apple the new Amstrad?

[dcdrac]

feeling in a heretical mood so  here is a debate:

Is Apple the new Amstrad?

Apple like Amstrad take existing technology and package it nicely, key difference is Amstrad prices were a lot lower.

Their devices use an old OS, Unix with a nice front end OSX, CPC/PCW had CPM

Open up any Apple computer and you will see something that looks strikingly like any other computer components wise.

I like Apple computers by the way and work on them daily fixing them mainly.

my  view of Apple is like Microsoft they stopped innovating a while ago and are now buying in new ideas rather than generating them, also for what their product is, they are wildly over priced, nice but over priced.

[VincentGR]

I agree with you. Never had apple machines, never liked their policies.
It is not only apple though, every console/phone/computer has two choices nowdays, intel/arm followed by 4-5 gpus that everybody use.
It will be very expensive for someone to try something new, but apple do this with everyday hardware... high prices with std hardware.


Today stability comes in the price of boredom 

[Bryce]

my  view of Apple is like Microsoft they stopped innovating a while ago and are now buying in new ideas rather than generating them, also for what their product is, they are wildly over priced, nice but over priced.

When did apple ever innovate?? Other than the extremely early apples, everything after that was a copy of something that was already invented by someone else. The big difference between apple and the others is that apple only ever does something if they can make money from it by locking you into one of their services, whereas the others will integrate new features that the user might find useful.
Comparing Amstrad to Apple is an insult to Amstrad. Amstrad made devices that really thought about the user, keeping the price low and even supplying a monitor so that you weren't hogging the TV. Apple makes self serving devices that are hugely over-priced and market them to people who don't know what the current cutting edge features are by making them shiny.

Bryce.

[CraigsBar]

I personally do not rate apple computers as overpriced. Yes my hexacore Xeon Mac pro with 16gb ram cost the thick end of 3500 euro. But if I were to build a linux desktop to the same spec it would firstly cost about the same, and the case would be thiner, cheaper and noisier. When it comes down to it, with the old Mac pro (before the current waste paper basket design) you really do get a premium product. In a 2mm thick machined aluminium case that dissipates heat so well it runs close to silent, even when under heavy use encoding video and audio in realtime.

A similar spec machine would have cost a similar price, and not had an os that just *works*. It would have been tinker time with Linux  or a windows machine that *just* works.

To my mind that is money well spent.

Before I get labeled as an apple fanboy, let me add. IOS is not a patch on android, and apple just killed the only decent iPod with the end of life of the iPod classic.

[robcfg]

I agree that apple hardware seems overpriced at first sight, but lasts longer, design is well thought and in general is less noisy. I've been a pc guy all my life and recently bought a high end macbook pro, worth every penny. As for having and old os, well, linux is a unix derivative too, and newer versions are quite improved. Simply put, the unix architecture is still very good.

[dcdrac]

I have working non apple laptops that are 5-10 years old still working.

[McKlain]

Wasn't OSX based on BSD?

[robcfg]

@dcdrac Yes, me too, but modern laptops get broken too easily or become less usable over time, at least in my experience.

@McKlain Yes, BSD being another Unix variant.

XD

[kilon]

feeling in a heretical mood so  here is a debate:

Is Apple the new Amstrad?

Apple like Amstrad take existing technology and package it nicely, key difference is Amstrad prices were a lot lower.

Their devices use an old OS, Unix with a nice front end OSX, CPC/PCW had CPM

Open up any Apple computer and you will see something that looks strikingly like any other computer components wise.

I like Apple computers by the way and work on them daily fixing them mainly.

my  view of Apple is like Microsoft they stopped innovating a while ago and are now buying in new ideas rather than generating them, also for what their product is, they are wildly over priced, nice but over priced.

And here goes my first post to this forum

lets do this

a) OS is an old OS. Not really , MacOS is inspired by UNIX and based on BSD. Meaning using 0% Unix code, and using some BSD code which is also a unix inspired OS. Unix was closed source , BSD is open source. But there the similarities end, code wise. MACOSX has its own kernel Darwin and a ton of other code.

b) Apple has stopped innovating - Not Really. As a matter of fact they innovated just recently with the introduction of 5K iMac  . 5K iMac is not only the only 5K computer (unless I missed something) its also the only computer out there that costs as much as it costs to get a 5K monitor (at least at the time it was announced). And they have of course introduced a ton of technology to their consumer making them the undisputed kings of innovation when it comes to computer technology at mass production.

But my favorite innovation that Apple has stubbornly continued to focus on is the all in one computer. Which of course reminds me a lot of the old home computers. Of course I have to say here that I am very biased because I love my iMac and I have a soft spot for all in one computers.

c) Apple is the new Amstrad - Again I will disagree, Amstrad focus was low price , Apple focus is on design and the overall feel of the product. There are fundamentally diffirent companies and my vote goes definetly to Apple. 

My iMAc reminds me a lot of the Amiga 500 , because they are extremely elegant computers , but still Amiga was cutting edge technology at the time , iMac is not.

d) Apple products are overpriced- People using this remark to mean that they can get a similar product for much lower price. But what they fail also to mention that the similar product will have several compromises in build quality, software included, design and reliability.   The real meaning of "overpriced" is a product that is priced so high that the majority of people think its a waste of money. The popularity of Apple products says a completely diffirent story and the fact that Apple is the biggest company out there by far. 

So to sum it up , yes Apple is diffirent kind of beast to Amstrad. Very diffirent.

[gerald]

b) Apple has stopped innovating - Not Really. As a matter of fact they innovated just recently with the introduction of 5K iMac  . 5K iMac is not only the only 5K computer (unless I missed something) its also the only computer out there that costs as much as it costs to get a 5K monitor (at least at the time it was announced). And they have of course introduced a ton of technology to their consumer making them the undisputed kings of innovation when it comes to computer technology at mass production.

If Apple where doing the LCD panel design and manufacturing, I would say Apple innovates. But there, Apple merly buy it from a compagny that is innovating ....

d) Apple products are overpriced- People using this remark to mean that they can get a similar product for much lower price. But what they fail also to mention that the similar product will have several compromises in build quality, software included, design and reliability.   The real meaning of "overpriced" is a product that is priced so high that the majority of people think its a waste of money. The popularity of Apple products says a completely diffirent story and the fact that Apple is the biggest company out there by far. 

The trend in Apple product is to prevent any HW upgrade/repair in the name of 'ease of use' and design bullshit. To my mind, paying more for less flexibility is a waste of money.

[Bryce]

b) Apple has stopped innovating - Not Really. As a matter of fact they innovated just recently with the introduction of 5K iMac  .

While I agree with some of your post (welcome to the forum by the way), you seem to have mis-understood the word "innovation". Increasing the resolution of a monitor isn't innovation. Bringing completely new features and design methods is innovation. Things like adding touchscreen to a laptop, power cords that are magnetic so that you don't kill yourself or your device when you trip over it, the mouse, windows based OSs, these are innovations, not upping the specs of an existing feature.

And as far as I know, not a single one of these innovations came from Apple, although, due to a seriously broken patent system in the U.S. they still managed to patent some of these under the name Apple.

Bryce.

[kilon]

If Apple where doing the LCD panel design and manufacturing, I would say Apple innovates. But there, Apple merly buy it from a compagny that is innovating ....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation

"Innovation differs from invention in that innovation refers to the use of a better and, as a result, novel idea or method, whereas invention refers more directly to the creation of the idea or method itself"

And even in this case it up to intepretation . Innovation, in this context,  for me means to bring something new to a mass scale. Because obviously I dont want to buy a computer for relative unknown company. So for me innovation is a general idea and it boils down what me as consumer is getting out of this. If I am getting the only 5k all in one computer, well thats enough for me to define that as "big time innovation" .

You are more than welcome to disagree with me

The trend in Apple product is to prevent any HW upgrade/repair in the name of 'ease of use' and design bullshit. To my mind, paying more for less flexibility is a waste of money.

