Re: Apple Computer changes its name

[Mitchell Spector <mitch2gs@hotmail.com>]

pausch@saaf.se (Paul Schlyter) wrote:

>In article <bkdbq2l90qeejjd11kfepru8d1ic95i6qa@4ax.com>,
>Mitchell Spector  <mitch2gs@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>     Thinking about it, I haven't purchased any new Apple products 
>> in 19 years now! The last really cool thing they made, to me anyways, 
>> was the Apple IIgs (I was tempted to get an iPod recently, but ended 
>> up with a third party MP3 player). :)
>
>Why do you call that mp3 player a "third party" mp3 player?  You're
>not using it with some kind of Apple computer, are you?   It's
>another brand than Apple, not a "third party", right?

    Funny, when re-reading my original post this morning (before even
seeing your mention of it) I was thinking the very same thing, why did 
I call it a third party device. Typo? Slip of the tongue? Ah well... 

    I consider choices in MP3 players much like computers of the past,
there is no official/standard one, just many different models from many
different companies. The iPod is just another brand, I definitely agree.

>Anyway, choosing something other than iPod as your mp3 player can
>bring you several advantages.  Such as:
>
>- a build in FM radio receiver
>
>- recording capability

    Yep, I was pleasantly surprised the SanDisk 1 GB player I picked 
up on a whim (was on special for under $50) had both those features. 
I missed having an FM radio and voice recording when I retired my 
old casette walkman for a disc-based MP3 player 5 years ago, it's 
great to have them back again!

    The iPod Nano's don't have them, or even a screen in some cases.
It's a turn off paying more for _less_...

>- the mp3 player's memory appearing just as a plain disk drive, with all
>  your mp3 files readily accessible  (they're there on your iPod too, true,
>  although with the 'hidden' bit set, and also obfuscated behind obscure
>  file names).

    That was what really put me over the edge. Not being able to use 
the iPod as standard mountable storage drive, and the biggest issue
of all, being forced to use Apple's iTunes software to get songs on 
and off. Cool elegant design, but high priced, proprietary and
forces you to use Apple-based software...sounds familiar. :)

    Back to the topic of this thread, the same day Apple announced
their name change to "Apple Inc." at MacExpo, conspicuously absent 
were announcements of any new Macintoshes computers, updates to 
MacOS X or other Mac software. Seems kind of deja vu, to AppleExpo's 
of the late 80's/early 90's, when Apple started shifting their focus from
their core product, the Apple II series, to the Macintosh. All while
promising to support both products.

    I wonder if the Macintosh and its users will become insignificant
and forgotten obscurities as Apple moves its focus more to MP3
players, TV devices, cell phones and other electronic devices.
I could see that happening, since the Mac these days is more a 
propertarty PC clone (a la Dell, Compaq, Sony) that can also run 
MacOS, than the unique machine it once was over a decade or 
so ago.

Mitchell Spector