Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Why John C. Dvorak is Wrong About Apple
robhyndman.com — An article decontructing John C. Dvorak's recent article speculating that Apple will drop OSX.
rhyndman- 1343 diggs
- digg it
- azharc, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Very interesting article,well written. digg+
- zimm, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Call him wrong all you want. but never forget.
he makes more money than you will ever see.
something all the anti dvorak people seem to forget... lol - rouslan, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Macs suck. You get that from the name:OSX=OS SUX
They are too simple, they are designed for people that have never used a computer before, definately not for power users. I do not understand why some sysadmins like them (apart from the fact that users cannot mess the computers up). I would be more productive on a PII 200MHz than a g5. - Ratty, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11He's wrong about everything. Ignore him and he'll go away.
- obscurelyfamous, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2zimm,
What does his financial wealth have anything to do with any bad predictions? No one is trying to be anti-Dvorak on a personal level.
On another note, he might make more money than you will ever see but that doesn't hold true for many others, bud.
rouslan,
Ignorance. Pure ignorance. - Seumas, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4The "C" stands for "Cocaine"
- r©ain, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Maybe a better strategy would be to blacklist Dvorak.
Why should we give his site noteriety via blog posts and online controversy and hits via links?
It's been common knowledge for sometime now that the guy is full of *****.
Maybe if people stopped linking, talking or referencing his articles, he'd dissapear.
I mean, he gets paid to do what he does.
What he does is stir controversy (paid blog troll)
If everything he wrote were to fall on deaf ears, he'd be out of a job since no traffic = no profits. - Orangutan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3very well thought out, nice rebuttal.
@zimm awesome picture. gir rules my brain. :> - TheShrike, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2I'll tell you why Dvorak's wrong.
Because he's a ***** idiot. Don't ever accept what he says. Take your Dvorak with a dump-truck of salt. - vdubski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Damn, site is down already.
http://www.robhyndman.com.nyud.net:8080/2006/02/25/why-john-c-dvorak-is-wrong-about-apple/ - kazem, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Dvorak is out of his mind. I rarely like his attitude, even though he's really knowledgeable.
- Seumas, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9"Macs suck. You get that from the name:OSX=OS SUX
They are too simple, they are designed for people that have never used a computer before,"
I presume this is either a troll or you are on crack.
OSX is too simple? I can do anything in OSX that I can on Linux or Solaris. I can write shell scripts in standard shell script languages, for example. Rather than whatever the hell windows uses. OSX is simply the marriage of a beautiful interface on top of a complex and immensely functional *nix system.
Saying "OSX is too simple" is like saying that "linux is too simple" because it has an optional GNOME/KDE interface or that "solaris is too simple" because you can use GNOME or CDE as your interface.
So what isn't too simple for you? Windows? Windows IS an interface. There's not really much of an undercarriage there. Not one that can be used as easily (or reliably), at least.
Really, spoken like the inexperienced, trolling ten year old that you probably are. Take a walk through the engineering departments of Sun, Google and many other places and you will find that many (sometimes even most) of the developers have a powerbook on their desk. - mariachi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I hate it when I get decontructed
- Yankidank, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0He's probably wrong because he's retarded. Seriously, these guys like to say crazy things just for the attention.
- TROGDOR42, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0He makes a good point.
- dspinks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0r©ain has got it figured out...Dvorak gets paid "smack the bee hive." Its funny...to think that he started this two weeks ago on TWIT (this week in tech podcast). If you don't like what he says then don't read it. Me personally I don't really care what he says. I think some of his comments are completely ludacris but i still give them some merrit; its creative thinking. ;)
- shinaku, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1rouslan: How can a mac not be for power users? The whole point of the UNIX part of it is for stability and robustness.
- TheReport, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Yeah Dvorak is a moron, im supirised all you digg fanboys arent jumping to protect your twit master. I would rather listen to Wozniak talk about yellow lasers for 3 hours than listen to Dvorak talk for 5 minutes about anything.
