![]() ![]() It could be Apple hoped someone would put something out that bridged the gap between iMovie and Final Cut Pro, but nobody did – at least not as quickly as Apple would like. It could be Apple was hoping someone might take a shot at that, but nobody did. The only other real presentation software for OS X is PowerPoint. I think they feel developers have not come out with software quickly enough to fill what Apple sees as voids. Also, in the beginning, developers were slow to come to OS X and perhaps Apple started to panic a little. I also think there are other factors involved. I think that Apple, having become mostly oriented to the digital lifestyle, feels they *must* provide a good out-of-box experience in that regard. And by angrying third party developers, who can write more than just 1 app, they are limiting their own software base, which can never be a good thing for a platform… The point here is not Apple driving the app base, because no matter how big company they are, they can’t write everything. At least not as much as it would have if such an app wouldn’t come with the OS. This is why, if something comes with the OS, an alternative but similar app won’t have much luck. They just use whatever it comes with the OS, and for extra needs they just go to their software retailer to buy an office suite or something like that. People (not geeks like you and me who want to try out everything under the sun) don’t download software much. Mozilla is still around or under 1% of the web browser market and it is almost one year out on 1.0 status (plus it runs on other platforms where it is the dominant browser e.g. > After a while free alternatives become good enough for everyday use, and become part of a free infrastructure. Maybe this is why Apple wanted to originally charge for the 3/4 of the iLife applications? (now they only charge for the iDVD) And a platform, sooner or later is as good as dead when it loses its developers. But this “kind” gesture towards its users, kills many developers. You can’t of course blame Apple for offering for free very nice software. Doesn’t this story sound a bit like IE, Windows and Netscape? The rest 6 browses on OSX will have no major future (Apple’s userbase is just 2.3% leaving no major profits to the rest of the players in the “background”). Now think when Apple brings Safari to stable status, add tabs and incorporate it with the OS. More over, Safari is not out for more than 15 days yet and it is already the No1 browser of choice among many OSX users. Safari has already won, the rest is just to see by how much.” In the meantime, Safari tops 1 million downloads. Who aspires to be number two in an already over-commoditized space? Working my ass off for 3% just isn’t any fun any more. AOL and Netscape have no interest in supporting it. It’s obvious it will only ever be a marginal product on a even more marginal platform. Update: One of the two developers (the most commited one) of Chimera is thinking of dropping out: “I’m torn about what to do with Chimera. In the past we talked about it regarding the Watson application and its competition with Sherlock 3. iTunes just got to be far too big, far too free, and far too bundled with the OS.” The editorial is going on giving more examples how Apple is taking away market from the small developers by embedding such user software on OSX (e.g. A note from Subband Software, former developer of MacAmp, cropped up recently: “Thanks to everyone who supported us over the years. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |