RE: SEE YOU IN THE MARKET
RE: SEE YOU IN THE MARKET
Sent: 5/25/96; 7:00:00 PM
From: tonys@mpx.com.au (tony stevenson)
Hello Dave
First I should say what should have been said a long time ago - "Thanks".
Your efforts on Aretha (now Frontier 4), and ClayBasket have given us some great tools for website creation and management. I am disappointed that Clay Basket (as a user tool) isn't going anywhere but you may yet win me over to the idea that website building is purely a scripting activity and can best be done in Frontier.
For the moment I am _fearful_ of Frontier and perhaps a little _ uncertain_ of future directions and _doubtful_ of whether I can harness it's power - FUD is in all of us to varying degrees even when the major players aren't generating it. I am sure you feel the FUD when you read the Clay-Basket list.
I also have a few words to say on your latest essay [[#glossPatch See You In The Market|96/05/seeyouinthemarket|]].
How wide should Apple cast their net?
The main sentiment of your essay was "Hey, I've got industrial-strength scripting covered. Why does Apple feel they need to do it too?"
I think perhaps you're too close to the issue with Apple wanting to do AppleScript 2. If, as you recently acknowledged, scripting and application integration are key MacOS strengths can Apple afford to neglect AppleScript?
Would you rather Apple said, "That's all we're doing with AppleScript - there will be no further development." What signal would that send developers and the Mac community?
I didn't see the Apple announcement so I can't comment specifically but Apple should ideally keep AppleScript as "scripting for the rest of us". That leaves the industry-strength scripting market to Frontier.
System Software is a nebulous concept
The issue that you and Peter Lewis (in his reply to your previous message) raise is how can we compete with Apple if the are developing competition for our software? Over time we've seen System Software grow in functionality as good ideas from outside the operating system developer become assimmilated into the OS. This has happened on MacOS and Windows. Over time this diminishes the opportunities for independent developers in this area as enhancements progressively find their way into the system. The market for disk defragmenters has disappeared under Windows 95 as Microsoft include a utility. In the same way the market for improved "Find" utilities has diminished on MacOS as Apple has progressively improved their functions. Over time we can expect System Software to include web browsers and web serving as the role of the web increases in importance.
The big difference between Apple and Microsoft is their world view. Microsoft's is clear - "own every substantial software market" - Gates said as much last year in Fortune magazine. On WinTel no independent developer is safe. If they are "successful" and build a substantial market then Microsoft decide they should own the market and launch their competitive product amid a flurry of FUD and "it integrates seamlessly with Microsoft Office announcements."
I don't really understand Apple's world view but I know that it's a lot more benign and it's a long way short of the "world domination" aspirations of Microsoft.
Look at web content development. When Apple belatedly considered this was something that had to be done, what did they do? They rather lamely partnered with Adobe to plug PageMill but also bundled a great wad of tools with their Internet Servers. It did nothing to diminish competition and offered some developers a great leg up including BBEdit and WebStar.
What did Microsoft do under the same circumstances? Bought Vermeer and put all of their weight behind making Microsoft FrontPage the standard. They're giving it away and leveraging the dominance of the Microsoft Office into potential dominance of web authoring via FrontPage. They're also giving away their Web server for some period of time. How would you feel if you'd invested heavily in web server development?
As an independent developer which approach would you prefer? I can't understand how Microsoft makes a better "lover" than Apple? Seems to me that Microsoft's approach is one of encouraging lots of people to develop software on the promise that they can make it big. There's just one problem - if you make it too big you then compete with Microsoft and they want your market.
Keep Zigging and Zagging
If you developed for WinTel you'd spend all your time dodging Microsoft - you'd either have to outrun them or seek a niche they have yet to touch.
You've got to treat Apple much as you would Microsoft. Try to out run them or find niches where they aren't at. If you have to compete with Apple they seem a lot more benign than Microsoft - don't expect any free rides from either of them. At least with Apple you can be reasonably comfortable they won't try to take your market unless you're writing what they consider system software.
Even in that case you just need to run faster and act smarter. Now Software, Alladin and Connectix (among others) all seem to do well at it.
Apple's a "lousy lover" because they bundle AppleScript. Yet Microsoft is a "good lover" because they send you flowers, tell you you're wonderful, while at the same starting their plans to take over the market you've built.
Change is inevitable but some can be worse than others
I assume that when you say "all the botched plans" you mean Apple spelt out a technological direction but failed to deliver or changed their mind. Well they wouldn't be on their lonesome there.
This is a fast moving industry and it's hard to set strategies in stone. When Apple change their strategies it's disappointing but it doesn't have the market crippling effect of Microsoft changing their strategy - I guess you didn't pour millions into OS/2 development like Lotus only to be dudded by Microsoft changing their plans. Remember when OS/2 was going to be the next Windows - Bill Gates said so. What happened? Microsoft changed their strategy and in the process gained domination of the word processing, spreadsheet and ultimately the "suite" market.
I am actually upbeat about Apple. They're changing and learning. In the past they'd launch technologies, find they weren't a hit and then abandon them. Their recent record is quite different. They've plugged away with Newton, QuickDraw GX, Open Transport and others. If they didn't get it right first time they tried and tried again. This is something they must have learnt from Microsoft who routinely have shipped weak release 1, and 2 but by the time it gets further along they've made it work well. I avoided betas and early release of Open Transport but 1.1 is a wonderful thing indeed. It still needs to be scriptable but it is solid and leaps many of the technical barriers in MacTCP.
Hurt Apple and you hurt us all You say > They're losers at Apple Computer. And they don't want to change. They > love their losing attitude. They depend on it. And they insist that I > be a loser too.
As you have pointed out and demonstrated on many occasions the Mac Community is much greater than Apple. Even a wounded and dysfunctional Apple doesn't diminish the strength of the community, at least not in the short term.
However when you join the throng and start sending out "Apple is terminal" vibes the negative energy begins to consume all of the good works you and thousands of other independent developers have done. It starts me thinking that perhaps I should consider FrontPage rather than struggling with Frontier - of course it would take a lot to shake me but the thought has crossed my mind.
Don't expect thanks from Apple and you won't be disappointed
If you want gratitude and thanks look to the Mac Community and not Apple. The world's changing. The Mac Clones are coming. Apple will no longer be omniscient in the MacOS world. If Apple don't want to know you why not bundle Frontier with Power Computing machines?
So once again "Thanks"
--tony
tonys@mpx.com.au - tony stevenson, sydney, australia
|
This page was last built on Tue, Dec 24, 1996 at 7:49:11 PM. The messages in this site are responses to DaveNet essays. |