"to my mind" is the key phrase here. Personally I don't care about upgrades, I prefer waiting a few years and getting a new computer far more efficient for my needs. In the end its not about you and me, I may be a Apple fan boy, you may be an Apple hater but there are billions of people that their opinions matter too not any less than yours and mine.

Even the voices about freedom and flexibility and openess are very loud, again, the huge success of the Apple as a company and its huge loyal following tell a very different story.

By the way I am, as well as many other Apple fanboys,  also a big open source fanboy

So life its a bit more complex than black and white.

Also I would like to add what according to me makes Amstrad and Apple a different but still in the same family. Both companies wanted to provide an overall fun experience for the user and they have succeeded several times in doing so. They both saw computers as way more than the sum of its parts and that has influenced me tremendously as a person on the way I think as computer as not only mere machines but as friends.

[Bryce]

Both companies wanted to provide an overall fun experience for the user and they have succeeded several times in doing so. They both saw computers as way more than the sum of its parts and that has influenced me tremendously as a person on the way I think as computer as not only mere machines but as friends.

While I'm not an Apple fanboy, I do own several Apple devices, but the thing that annoys me most about Apple is that their intention is definitely NOT "to provide an overall fun experience for the user", their aim is to lock people into their services. The best example of this is with the iPhones Bluetooth software. Is it "Fun" for the user, that Apple deliberately added code to block it from connecting to anything other than an Apple device? I don't think so. This was unnecessary and self-serving.

Bryce.

[kilon]

While I'm not an Apple fanboy, I do own several Apple devices, but the thing that annoys me most about Apple is that their intention is definitely NOT "to provide an overall fun experience for the user", their aim is to lock people into their services. The best example of this is with the iPhones Bluetooth software. Is it "Fun" for the user, that Apple deliberately added code to block it from connecting to anything other than an Apple device? I don't think so. This was unnecessary and self-serving.

Bryce.

Dont know about iPhone but my iMac and my macbook air connects fine via bluetooth with my Google Nexus 4 smartphone that I use sometime to get internet when my adsl is down. They also even connect fine via wifi and usb.

No clue why Apple would do that to iPhone and not other products as well.  But I got an iPhone for my father so I will definetly put your claim to the test, I am very curious.

[AMSDOS]

Only Apple I could compare an Amstrad to would be an IIc, but it's still got the wrong processor, standard 5.25" Disk Drive (140kB thank you very much), had a price tag of $1295. There was an IIc Plus, but I think the enhancements were merely more than an Increase of CPU speed to 4Mhz and 3.5" Disk Drive capability (800k & quicker Disk Drive access, though wasn't necessarily due to the improved CPU speed according to this article) & some enhancements on Power Supply.

[seanb]

Before I get labeled as an apple fanboy, let me add. IOS is not a patch on android, and apple just killed the only decent iPod with the end of life of the iPod classic.

Really? I've been waiting til my ipod touch 2 dies (hopefully soon) to go back to the classic. So much better if all you want to do is listen to music like me.
I'll be getting one second hand as usual but now prices will probably go up.
But that's apple for you 

[MacDeath]

Amstrad was doing Ms-Dos / GEM / Windows PCs.

and those machines were quite cheap.


That's the main difference between Apple and Amstrad.


a PCW can be dubbed as a cheapass Mac in text interface.


I would more compare Apple to Commodore/Amiga indeed.

But actually most manufacturer with specific system and niche market in some industries can pretend, and Apple, Amstrad, Atari and Commodore were into this actually.


Amstrad : cheapos 8 bit computers and low end word processor, cheapo IBM compatible PCs.

Atari : Cheapo 16 bit computers, for Music also.

Amiga : Video oriented machines.


Now Apple took place of both Amiga and Atari actually, and was already marketed as high end word processor.


But success in high end market (journalism, architects, musicians, doctors, writers and so on) is mostly due to executives/artists being prone to want high priced computers and knowing nothing about it so they won't assemble a computer themself.



Most Apple's innovation is in marketing actually and fanboyism pushed to the extreme.
I quite enjoy MAC OS actually, some things are nice, but Win8 is really becoming closer to this as well.
And if I want a computer to do some technical stuffs, I think I would one assembled for this purpose with possibility to easily change parts or evolve it.


So no "tube" nor screen/motherboard combo please...

oh, do you know what my job is ? sorry, signed a contract, can't tell.
But yeah, I work on a Mac on a daily basis and talk to Mac/iOS users on a daily basis as well.

you would be surprised that many believe a 5 years old MacBook "pro" with only 4gb can process a 5minutes video montage in very highest resolution all in full quality" in 1920x1080 because iMovie let the option...

="oh, the computer is making noise"
=dude, do you even know what a video card is ?


So believe me, reality is far from the marketing campaigns.

[TotO]

Peoples speaking again Apple computers and inovations generally never used their products to be objective and have clichés to speak about them.
The problem is always the same: A company is the hell if it have a too big succes... Apple is that since 10 years only.

The title "apple the new Amstrad" shown that peoples forget that Apple does that before in 80's.
For the short story, the Discology look&feel existed because his creator used a Machintosh.

[protek]

Can you think of any 8 bit computer other than Apple, for which people can put as high price tags as $12k on eBay? I bet that if Steve Jobs hadn't returned to Apple in 1997, people wouldn't be asking such ludicrous prices for 30 year old hardware, which by no means can be considered rare.

The only similarity I can think between Apple and Amstrad that Apple at some point started offering their products bundled the same way as Amstrad did already back in the 80's.

[dcdrac]

I use macs every day as part of my work and see little to choose between them and any other computer I use at work in real terms now apart from price.

[Gryzor]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation

"Innovation differs from invention in that innovation refers to the use of a better and, as a result, novel idea or method, whereas invention refers more directly to the creation of the idea or method itself"

This is a bullshit definition IMHO, and a good sign one must not take Wikipedia as the Holy Bible. "better"="novel"? What the actual fuck?


What you describe further down your argument, about bringing new stuff to the mass market place, is not innovation either - that's facilitation. The fact that Edison, such a classic example, patented so much stuff and made it popular does not make him an innovator (though he did improve on some of those ideas).


What I loath about Apple, and incidentally what happened with Edison as well, is the abuse of the patent system it employs. You can argue Apple is innovative but the net effect for society and economy? More like putting a damper on it. I remember reading about a Victorian gynecologist who invented the pliers they use to pull out babies that are in the wrong position at labour. Well he did innovate, and he did invent. But the fact that he actually patented that device meant that thousands upon thousands of less fortunate babies had to die.


That, of course, is not a characteristic solely of Apple. But Apple has taken it to new heights (rectangular tablets with rounded corners, anyone?)


(oh, this reminded me of this:)
[attachimg=1]


Also, I'll just leave this here as a parting word:
[attach=3]

[Bryce]

The Oxford English Dictionary says:

Definition of invent in English: 
verb [with object]
1Create or design (something that has not existed before); be the originator of: he invented an improved form of the steam engine
1.1Make up (an idea, name, story, etc.), especially so as to deceive someone: I did not have to invent any tales about my past

Definition of innovate in English: 
verb [no object]
1Make changes in something established, especially by introducing new methods, ideas, or products: the company's failure to diversify and innovate competitively
1.1 [with object] Introduce (something new, especially a product): we continue to innovate new products

Bryce.

[kilon]

This is a bullshit definition IMHO, and a good sign one must not take Wikipedia as the Holy Bible. "better"="novel"? What the actual fuck?


What you describe further down your argument, about bringing new stuff to the mass market place, is not innovation either - that's facilitation. The fact that Edison, such a classic example, patented so much stuff and made it popular does not make him an innovator (though he did improve on some of those ideas).


What I loath about Apple, and incidentally what happened with Edison as well, is the abuse of the patent system it employs. You can argue Apple is innovative but the net effect for society and economy? More like putting a damper on it. I remember reading about a Victorian gynecologist who invented the pliers they use to pull out babies that are in the wrong position at labour. Well he did innovate, and he did invent. But the fact that he actually patented that device meant that thousands upon thousands of less fortunate babies had to die.


That, of course, is not a characteristic solely of Apple. But Apple has taken it to new heights (rectangular tablets with rounded corners, anyone?)


(oh, this reminded me of this:)
[attachimg=1]


Also, I'll just leave this here as a parting word:
[attach=3]

Life is complex. As you may know , one man's treasure is another man's garbage. Its the essense of individualism to prioritize diffirently.

"What I loath about Apple, and incidentally what happened with Edison as well, is the abuse of the patent system it employs."

Frankly I dont blame Apple, if we lived in the world where companies are all the good guys and Apple is the bad apple (pun intended) then sure I would loath her. But in the world where greed is only ideal Apple tries to defend what its rightful her property and her ideas. Its not that hard to see that other companies have been copying Apple to take a piece of the pie.  Other companies are not any less ruthless. The diffirence is that Apple dares to think diffirent (pun intended once again) , without Apple the computing world would be an extremely boring place to live in. For many people including me. It would be nothing more than glacial pace of one tiny improvement to another. Just take a look at the phone market before apple, table market before Apple , OS market before Apple etc etc etc.

If we want a world where companies are not ruthlessly greedy then its up to us to change it. Just putting the blame on a single company wont change a thing.

But thats my opinion and most likely the opinion of great deal of people who love Apple products and who like me find Apple the very definition of innovator(and inventor in some cases). There are things that I definetly don't like about Apple , but in the end it is my No1 choice for many technology orientated products.

On the other hand I have zero issues with people hating Apple. Its a huge world, there is room for all of us

Ps: Cant say I understand the meaning of last two photos.

[Gryzor]

Life is complex. As you may know , one man's treasure is another man's garbage. Its the essense of individualism to prioritize diffirently.

"What I loath about Apple, and incidentally what happened with Edison as well, is the abuse of the patent system it employs."

Frankly I dont blame Apple, if we lived in the world where companies are all the good guys and Apple is the bad apple (pun intended) then sure I would loath her. But in the world where greed is only ideal Apple tries to defend what its rightful her property and her ideas.

Um, no... Apple is known to abuse the patent system so much it's absurd to speak of  "their property and ideas"

without Apple the computing world would be an extremely boring place to live in.

A very big thing to say, and it could be said for a fair number other companies as well, of course. As I'm typing this, for instance, I'm watching the documentary series "Once Upon Atari"


[/size]

Just take a look at the phone market before apple, table market before Apple , OS market before Apple etc etc etc.

Yup, two instances where Apple swooped down, gulping existing ideas and coming up with a mass market product that indeed, pushed the industry forward.

[/size]
[/size]

Ps: Cant say I understand the meaning of last two photos.

The first is from the TV series "The Office", from the episode where the parent company "invents" the triangular tablet. The second is, of course, the hugely innovative golden Apple Watch

[kilon]

Um, no... Apple is known to abuse the patent system so much it's absurd to speak of  "their property and ideas"

I have not been following the whole patent story very closely, as a lawyer I know what a legal disaster Copyright and Patents are in general and what mess they create in the process. I have several client entangled in this mess. As you can imagine I have seen several things in my life that make little logical sense in the name of profit. Sadly this is the world we live in and we dont do anything about it. We love to complain about it, but thats about it.

A very big thing to say, and it could be said for a fair number other companies as well, of course. As I'm typing this, for instance, I'm watching the documentary series "Once Upon Atari"

Yes I was implying current companies and sure Apple is not the only one. Atari was great (is it still around ?), Commodore too and many many more. But if you take a look at the majority of current "big" companies you know what I am talking about.


"The first is from the TV series "The Office", from the episode where the parent company "invents" the triangular tablet. The second is, of course, the hugely innovative golden Apple Watch "

The golden Apple watch is definitely not innovative. It makes zero sense for the average human being. But I dont think they market it as such, they try to approach a ludicrous rich crowd. The type of crowd that buys bottle water decorated with Swarovsky  diamonds. Kinda strange I see no complains about golden Rolexes but tons for golden Apple watches. Well not that strange because of Apple's popularity

As I said I don't like everything Apple does.