Handpicked Software

In the aftermath of Apple’s announcement yesterday to switch from IBM to Intel, the Net is abuzz with speculation about what it all means for Apple, developers, and users. Wired notes that most developers greeted the announcement with “measured optimism,” but over at Apple Matters, Chris Seibold does a little hand-wringing, worrying that Apple will be software only in five years. Not that I have a good track record (I was skeptical of the Apple-Intel rumor), but I think he’s got it wrong.

Jobs argued yesterday that Apple had successfully made two key transitions in its history, first from the 680×0 to PowerPC and second, from Classic to OS X. Seibold argues that with each transition (he also counts the transition from Apple II to the Mac), Apple lost market share, and that this transition to Intel chips will have a similar impact. “[A]fter all,” he argues, “is it a reasonable expectation to think that people will invest in a PowerPC based Mac with the foreknowledge that Intel Macs are on the horizon?” I posed the same question yesterday, since I’m still waiting to splurge on a new PowerBook.

After calling into question Steve Job’s navigational abilities (”Steve obviously has trouble reading roadmaps, how often has Steve said the roadmap looked great from Motorola or IBM? Too many times for anyone to have any faith left in his abilities at prognosticating the future of chips.”), Seibold takes a quantum leap from a high cliff:

With the change in architecture the difference between Macs and Wintel boxes is, more or less from a consumer’s point of view, purely aesthetic. While people will opt for aesthetics all things being equal they tend not to buy computers purely for the looks (witness the cube debacle). The end of Apple as a manufacturer doesn’t necessarily mean the end of Apple as a company.

Now we’re in familiar territory. This Apple-Intel bombshell will get the pundits going again, speculating for the umpteenth time whether it spells the death knell for Apple. But after my initial shock yesterday, during which I sold my Apple call options after the market gave a slumped yawn to the announcement, I’m on the lookout for the right time to buy back in again. I’ll give my reasons for why I think this is ultimately good for Apple, but why don’t you play devil’s advocate?

Won’t this transition mean another dip in market share for Apple?
I’m not convinced that Apple’s dwindling market share has been the result of the transitions noted above. There are numerous other reasons that can account for Apple’s dwindling share of the market: the WinTel platform has always had a larger eco-system and an enthusiastic do-it-yourself sub-culture. It’s always been, or seemed to be, cheaper. Apple never convincingly made the case that Macs were faster. There has always been the software issue—more apps have always been available on the PC (sure, there are lots of apps for the Mac, but if you need that one thing that only runs on a PC, and you use it everyday, you’re not going to run it in Virtual PC). Apple has never done a very good job of marketing itself. There’s a term for this, the “something-effect” (somebody help me out me out here), but let’s just say that the rich get richer and the poor…

Won’t this hurt Apple, at least in the short term, as everyone waits until 2006 to buy a new Mac?
My reservations about shelling out for a new PowerBook notwithstanding, I don’t think anyone who wants or needs a computer is going to hesitate to buy a G5 right now. Buying a computer is a lot like buying options—both have a “time value” and both are “wasting assets.” If you need a computer, you’re going to buy one, and you still have the same choice to make today that you had yesterday: a machine running Windows (hey, if you want to work at a computer that makes you feel like you’re standing in line at the DMV all day , that’s your choice) or OS X (which lets me get the job done and makes me feel good at the same time). Your G5 isn’t going to become obsolete anytime soon.

Yeah, but can we trust Steve Jobs to read the roadmap?
I’ll be the first to confess that I don’t much know, or care, about chips. I just want the fastest computer I can get for about $3,000. It wouldn’t surprise me if the lead in chip making changed from one manufacturer to another from time to time. I’d say Intel has a pretty good track record. Besides, this isn’t just about speed. It’s about heat, as Jobs pointed out in his keynote yesterday. Also, it’s probably about some things we don’t know about yet, like digital rights management. And, while I’m not a big fan of copy protection, if it opens up markets for Apple, I’m all for it. If ever I can go online and buy a movie and download it to my computer, I’d want to watch it on an Apple instead of a Windows XP Media Center PC.

What about aesthetics? People won’t buy a Mac just for looks, if the guts are no different from a PC.
You’re right. People don’t buy things for looks. Just drive around town and you’ll see what I mean. Most buildings are not beautiful, they’re cheap. That’s why people shop at Wal-Mart. But, all things being equal (i.e., price), many people will buy for aesthetics, and Apple has always had the lead in that area. People buy what’s cool (how else to explain the iPod’s huge market share?). And, while there’s some debate, I think chances are good that a Mac with Intel inside will be price competitive with a WinTel machine. The Cube failed, not because of aesthetics, but because it wasn’t expandable.

But isn’t this move joining the enemy? And doesn’t Apple lose a key differentiator if it has the same chip inside?
Intel is not the enemy, not as far as I can tell. I’ve never bought a Mac because it had a chip from Motorola or IBM inside. I bought it for the OS. If there’s an enemy, it’s those who are opposed to innovation and beauty, at least in my opinion. That’s why I’ve avoided Windows. Besides, comparing performance between a Mac and a PC will become easier, and a lot of people buy a computer for performance.

There are differences, and there are differentiators. There are some differences I could do without (hey, Steve, when do I get to have an Apple two-button mouse?!). As far as I know, OS X isn’t going to run on your Dell machine. The differentiator is the OS and the way things work. It’s about style and soul, man, and as Jobs said yesterday, “the soul of the Mac is its operating system.”