- TROGDOR42, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9*****... Me to teh rescue:
Why John C. Dvorak is Wrong About Apple
February 25, 2006 at 07:18 | Print This Post
John C. Dvorak’s recent column in PC Magazine speculating that Apple may soon abandon OSX for Windows created a small firestorm of controversy. (You can also hear him explain the theory on TWiT 42 (”Dvorak’s Lost It”) - the sound in the background is Leo Laporte beating Dvorak with a sneaker.)
So is Dvorak crazy? Or as Mathew Ingram suggests, is he on drugs? Both, perhaps - he’s always been crazy, as far as I’m concerned - crazy, provocative and controversial, now more than ever, and that’s why I’ve been faithfully reading him for — is it really about 20 years?? Only Dvorak would have the nerve to float this one, and he must have swallowed hard when he did. So, while I think he’s wrong and very possibly pharmaceutically over-medicated, I think it’s also worth spending a few minutes laying out exactly why.
So, herewith Dvorak’s reasons for thinking the theory may have legs (the reasons come from his column, and from TWiT 42), and why I think it’s farcockteh:
1. This is Dvorak’s #1 reason: Adobe hasn’t ported its apps to Universal Binaries. As a result, they have to run under Rosetta for now, with the result, as Steve Jobs explained at MacWorld, “While the performance is not going to be strong enough for professionals who spend hours a day in Photoshop, it’s going to be enough for the rest of us, even under Rosetta.” Dvorak’s theory is that Adobe is holding back because they have inside knowledge that Apple is going to abandon OSX, and a native version would be a wasted effort.
This just doesn’t hold water. The creative class has, of course, long favoured the Mac, and Adobe’s software is the preferred platform. It’s also fair to say that if Adobe apps aren’t quickly produced in native Intel versions for the Mac, the creative class is going to take its time making the switch. Which, naturally, gives Adobe a lot of leverage in any negotiations with Apple. So, knowing that Apple was desperate to make the switch and not get left behind in the Intel-AMD chip wars, why would Adobe merely play along? Wouldn’t it be smarter to play hard to get and extract some concessions from a desperate Apple? To my mind, this is nothing more than Adobe wisely playing a strong hand. It’s not personal - just business.
2. The switch to Intel. Dvorak also suggests that the switch to Intel is just a necessary step to the switch to Windows.
The early reports are of a 4x speed improvement from the Powerbook G4 to the Core Duo version. 4x, with the same heat and the same battery life. This one’s not complicated: Apple made the switch because the PowerPC was falling behind Intel falling behind AMD.
3. The Apple Switch campaign isn’t working - no one’s switching. Dvorak suggests that Apple needs to do more than OSX to maintain its customer base; customers aren’t coming over, he says.
The way Macs work - all Apple OS’s for that matter - is woven as deeply into the company’s DNA as any other virtue. … Apple needs its OS to dream.
I read posts by gleeful switchers every week. And I follow them carefully, because I’m considering the switch myself. Surprisingly often the switchers are long-term, hard-core Windows users. And everywhere I look I see Mac laptops - more and more of them, it seems, every day (though sometimes you have to squint to see past the forests of other Apple schwag in the way). As Mathew points out, it just ain’t so. But perhaps more importantly, now that the Mac OS has been opened up it will become much more appealing and powerful as time passes. Switching should accelerate. (Admittedly, based purely on anecdotal evidence) I think it already is.
4. The iPod was designed to get people to move to the Mac, but this hasn’t happened. Dvorak suggests that the iPod has failed as switch-bait.
See #3. People are switching. And the iPod has helped to make Apple even more wildly creative, inspired and cool than it was before. And what’s good for Apple is good for OSX.
5. The iPod lost its firewire connector. Dvorak suggests that Apple dropped the firewire connector from the iPod because the Windows crowd - a USB bunch - is the new target market.
Well, if you want to sell a lot of iPods, you sell them to the Windows crowd, too. There are more customers there. But more to the point, the standards battle is over and firewire has lost - at least for the iPod’s purposes. With no firewire 800 on the MacBook Pro, but two USB ports, it’s clear what Apple is thinking about whether it makes sense to have two standards. Apple is simply deciding not to fight the VHS-Beta battle all over again - we all know how that ended.
Apple would be dead as a hardware company. Apple sells dreams, not computers - the dream to be different, to be unique, to be cool.
6. Apple’s assault on the gossip sites. Dvorak theorizes that Apple went after ThinkSecret because it was worried the gossip sites would find out about the Windows switch.
Wasn’t the ThinkSecret suit launched before Apple announced the Intel switch? Perhaps the lawsuit was aimed at preventing that disclosure. But in any event, Apple’s mystique is built on marketing, and its marketing is built on controlling perception. It’s much more likely that Apple went after Think Secret because it was interfering with Apple’s ability to control spin.
7. Microsoft’s announcement that it would support Office for the Mac for 5 years. Dvorak refers to Microsoft’s announcement at MacWorld and wonders, why 5? What happens after that? He theorizes that Microsoft won’t agree to more than 5 because it knows Apple is planning to dump OSX.
No, Microsoft won’t announce more than 5 years of support because while it knows how much its support is worth to Apple now, it’s worth waiting for a few years to see how much more its support will be worth to Apple then. Avoiding a long-term commitment when you’re in the driver’s seat - and when you don’t know what the future will bring - is just good business. Apple’s vulnerability to Adobe and Microsoft for critical applications is probably the company’s single biggest strategic vulnerability (other than the risk of Steve Jobs getting hit by a bus) - and Adobe and Microsoft know it.
8. Finally, Apple is a hardware company, not a software company. Dvorak thinks that with the iPod being a cash cow, Apple now has the nerve to be a hardware company.
Apple would be dead as a hardware company. Apple sells dreams, not computers - the dream to be different, to be unique, to be cool. The way Macs work - all Apple OS’s for that matter - is woven as deeply into the company’s DNA as any other virtue. As Mathew says, it’s “the last thing that makes the company unique”. Without that differentness, Apple would soon be just another slick box designer. Apple needs its OS to dream.
……………
So, as I often say when I’m hedging my bets, Dvorak may be right, but if he is it’s not for any of these reasons. They just don’t add up.- danmacon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0DoS attack perhaps?
- shiftless, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Good point, good point.
The page won't load.
What good points I am not reading... - TokenUser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1An article that is as equally speculative as JCD's. Only Steve J and Bill G know what is truly happening.
- mariachi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"I think some of his comments are completely ludacris"
John C. Dvorak: journalist, podcaster, rapper. - PathDaemon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@"Macs suck. You get that from the name:OSX=OS SUX
They are too simple, they are designed for people that have never used a computer before, definately not for power users. I do not understand why some sysadmins like them (apart from the fact that users cannot mess the computers up). I would be more productive on a PII 200MHz than a g5."
Holy *****, rouslan! You couldn't be more wrong. First of all, "OS SUX" is a big stretch. Greater than transforming "Windows" to "Winblows" and possibly equal to making "Microsoft" "Microsucks".
As far as the second part of your comment, I'm led to believe that you haven't used a modern Mac for any length of time. ("I wouldn't want or need to," you'd surely respond). The only point I _really_ need to make is that OS X is based on UNIX. That is THE sysadmin-friendly, powerusertastic OS and CLI. Much greater than DOS. Hell, that's why there's that other OS called Linux — it's a free recreation of UNIX, NOT of DOS, which is Windows' core of choice.
