print file is spooled to OSX and prints.

Also, let's not forget that running OS9 apps requires that you run with root privileges. Which has the potential to completely hose your machine, particularly if you get a macro virus or some other problem.

Wrong again. Classic Mode is a program like any other under OSX and as such has no more privileges than any other app the user has launched... the privileges his access allows him. You certainly are NOT running in ROOT... file handling and all desktop work is still handled by OSX... Boy, do you have a bunch of wrong info.

If you BOOT into OS9 (which could be done on early OSX releases, then you are actually not emulating anything but are actually working in OS9... and you can trash things you should not. For the last two years, all new models of Macs will not boot into any Apple OS except OSX.

I reviewed the list of problems you linked to... 90% of them were from people who expected everything in Classic mode to work as it did before... it still works, but it works differently. They merely did not understand. For example, there is NO OS9 desktop, most of the extensions are useless and should be disabled as OSX routines take over what they did in the old system. Networking is handled by OSX... not OS9... and so on. One user was complaining that he could not run Norton Speed Disk in Classic Mode... he should not run it at all on an OSX system... and the system does not allow it, because that is an HSF+ file system optimizer that would not work properly with a UNIX file system.

[1L]

My comparisons were to MP3 and were done at higher than 128 bitrates -- 196, I think.

My iPod songs are (mostly) ripped at 320.

In addition, the internal hardware design may not impact the sound as greatly as the analog output. If you can point me to a device that includes a digital output, I would be very interested.

[Bush2000]

Pardon me, Bush, but the car I bought was sitting on the lot... prepped and ready for a buyer

That's atypical. Dealers generally don't spend time prepping a car until AFTER THEY HAVE A BUYER. Ask around. I think you'll find that I'm right.

[Bush2000]

You simply can't admit that quite a few people experience problems with OS9 running under OS X, can you? Not even when the evidence is shoved in your face... Sheez ... what a waste of time it is conversing with a blind zealot...