| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Daily Microsoft Shorts (December 19th 2002) | |
|
||
| Time: 11:32 EST/16:32 GMT | News Source: ActiveWin.com | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Here are today's Microsoft daily shorts:
| ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 330 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:33:58 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 12/19/2002 12:23:19 PM |
|
IDC estimates that the market share for Mac OS dropped to 3.1 percent in 2001 from 4.6 percent two years earlier. Windows, in contrast, has more than 90 percent market share.
"Certainly by...2005, possibly by the end of 2003, Linux will pass Mac OS as the No. 2 operating environment," said IDC analyst Dan Kusnetzky. Sodajerk? nomdlev? |
| #2 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 12/19/2002 1:01:16 PM |
| things are looking bad for apple. it might be time to restart that "sun will acquire apple" rumor again. |
| #3 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/19/2002 3:07:50 PM |
|
I don't have a problem with the marketshare. Did you read the story? On this issue, I would say MS is behind and doesn't have a favorable strategy going forward. I see MS's XML claims going bye-bye (at least looking weak and pathetic) if other OSes and devices are using SyncML and Windows is left an island using activesync...
Read the title of the article and then read the article again, and then tell me how MS is going to be able to preempt Apple in the sync game. |
| #4 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/19/2002 3:38:16 PM |
| You don't understand open source or Apple at all, do you, parker? |
| #5 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/19/2002 3:47:35 PM |
|
Heck, who knows where things stand...
Not you certainly, Kennedy. Boy, you are off in every respect in matters that could be verified with about 2 seconds of effort. |
| #6 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 12/19/2002 3:49:45 PM |
|
Sodajerk, I did read the story, and obviously it's more about synchronizing non-PC devices than it is about market share. I was just curious what the Applephile response was to Linux being no. 2 on the desktop within the next two years.
As for Activesync, who knows what is planned. Rest assured that Microsoft will compete. |
| #7 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/19/2002 4:02:38 PM |
|
My take is that it doesn't mean too much. Apple goes through cycles where it's sales (this is new hardware sales after all) climbs to slightly +5% and then declines to 3%--IDC, Gartner and the rest always interpret this as real world marketshare (when in fact, the Apple product life cycle is longer than the PC, and there is no way to guage how many PCs become non-Win post sales, etc...) or as a sign that this is a continuing declining trend. I don't see that as true. In general, I'm satisfied with Apple's persistence. This is likely to be a good year if the overall economy turns around in the slightest way. Note for example that Apple has opened over 50 stores--and these are expensive stores on prime real estate--yet the venture is expected to show a profit this quarter. That's an incredible accomplishment in one year's time considering the number of stores and how much they spend on them... Yes, maybe there are questions about long term profitability of these stores, but if the predictions hold true and these stores are profitable by end of year, I'm happy.
I'm not concerned about linux marketshare, bully for them. Linux doesn't threaten Apple that much. In fact, the issues that face Linux on the desktop benefit Apple. Driver issues, quality apps, etc... If Linux can ackle those issues, Apple can quickly and easily reap the benefits itself. For me, the only question is: is there a threat to Apple's viability? I have seen their viability increase over the last year and a half even under extremely difficult economic circumstances, particularly for them. |
| #8 By 2960 (156.80.64.132) at 12/19/2002 4:04:00 PM |
|
#6,
One can only hope.... The PowerPC is a disaster. Motorola's inability to keep it's technology competitive performance wise is killing Apple. TL |
| #9 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/19/2002 4:25:04 PM |
|
Well, parker, do you know the issues that would need to be faced in order to do so? Classic and Classic apps would have to be dead. Carbon and Cocoa apps would have to be ported. Linux fans still aren't going to buy a premium box even if it does kick ass. Macs already have a Windows emulator. And, well, just let me tell, and I do know, this isn't going to happen, plain and simple.
As for Linux dying because every OSer will realize that OS X is the way to go? Where do you buy your crack? Have you followed the GNU Darwin story today? Yeah, it sounds like the OSers are really "realizing" something, here.... NOT. And as for MS making a killing--they are already floundering on the Mac; they had only sold 750,000 copies of v.X when they had expected 2 million. Apple is months away from releasing a competitive AppleWorks with full Office compatibility, their own browser, and new iApps. How happy is that going to make Microsoft, and how are they going to respond to this "opportunity"? Hmmm? Having some silly delusions doesn't mean your informed. Or being informed and completely ignoring the implications, doesn't mean you aren't deluded. |
| #10 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/19/2002 5:13:24 PM |
|
No, I asked where you get your's so I could get a hold of that good sh!t too.
