Re: Apple and the Holy War

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

Phoenyx <quazar@dcnet2000.com> wrote:

>IMHO, Apple blew it by not acknowledging the 'home market'. After
>all, they started it. I bought my first computer for my daughter's
>use at home, for school work and games. The thing that sold me on
>the Apple II was it's reliable use in schools. Daily abuse by
>children with limited downtime speaks volumes.

I agree.  The home market is what makes or breaks a personal
computer.  As others have noted, businesses were quick to
adopt genuine IBMs but slow to buy clones.  They didn't trust
clones, but as the clones grabbed the home market, businesses
saw the light.  The same could have happened with Apple had
they continued to build on their user base of loyal II users.

The same thing is happening with the battle between Intel and
AMD today.  Even now, even after AMD has proven it can
deliver a superior processor with the fastest clock speed (1Ghz),
you will find that businesses will still trust an Intel based unit
more.

BUT, AMD is scorching Intel and stealing the PC market at
a staggering rate BECAUSE almost any home user will
want a 1Ghz Athlon based computer to an 850Mhz
Pentium III.

The home market is the smartest market and where a PC
can become successful in the home market, all other
markets (business, education, entertainment) will follow.

This is why I bring up the contrast between AMD and
Apple.  Apple saw IBM and tried to go around it with the
Macintosh.  AMD took Intel head on and is winning.  Jobs
thought Apple could not win by taking IBM head on with
a continually improved Apple II line, but he was wrong.
Think about it, if the Athlon were not x86 compatible and
not aimed at taking down the Pentium III directly, would
it be half as successful as it is today?

Ok, enough PowerPC G4 versus Intel Pentium III rhetoric.
What do Mac folks think of the 1Ghz AMD Athlon?  The
rebel company that produced the superior CPU.  ;-)