Woz was always the guy that built stuff and Jobs explained how it worked. I don't see how Woz giving a keynote would make it any shorter as he likes to ramble. It took them an hour before the iPhone was announced last week. We don't need these things dragging on any longer.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Steve Wozniak back at Apple
- Thread starter TSE
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
no it was the other way round as far as i know Woz got number 1 and Steve Jobs got number 2 , Jobs protested and got number 0 , because 0 comes before 1
Woz is a fan of open stuff , under him OSX would become multi platform (means would run on any hardware out there )
The days when Apple did only make money with selling computers are gone anyway , they make more money with selling iphones and ipads , and itunes and apps anyway.
So making OSX multi platform like LINUX would be something that should have been done a half decade ago with the transition .
I explain why , you want to try out OSX , you got at the moment only 3 choices :
1. either to spend the money on a brandnew Mac (the safest way as you can return it within 7 days and get the money back or get it repaird for free or exchanged under warranty )
2. a used intel iMac (not always a great idea as some break down ,mainly gpu ,psu display problems a day after you bought them , high resale value brings lots of scammers who want to sell their 4 year old half dead unsupported under Lion Mac's (all the core duo's)for more then 50% of the NEW price today
3. a hackintosh (self building with all those drawbacks if you chose the wrong parts)
so finally getting a 4th option and buying OSX say for £50 or $50 , (you still get it for free on your Mac ) to run on a HP , Dell or ASUS or lenovo or whatever PC people have at home would be great , and maybe one day those will buy a NEW Mac for its design , as thats essentially (hardware) the only difference between a ... PC and a Mac , but even if not ,Microsoft and Linux would get real competition , as at the moment OSX is everything but a competition for Microsoft or Linux , because it runs only on Mac's or some hackintoshes, so nothing to fear from OSX , and then there comes Android , as Android hits already the netbook market so the first desktop running Android is not to far away in the future in fact you can already install it on a x86 based PC . and there are already All in one Pc's running Android http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PecyisPGzGc and netbooks or ultra portables http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpL-ZQf-tRc&feature=relmfu and even desktops http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Gfs5ujSw1Q&feature=relmfu
and thats all you need for what most do on their computers , surfing ,emailing ,watching 1080p videos and play some little games
And i think OSX does not deserve to stand in the shadow of Windows, Linux,and soon Android and i think Woz could give OSX the place in the computer world it deserves
Last edited:
Aren't you from the state where people voted for the same guy that says "I'll be back," and used to lift weight building a questionable physique? Yeah, it could happen that Woz works at apple again.
sorry now i cant stop loughing i just have those pictures in mind
dont forget Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak had been a great team and without those two there had never been a company called Apple in first place ,and it was Steve Wozniak who did design and build the Apple I and II , Steve Jobs had the idea that one could sell those things as he believed the world would need them .
dont forget Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak had been a great team and without those two there had never been a company called Apple in first place ,and it was Steve Wozniak who did design and build the Apple I and II , Steve Jobs had the idea that one could sell those things as he believed the world would need them .
Last edited:
Yeah, licensing Mac OS worked so well for them in the 90s. Apple is a hardware company and makes its money selling hardware. iTunes and Apps are a drop in the bucket. Hell, even the near end of life iPod makes tons more money for Apple than iTunes or Apps. Licensing OS X would be the beginning of the end for Apple.
I don't get the fascination with Woz. He made his mark 30 years ago. That's a long, long time ago. Apple's customers (the vast majority) have no connection to him. OS X has its place in the world and has been growing more than other PC makers for 20 consecutive quarters.
Agreed, for Apple the software is the means to get customers to buy their hardware. Licensing OSX will cannibalize Mac sales to a high extent
There's definitely a fascination with him, but given his track record (there isn't any) for producing products over the past 30 years, it makes little sense to bring him back into the fold.
Woz is not someone I'm fascinated with, because I'm not into hero worship. That's the problem here. Everyone seems to yearn for another hero as they had in Jobs. The fact is I have a high level of respect for Woz, I know enough about the man to know that while he's been out of the Apple spotlight (a place he never sought anyway) he remains very current & relavent in the high tech space. His lack of an over inflated ego and complete lack of narcissism are not weaknesses. He's a Thinker, Innovator & Engineer that would be a huge asset to Apple. Yet being a modern man who lives in the present he doesn't need Apple, even though he has a love of the company.