To go further, you are right that the Mac OS is designed to work with those who have never used a computer before, but it's also designed to grow with the user… in a sense. The OS never actually changes, but new users simply don't notice or need to find advanced faces of the OS. I've been a computer user for my entire life, and have NEVER felt limited by the Mac OS because I do look for and find those faces. The fact that many graphic designers and video editors (like myself, though I'm primarily a student), is testament to this fact. The Mac OS is simple where it should be, where complication like that of Windows is unnecessary for equal performance. An indicator of this? Why are there so many stories of long-time Windows users becoming curious about Macs and eventually switching (without aggravation about limitations) but so few about switches in the other direction?
Enough of this. I've work to do. - tolbs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1There is one thing John C. Dvorak is: Smart. The guy is making a living off of everyone's fervor.
- speel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1John Dvorak reminds me of this old woman that lives around the corner from me , always complaining about other peoples trash. Go home Dvorak.
- TheReport, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"4. The iPod was designed to get people to move to the Mac, but this hasn’t happened. Dvorak suggests that the iPod has failed as switch-bait"
Yes and the Icecream companies created the chocolate flavor just to get people to start eating more vanilla icecream. - robroydude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Here here - tokenuser is correct - neither article has "hard" facts just speculation - JCD is entertaining even if he has "lost it”. I will continue to read his blogs as long as wants to post them and so will thousands of others.
Why anyone would want to blacklist him or any journalist boggles the mind - are we back in the McCarthy era? - is JDC some sort of commie? The blacklist suggestion is a pathetic attempt by some whinny whannabe's jealous of his success - nothing more. - badminus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I GET NO SPAM!!
- tyns, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0It would be ALSO smart to point out the fact that Steve Jobs "clearly" proclaimed at the announcement of the Intel Mac at WWDC that the HEART of the Macintosh is it's operating system..
Dvorak seemed to neglect this.
Apple dropping OS X would, according to Steve's words only a few montsh ago... Be tearing the heart out of the macintosh..
Another totally neglected fact is that Apple was developing OS X for intel secretly for HOW MANY YEARS?... It seems like a REALLY big waste of money on research and developement if dvorak were true... eeesh.
I like dvorak .. but sometimes he needs to think things through.. - DarkPilot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Love him or hate him Dvorak has made people think, really think. Apple may or may not switch to Windows we will have to wait and see. I personally think that Apple may add windows as an OPTION when you buy a new computer (i.e "Please select O.S: Mac OS XII or Microsoft Las Vegas") since they could still closely control the hardware to ensure smooth operation and I'm sure Microsoft would be more than happy to tweak Windows for apple. Heck, they tweaked Windows Mobile 5 for Palm didn't they?
I think we all just need to wait and see what happens and stop bitching that someone has a different ant opinion than yours.
- RobotCitizen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Dvorak being wrong needs no explanation.
(Damn captcha!) - FRAGaLOT, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Well the idea of them switching to windows and keeping the Mac GUI isn't a crazy idea. After all the move to OS X is exactly the same thing that Dvorak is hypothesizing. The change to the Unix/BSD kernel, while keeping the same Mac OS interface from version 9, is EXACTLY what Dvorak might be inferring from.
It really has nothing to do with the Intel cpu switch. That was done to make the Mac run faster; and use newer hardware... nothing more. After all Microsoft can compile Windows to run on anything if Microsoft really wanted too, which they did have multiple ports of Windows NT 10 years ago for Alpha Dec, CGi, i386, Macs.. etc.
Though I do not think anything significant will happen in this regard. - zybch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"It would be ALSO smart to point out the fact that Steve Jobs "clearly" proclaimed at the announcement of the Intel Mac at WWDC that the HEART of the Macintosh is it's operating system.."
But remember that Jobs also stated that there wouldn't ever be an iPod photo/video (whatever he said) and there now is.
Will they switch? I have no idea, but the sales figures for apple if their macs could run both OSX and Windows is undeniable. Extend that thinking just a bit further to a windows based mac and its easy to see what JCD believes might be happening.
No matter which way you look at it, apple realy does have to do something drastic to grow its brand. Remove the iPod sales from apple's bottom line and its a pretty sick company. I certainly wouldn't have wanted to own any stocks if the iPod hadn't been the sucess it has, but you can't realy sustain a company like Apple on just 1 product line. - Wamzlee, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0How does this have anything to do with terrorism?
WE ARE AT WAR PEOPLE!!! Get it through your heads.
Yes I am just being dumb. - starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0>I can do anything in OSX that I can on Linux or Solaris. I can write shell scripts in standard shell script
>languages, for example.
you can easily use automator to initiate shell scripts, applescripts, cron, quikeys mouse actions... pass apple events from one app to another in nice little kludges that work and are quick. - skara, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0why all these?
just wait for the next year to see if his predictions are right...
Dvorak rockz as always - enzomedici, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0
Do you really need an article to see why Apple won't drop OS X? Dvorak's an idiot. Apple would never in their right mind drop OS X. OS X is Apple.
If Apple were to ever drop OS X, they can kiss their fan base good bye. - simd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why don't they make OSX open source?
- UbuntuAtlantis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Since when has Dvorak ever been right?
- dotuplink, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Dvorak = Stupid
APPLE IS MOSTLY A SOFTWARE COMPANY! - starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i think, that it is a lot more likely that Microsoft will dump Windows in the public domain... and adopt OS X. Vista is behind. When it does come out it is likely to be lagging in its already lagging kludginess. OS X will be a few more steps ahead by the time Vista does come out. Microsoft needs a complete code rewrite to dump old parts of the x86 CPU. They more than less need a complete rewrite to take advantage of inels latest and near future CPUs. They already have a complete line of Mac Software that is great. more or less. Microsofts Mac software is usually better than its Windows software. They regroup with new appleeque software lines. Apple gets the headaches of security. Microsoft has a better OS to develop on. Microsoft goes for entertainment stuff on the xbox and works with opensource windows to do more gaming... Windows is a looser and getting worse. Best thing that could happen to it is get thrown in public domain.
- gezick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0this article makes some interesting points,
but so do this one, and it was posted almost 10 days ago...
here's the link.
http://stefan.dlcblogs.com/articles/2006/02/16/john-c-dvorak-is-a-poopy-head - leonbev, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I gotta hand it to Dvorak. He may be a senile old fart who stopped understanding the technology business five years ago, but he's probably the best professional troll out there. He posts flamebait like this every week in his blog, and you fanboys keep falling for it EVERY time.
- CarbonAndroid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0He's wrong. Maybe Apple will come out w/ a dual boot machine. I would buy one. While I don't particularly like MS, I have to have it to develop/support windows apps.
- simX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You're seriously kidding me. Someone took Dvorak's bait and actually posted a response? Are you SERIOUSLY kidding me?
- charge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't think that Apple would make a complete switch, but I think that they're going to make it easier so you can run Windows alongside OSX on their machines. The only appeal in OSX and Apple hardware is because it's pretty. But, it's too expensive nonetheless.
"i think, that it is a lot more likely that Microsoft will dump Windows in the public domain... and adopt OS X. Vista is behind."
Stupidest thing anyone has ever said. - biff198, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"Macs suck. You get that from the name:OSX=OS SUX
They are too simple, they are designed for people that have never used a computer before, definately not for power users. I do not understand why some sysadmins like them"
lol that makes no sense! You first say that macs are simple, but then you say you don't know why sys admins like them. Um... if I was a sys admin, I would want things to be as simple as possible. I would hate to do everything from a CLI or something like that.
__________________________
-biff198
http://www.crusaderflash.com/ - Klowner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+01. Because he is a cuckoo bananas
- AttroPheed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0John C. Dvorak's "recent" article?
+inaccurate. - TMon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I heard that ninjas are coming to take over the world. Is this true? Please repond immediatly.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 132 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by