The iPod is More Than an MP3 Player!

The transformation of Apple from a computer manufacturer to electronic device manufacturer has begun. Mark it down as the iPod.


The iPod is one nifty MP3 player/recorder, but I believe Apple may have an underlying strategy with the device. Has everyone noted there been no Apple-branded PDA device announced? Could iPod possibly be the handheld device that will deliver this technology to Mac (and possibly Windows) users? Think about it.


Now I am not familiar with the underlying technology in iPod. However, what I do know is that it can serve as a hard drive for Firewire-equipped Macs and has its own operating system used to select and play songs. If you take this one step further it would be noted that programs theoretically could be installed and run on the device. Now , you tell me, how hard would it be for Apple to write PDA software to run on iPod? They already know how to do it (Newton) and they would have had to been blind not to see the tremendous potential out there (Palm, Microsoft CE devices).


You may say, well Newton was a bomb, so why would they want to go after this market again? Well, the answer is simple: iPod wouldn't just be an MP3 player/recorder, PDA or whatever. Depending on software installed, it's a cool and extremely portable extension of your computer desktop. Steve Jobs said it himself during the introduction of iPod: it will go places only PowerBooks dream of.


Well, there's my theory. Hey, I may be wrong, but it's interesting speculation nevertheless, huh?


No matter what happens with iPod, it appears Apple will be introducing more non-computer based gadgets in the future and attempting to migrate to more of a computer electronics company.


Click here for an example from Mac Directory that shows the iPod can be more than an MP3 player!

Different May Not That Bad After All!

A funny thing is happening on the way to world PC domination. Many journalists covering the computing industry are writing that fewer PC manufacturers may be a good thing and that Apple has a real chance of becoming a relevant computing platform once again (as if Mac users had to be told that). I've noted some significant news stories covering the computer industry the past several weeks.


It all started when Hewlett-Packard bought Compaq a few weeks ago and someone forgot to tell HP that a merger of the two PC box manufacturers wasn't necessarily a good thing. Stocks dropped and the PC press jumped in with both feet. What I liked most about the whole debacle is what they said about Apple:


"Dell sells online and through catalogues, its primary customers are companies and businessmen," writes Charles Haddad in his Byte of the Apple column. "Although Apple's online sales are growing smartly, the company still sells largely through retail outlets. Its customers are home users, students and artists. And that pits Apple directly against HP and Compaq, which dominate the consumer market for PCs ... If HP and Compaq wed, odds are good that one of these well-known consumer brands in PC retailing will disappear. That thinning of the marketing clutter should help elevate Apple's already lustrous brand name among consumers."


Charles Haddad of Business Week writes how brilliant he thinks Apple's strategy is to open retail outlets across the country.


"Call me crazy, but I agree with the handful of analysts who believe Apple-branded stores are a stroke of genius," said Haddad. "A place like CompUSA is basically a fast-food joint, except the boxes hold microprocessors rather than hamburgers. Sure, the labeling varies from box to box -- Sony, Compaq , whatever -- but what's inside is pretty much same. Not so with a Mac. It has a unique architecture that not only melds the machine to the operating system but enables users to do just about anything -- from playing graphic-intensive games to editing video -- without adding new parts. It never ceases to amaze me the hassles PC users learned to accept. Games that won't work without special cards. Printers that work with one PC and not another."


No truer words have ever been spoken about a computing platform.


Another Internet writer made the following observation recently (sorry, I didn't get the name or attribution):


"Ironically, Apple now appears to be the most stable company in the business (even though Dell is formidable). HP/Compaq's and IBM's ongoing presence in the desktop market is far from certain. Sony has so many other businesses that it's involvement with PC's need not be permanent. I'd think with the Xbox coming out that Sony (maker of PlayStation) would try to prevent people from using Windows since consoles and PC's are starting to converge. Gateway is in trouble, eMachines has been delisted from the NASDAQ, Micron, Acer, Tandy, NEC and Packard Bell are all gone. The dog-eat-dog world of Wintel is getting down to very few uneaten dogs, and the survivors may have pieces missing. Apple is starting to look awfully smart for marching to the beat of a different drummer."


Do you feel the tide may be turning in Apple's favor? You bet! What's more, Apple has a major change in OS strategy coming that will rattle a few cages. It's OS X and its UNIX based, which makes sense (finally) to all those computer geeks out there who could never embrace what they feel was Apple's proprietary operating system/hardware integration (like Microsoft isn't proprietary the way they "integrate" their technology)! For good or for bad, OS X will be embraced by a wider range of computer users simply because of its UNIX underpinnings.


While OS X will move a lot of folks initially to the Mac platform because of the UNIX attraction, in the end it may be cool and superior hardware that seals the deal. Some say there is no way Apple can build enough computers annually to keep up with say, a 10 percent increase in market share. Make no mistake, Apple has learned the hard way how to outsource product and would be able to keep up with nearly any demand the market has to throw at it.


I haven't said a think about the rumored 1.6 GHz G5 chip from Motorola, mainly because there are conflicting stories on the subject. Actually, I think it's believable because of the way it states Motorola got there – by altering the G5's pipeline structure from its initial seven stages to a total of 10. Thus, Motorola is using a type of microchip slight of hand to get the GHz to comparable Intel levels. The current 867 MHz Motorola G4 is roughly equivalent to Intel's 2 GHz P4 chip. That means a G5 running at the same 867 MHz could be at least twice as fast as the current P4, except for the added pipeline structure which could slow it down somewhat.


For more about the rumored G5 chip, see http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/13626.html.


As you can see, it has been a busy couple of weeks in the Mac world. Hang on, it's only going to get better.