The sooner the fans of Apple accept the reality that things change & times change, the better. This is a new era in the history of Apple. Yes I've read where Steve left years of future products in the pipeline, the warp speed of change & fickle retail buyers may upset that Apple cart.
We are now going to see just what Apple is made of now that their "Ace in the hole" is gone forever. Fanboys should brace themselves, it will never be the same again.
Apple will live on, but the Magic is gone, never to be recreated again.
Now with a slight more level playing field some ugly truths may be revealed.
I'm sending good wishes & positive thoughts Tim Cooks way. He's a great guy that just stepped into a hornets nest I wouldn't wish on anyone. At every turn this man will be expected to be like Steve. The fan boys just don't get it.
Only Time will tell how long it takes from running on autopilot as they will do, until they are truly forced to compete in the new world order.
Now _that will be _fascinating_
The sooner the fans of Apple accept the reality that things change & times change, the better. This is a new era in the history of Apple. Yes I've read where Steve left years of future products in the pipeline, the warp speed of change & fickle retail buyers may upset that Apple cart.
We are now going to see just what Apple is made of now that their "Ace in the hole" is gone forever. Fanboys should brace themselves, it will never be the same again.
Apple will live on, but the Magic is gone, never to be recreated again.
Now with a slight more level playing field some ugly truths may be revealed.
I'm sending good wishes & positive thoughts Tim Cooks way. He's a great guy that just stepped into a hornets nest I wouldn't wish on anyone. At every turn this man will be expected to be like Steve. The fan boys just don't get it.
Only Time will tell how long it takes from running on autopilot as they will do, until they are truly forced to compete in the new world order.
Now _that will be _fascinating_
ok then lets keep OSX to the people who are willing to buy Mac's
Sorry but was more interested in OSX , and by making it available to everybody Apple would still create profit ,but the only person who would do that would be Woz .
I guess Apple is to scared to get competition ,shown in all the lawsuits they battle , if their products would be as good technically as some claim .... they would not need to fear any competitor on the market
Sorry but was more interested in OSX , and by making it available to everybody Apple would still create profit ,but the only person who would do that would be Woz .
I guess Apple is to scared to get competition ,shown in all the lawsuits they battle , if their products would be as good technically as some claim .... they would not need to fear any competitor on the market
Last edited:
A little premature. Give it a year, at least.
As for Woz, there is nothing he can really offer Apple at this point. There's little point in even discussing it.
They've been competing just fine for over a decade, including in this so-called "new world order", which they happened to create.
Has Apple been competing in some mysterious alternate reality we don't know about?
Last edited:
Apple did not compete at all , they filed a lawsuit against every form of competition since the iMac G3 , thats why PC's cant look as good as Mac's , as soon as there was a glimps of hope in the pc world that a designer could creat a gorgeuos looking PC Apple was at court and filed a case because it looks to much like a MacPro . There are not many ways you can design a AIO system either, a display and a computer behind automatically leads to a design close to a iMac and Apple runs to court .
Same with OSX as soon as sombody is creating a computer that could challenge Apple in terms of quality and price and can run OSX they file a case .
OK they made Darvin open source ,yes , but anybody who would try to alter Darvin a bit would have to fear to get dragged to court because it might be to much like OSX a reason why Darvin as operating system never really took off like Linux for example
Same with OSX as soon as sombody is creating a computer that could challenge Apple in terms of quality and price and can run OSX they file a case .
OK they made Darvin open source ,yes , but anybody who would try to alter Darvin a bit would have to fear to get dragged to court because it might be to much like OSX a reason why Darvin as operating system never really took off like Linux for example
Last edited:
Woz is still a big advocate for Apple. Having said that, my impression is that his interests don't currently lie along the same lines Apple is pursuing.
certainly. especially since its been clear for a long time that Apple and MS borrow UI stuff from each other all the time. And there are a lot of AIO computers out there are a similar enough to the iMacs as well, they're just cluttered and not put together as well by comparison.
Sony Vaio Z series looks just as good, if not better, than Apple laptops.
The reason Apple is where it's at now is because Steve Jobs knew where to go even if it meant breaking technological boundaries that consumers were not ready for yet. He was the visionary.