So, then, do you realize that IBM wouldn't have much interest in Apple and would have no clue how to market a consumer computer if you are able to realize that it's not Linux. And, yes, it's easy to laugh off the idea of Apple switching to Linux. Very Easy. |
| #11 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 12/19/2002 5:49:22 PM |
|
I agree with Sodajerk about Apple switching to AMD--this is a silly idea. Parker, you are right that the faithful would "follow them into hell" (LOL!), but with IBM in the PowerPC chip queue, it would be nonsensical for Apple to switch to an x86 platform. The architecture is a viable one, it's just that Motorolla has fallen far behind the performance bar of Intel and AMD (despite Apple's surface/marketing claims to the contrary--for more information, check out: http://www.azillionmonkeys.com/qed/apple.html).
But Sodajerk, you're saying that the next version of AppleWorks will have FULL Office compatibility??? You mean, you can even use Office macros in it? It has full VB functionality? It connects to Exchange via MAPI? You can run it against MSDE? You can open any Word document, and NO reformatting at all will be required--even complex tables, headers/footers/footnotes/margins, table of contents, table of authorities, etc.? I don't think anything has FULL Office compatibility. |
| #12 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/19/2002 6:01:18 PM |
| bluvg, I'm talking about compatibility of the level of Office v.X for Mac. Which is essentially full support. Office compatibility--not compatibility with MS's proprietary tools which go way beyond Office and are found in no other products besides MS on MS. In other words, the type of compatibility that necessary for exchanging the types of files that you would want to exchange with organizations outside your own. So yes to" You can open any Word document, and NO reformatting at all will be required--even complex tables, headers/footers/footnotes/margins, table of contents, table of authorities, etc.?" No, to everything else. |
| #13 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 12/19/2002 6:16:19 PM |
|
But there's the rub, Sodajerk--exchanging files with organizations outside your own. Proprietary or not, Office is the de facto standard, and unless you're exchanging documents that you might as well have done in WordPad, you're going to encounter compatibility problems. The promise of Office interoperability has been offered by countless competitors in the past, and it never happens. WordPerfect, which arguably stood to benefit most from full compatibility, couldn't achieve it. Star Office doesn't do it. Lotus SmartSuite doesn't have it. Don't believe the premature claims from Apple that they will be able to open ANY Office document and require zero formatting changes.
Also, this problem hardly ends at exchanging documents. If you're an organization contemplating a move to another office suite, plan on recreating those macros. And plan on giving up the power available in VBA. Plan on giving up a best-of-breed email client. Plan on giving up A LOT. |
| #14 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/19/2002 6:32:51 PM |
|
Actually, bluvg, that's not a problem. At least in my work environment, and I work for a decent size consulting firm that needs to exchange data with clients, owners, governments (state, local, federal, and international), regulatory agencies, other consulting and engineering firms, architects, etc... From the little guys up to the big multinationals, and I have never seen a file using MAPI connections or MSDE data (wouldn't you have a problem exchanging such a file anyway if the database or exchange server didn't exist at the other location even if you were entirely Win?)... Never. There are occasionally macros, but they are usually disabled or have no affect when disabled.
So what I am talkign about is formatting. If you have useed Mac Office (Tech can tell you), formatting compatibility is 100%. (This is, of course, due to the fact that MS is developing both products.) However, if Apple does achieve this, that is what needs to be done to allow Mac users to use another program and still exchange files with Win/Office users. Who the hell brought up migrating mail servers, and devleoping automated macros, and this crap? I don't care--I'm talking about empowering Mac users to do without Office. That's what I care about. That's it. Small victories, my friend, small victories that sting. |
| #15 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/19/2002 7:01:05 PM |
|
oH, mY gOd!!!!
I had no freakin' idea!!!! Ain't that amazin'!!! Jesus christ, parker... you are entertaining. |
| #16 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/19/2002 7:07:23 PM |
| by the way, bluvg, the current incarnation of Appleworks which is , what?, four years old already has extremely good compatibility--I would say about 75-90%. So from what I've been hearing--i.e. a substantial improvement worthy of a 100% file compatibility claim, seems accomplishable. |
| #17 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/19/2002 7:19:42 PM |
|
sodajerk: http://a1468.g.akamai.net/f/1468/580/1d/pics.drugstore.com/prodimg/15081/200.jpg
|
| #18 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/19/2002 7:27:07 PM |
|
what's your point, soda? I'm just answering bluvg's questions, and am trying to let parker and Kennedy understand that they need a little help.
Did you have something to add? |
| #19 By 3653 (65.190.70.73) at 12/19/2002 7:53:47 PM |
| sodajerk is a consultant? hell, that explains everything. |
| #20 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 12/19/2002 8:09:23 PM |
| No, I'm not. And its environmental consulting and engineering. Not exactly the same ballpark as what I imagine you are thinking of. |
| #21 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/19/2002 9:40:29 PM |
| Actually that does explain the need for ex-lax... |
| #22 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 12/20/2002 11:13:01 AM |
|
Sodajerk, I'm talking about MAPI connections to an Exchange server. Exchange is a huge part of many, many organizations, and a POP3 or IMAP connection doesn't really cut it in most cases. If you hope to move completely away from Microsoft on your desktop to another email client, plan on giving up a lot in terms of functionality. I never specifically brought up migrating email servers, but it brings up an important point--if your backend (servers, not your own backend ;) is currently integrated with and tuned to your office suite, you're either going to lose functionality (in reality, not rhetoric), or you're going to have to migrate the backend (and likely still lose functionality).
If you aren't using macros, then your situation is much easier. Macros are a very powerful part of an office suite, though, and VBA in Office is good part of the reason for its high value. If you haven't exploited macros, you really haven't put Office to work for your organization... or perhaps WordPad really is all you need. Why are you bringing up Office for Mac? I have used it (98 and 2001), and of course it should be 100% compatible. What bearing would that have on AppleWorks, unless they were to somehow license the file formats from Microsoft? It all depends on the environment, really--if you're exchanging documents with other Office users very little or never, or if your documents are fairly simple and never use macros (which perhaps begs the question why you were using Office in the first place), or if reformatting isn't much of an issue, or if you just hate Microsoft and in the name of spite will turn a blind eye towards any extra work you may be creating for your organization, then migrating away from Office might be for you. |
| #23 By 1845 (12.209.152.69) at 12/21/2002 12:00:51 AM |
| Just my opinion here, but the ex-lax "joke" is rather old. Rather than mocking jerk, the more reasonable solutions seems to be to either refute his arguments or ignore him if you think refuting the argument would fall on deaf ears. |
| #24 By 901897 (188.165.141.7) at 11/27/2012 11:20:44 AM |
|
This does not mean, necessarily, letting down your guard and pouring your heart out about how much you love your grandmother. This also depends on your own personality, your niche and the audience you are targeting. You should not, however, blog about anything that you wouldn't write in a business email.
<a href=http://cheapjordans2013.loveslife.biz/>cheap air jordans</a> You can draw inspiration from others, but make sure you instill your blog with your own personality as well! <a href=http://cheapnfljerseys168.22web.org/>Cheap NFL Jerseys</a> |
| #25 By 868449 (110.85.126.20) at 11/27/2012 4:39:45 PM |
|
Making some extra money is something that a lot of folks have to do these days just to get by, and you're going to discover that there are multiple ways that this can be carried out. Something you may possibly or may not be aware of would be the fact that there plenty of individuals nowadays attempting to make money online mainly because they heard this is actually a very viable option. The only problem is that plenty of folks do not know how to start making cash from the Internet mainly because they do not have the information that they need in order to get started. If you want to begin making cash online you'll be glad to know that we will be going over a number of the techniques you could use in order to accomplish this.
<a href=http://www.shopjordanscheap.com/air-jordan-fusion-c-118.html>buy cheap air jordan shoes</a> Even though the two methods we discussed above are the most popular ways to earning money online and you're going to discover that there are additionally a great many other ways you go about doing this. With regards to learning other ways of making cash on the web you're going to discover that there are tons of different methods that can be used and to be able to discover what they are, I recommend using the various search engines to find out exactly what they are. <a href=http://www.jordansoutletcheap.com/air-jordan-shoes-c-307.html>air jordans china</a> |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 330 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:33:58 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