USB on the iMac G3 was the first example of this.
MacBook Air was another.
Another reason is Jonathan Ive. He creates designs that are rarely rivaled in the industry.
Another is the marketing department. From what I know, Steve Jobs personally controlled a lot of the advertisement when he first made his comeback and through the early days.
I think Cook is going to be a very successful CEO. I just wish he had a bit more flavor in the keynotes.
The reason Apple is where it's at now is because Steve Jobs knew where to go even if it meant breaking technological boundaries that consumers were not ready for yet. He was the visionary.
USB on the iMac G3 was the first example of this.
MacBook Air was another.
Another reason is Jonathan Ive. He creates designs that are rarely rivaled in the industry.
Another is the marketing department. From what I know, Steve Jobs personally controlled a lot of the advertisement when he first made his comeback and through the early days.
I think Cook is going to be a very successful CEO. I just wish he had a bit more flavor in the keynotes.
Last edited:
maybe but thats how it looks like in reality
latest example is the case Apple vs Samsung
how can one make a tablet that does not look remotely like a iPad
unless you are making the tablet 5 inch thick with a round display
and it started with the case Apple against eMachines in 1999 about their eONE
it was cheaper , and ok it was even cheaper buildquality , and you could not even upgrade the ram inside , but it had ethernet as standard unlike all the other pc's at the time , so it was not really a competition for the iMac G3 , but the price difference made it compete with the iMac G3 as it was several $100 cheaper..and offered a worse looking but easier to use mouse
Last edited:
Excellent business plan. Play against Microsoft, the largest OS monopoly in the world, according to Microsoft's rules. That's a sure winner. And for what? So that people can run MacOS X for $50 (as you suggest) instead of having them buy a Macintosh for $1000 or more?
Why would Apple do that?
Many businesses struggle because they come up with ideas how to run the business, and they forget to answer a simple question: Why would customers want to buy our products or services? You do exactly the opposite here. You think about what Apple should do in your phantasies, but you completely ignore the question: What is in it for Apple?
Toshiba Thrive. One look, and it says to you "I am not an iPad".
Or Sony's new tablet.
There's a story about Raymond Loewy (I trust you know how to use Google) who was hired by a company whose product design was copied, went to court, and the defendant company claimed that the product couldn't be designed any other way. So Raymond Loewy just turned up in the court room with _three_ designs that all worked just fine and all looked _completely_ different than the original.
And of course another tablet that won't look like the iPad 2 is the iPad 3 that Jon Ives is working on right now.
In the eMachines case, Apple sued and won because they had a design patent for the iMac, and the eOne matched that design patent. On the other hand, eMachines _also_ had design patents for an all-in-one computer (that looked totally different), and they could have just built _that_ computer, and if Apple had copied it, eMachines could have and would have sued Apple, and they would have won. eMachines really had no excuse for copying the iMac, because they had designed and legally protected a different design themselves.
Why would Apple do that?
Many businesses struggle because they come up with ideas how to run the business, and they forget to answer a simple question: Why would customers want to buy our products or services? You do exactly the opposite here. You think about what Apple should do in your phantasies, but you completely ignore the question: What is in it for Apple?
Toshiba Thrive. One look, and it says to you "I am not an iPad".
Or Sony's new tablet.
There's a story about Raymond Loewy (I trust you know how to use Google) who was hired by a company whose product design was copied, went to court, and the defendant company claimed that the product couldn't be designed any other way. So Raymond Loewy just turned up in the court room with _three_ designs that all worked just fine and all looked _completely_ different than the original.
And of course another tablet that won't look like the iPad 2 is the iPad 3 that Jon Ives is working on right now.
In the eMachines case, Apple sued and won because they had a design patent for the iMac, and the eOne matched that design patent. On the other hand, eMachines _also_ had design patents for an all-in-one computer (that looked totally different), and they could have just built _that_ computer, and if Apple had copied it, eMachines could have and would have sued Apple, and they would have won. eMachines really had no excuse for copying the iMac, because they had designed and legally protected a different design themselves.
Last edited:
sorry but maybe i am no capitalist as i dont think a company should work to creat profits for the sake of profit making , so just enough to cover the cost is fair and honest , any more profit that created should go back into society to do good things , like building hospitals , schools, .... instead of making some people like shareholders rich while others have to live in poverty , as i am radical in that view , call me a right wing Marxist (not communist please , because communism in the forms known to mankind has more in common with Fascism and Capitalism then with Socialism ) and as you see in the recession we are in , and we are in since at least the 70's as from then on western governments have gone only into dept while some corporations create billions a year profits and thats wrong and antisocial
as from wiki:
"Capitalism according to Marxist theory can no longer sustain the living standards of the population due to its need to compensate for falling rates of profit by driving down wages, cutting social benefits and pursuing military aggression. A socialist economy would not base production on the accumulation of capital, but would instead base production and economic activity on the criteria of satisfying human needs - that is, production would be carried out directly for use.
Eventually, socialism would give way to a communist stage of history: a classless, stateless system based on common ownership and free-access, superabundance and maximum freedom for individuals to develop their own capacities and talents. As a political movement, Marxism advocates for the creation of such a society."
so i would still produce top end Mac's , some need them to do their Job , and a life without computers today is unthinkable so we need them , but not as luxuries ,so i would produce them but sell them to just to cover the production and development cost and not to make profit on top and i would make sure the production workers in China get at a fair wage ,like if they would if they would work in Cupertino ... the son of one of my production workers in China if i would run Apple should not need to sell a kidney to buy a iPhone 4(took it as a exaggerating example i dont think he was a son of a Apple employee ) , they would get one for free every year as a thank you for good work , and they could take the Mac's with little flaws like a scratch on the back(these things happen in production ) for free if they want one, and Schools and students around the world would get them for just the production cost instead of just a discount , as i believe a student should only have to worry about his exams and not about money as they are our future and a lot cant afford to go to university because they cant even afford the equiment needed
as from wiki:
"Capitalism according to Marxist theory can no longer sustain the living standards of the population due to its need to compensate for falling rates of profit by driving down wages, cutting social benefits and pursuing military aggression. A socialist economy would not base production on the accumulation of capital, but would instead base production and economic activity on the criteria of satisfying human needs - that is, production would be carried out directly for use.
Eventually, socialism would give way to a communist stage of history: a classless, stateless system based on common ownership and free-access, superabundance and maximum freedom for individuals to develop their own capacities and talents. As a political movement, Marxism advocates for the creation of such a society."
so i would still produce top end Mac's , some need them to do their Job , and a life without computers today is unthinkable so we need them , but not as luxuries ,so i would produce them but sell them to just to cover the production and development cost and not to make profit on top and i would make sure the production workers in China get at a fair wage ,like if they would if they would work in Cupertino ... the son of one of my production workers in China if i would run Apple should not need to sell a kidney to buy a iPhone 4(took it as a exaggerating example i dont think he was a son of a Apple employee ) , they would get one for free every year as a thank you for good work , and they could take the Mac's with little flaws like a scratch on the back(these things happen in production ) for free if they want one, and Schools and students around the world would get them for just the production cost instead of just a discount , as i believe a student should only have to worry about his exams and not about money as they are our future and a lot cant afford to go to university because they cant even afford the equiment needed
Last edited:
Don't worry, nobody mistook you for a person knowing the slightest thing about how to run a company.
I think Woz would make a good addition to some greater role in Apple. He isn't clueless, lets face it.
People may find him charismatic enough to pay some attention to what he says. My two cents....
People may find him charismatic enough to pay some attention to what he says. My two cents....
i know, but i running mine sucessfully since 10 years ..means i can live from it and thats all that counts for me , i never had the intention to make big profit , i do it just to cover the cost of daily living and for the fun . So if i can avoid spending money i will , means i need the product that does the job , and i dont care how old it is or how outdated for others , if it does the job and is cheap then fine , i would spend more if i would see sence in it
For OSX it means i would like to see it available for all plattforms , i mean Microsoft is creating a little profit from selling their operating system too as far as i know .
Apple did not well with selling operating systems in the past has a reason , they did not well because their OS did run only on certain hardware like today .
and i believe the only who would change that is Woz
Having said that as its proven by some hackintoshers that OSX can run on AMD processor based platforms it makes me think back ..Officially OSX was originally made for PPC so Apple said and nobody did expect anything else , but they secretly made it from the start to run on intel .So i believe OSX is secretly made from the beginning 10.0 to run on AMD processors too
Last edited: