Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Virtual Reality coming to Macintosh

13»

Comments

  • mgilbrtsnmgilbrtsn Member EpicPosts: 3,430
    SEANMCAD said:
    mgilbrtsn said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    mgilbrtsn said:
    Sovrath said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    This seems destined to fail.  Not a fan of any Apple products so it won't affect me either way if it's successful or not.  But I don't really see a huge market for $5000 Macs when you could have an insane PC for half that price.
    has any Apple Product failed? not that I know of
    has any Microsoft Product failed? a lot
    Well, there were some that didn't really take off. The Newton (way ahead of its time) and the cube. Keep in mind I'm a huge fan of Apple's products.
    The cube was a joke lol remember the Pippin? Apple actually made a failed game console ugh terrible.
    Or the Tam? Killed off in one year
    Or the Mighty Mouse? Which was surprisingly worse than their failed hockey puck mouse.
    Or their 3rd gen ipod shuffle? terrible technically and commercially. 
    Or even the 2015 macbook.
    Noone bought that thing and Apple admitted after terrible sales and community reception "We need to go back to the board" lol  
    Agreed.  Apple is by no means infallible when it comes to tech.  They do seem to be almost infallible when it comes to PR.  They shuffle their failures to the back, quietly and quickly, and move on with their PR for future tech.  A Brilliant company, however, I had an intervention and managed to break away.  That was only slightly more difficult than leaving Scientology.

    The question is not one of infalliablity.

    The question is when presented two options which one do you think is more successful today in a specific market.

    -Bing is horrible
    -MSN is basically a non-thing even when they came out
    -really all internet apps like maps, youtube etc (if you told me MS would basically not have a serious presence on the internet 20 years ago I would call you crazy)
    -Zune (which was a counter to the iPod which was a HUGELY successful music player)
    -nearly completely missing the entire cell phone market
    -nearly completely missing the entire smart phone market
    -coming VERY late to the party with 'smart pads'
    -a huge expensive Touch device that didnt go anywhere
    -I might even suggest Xbox One was a huge mis-step. not a failure but they have the resources and presence in gaming that Sony should not have been able to out do them

    If you had to make a bet at Vegas that Apple would reveal a product today (not 15 years ago but today) and Microsoft would reveal a product of the same type today but you dont know what that said product is, its more likely a bet to bet on Apple. That is all I have been saying.

    If you were standing next to me and placed a bet on MS I would say 'dont you think Microsoft missing out on cell phones, smart phones, for the most part tablets, all internet services and the explosion of companies like Google, Apple and Amazon is an indication that its not 1993 anymore?'
    I don't disagree that Apple puts out some quality stuff.  That doesn't mean that Microsoft doesn't.  They can both be good companies in their own way.  I would say that Microsoft has pulled up a bit from their nose dive.  Surface is doing well, 10 is good, Xbox is doing well, They're AR seems...seems headed in the right direction.  

    As a general rule, I'm in the googleshphere with most of my automation, other than my PC.  So they can both go pound sand with their gadgets.  I'm not a real advocate for either of them.
    I am not asking if the stuff is quality or not.
    One thing is for sure the population does not buy the best quality. I am saying ....well..fuck it...what I already said please go back and read it as if you are an investor and both companies had separate stocks for JUST products.

    and again..

    Apple over the past 15 years have had considerably better success at consumer products then microsoft has.

    quality is not important in that statement
    Well, Apple stock is in the 150s, and Microsoft in the 70s.  

    Company

    Cash

    Debt

    Net Income

    Free Cash Flow

    Microsoft

    $137 billion

    $76 billion

    $16.6 billion

    $26.8 billion

    Apple

    $238 billion

    $87 billion

    $46 billion

    $53 billion


    So, stock wise, Apple gets it.  This doesn't mean anything.  I say again, that I evaluate individual products when I'm deciding which to jump into.  The problem with getting into apple, is that it's really an all or nothing proposition.  They have a great tablet, but if you get that, you really have to get an apple phone, itunes... and eventually, might get sucked into their entire echosphere.  Microsoft for all of its faults is much easier to pick and choose where I get my stuff.


    So in short, Apple wins the company valuation/stock battle.  Grtz.

    I self identify as a monkey.

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    edited June 2017
    mgilbrtsn said:

    Well, Apple stock is in the 150s, and Microsoft in the 70s.  

    Company

    Cash

    Debt

    Net Income

    Free Cash Flow

    Microsoft

    $137 billion

    $76 billion

    $16.6 billion

    $26.8 billion

    Apple

    $238 billion

    $87 billion

    $46 billion

    $53 billion


    So, stock wise, Apple gets it.  This doesn't mean anything.  I say again, that I evaluate individual products when I'm deciding which to jump into.  The problem with getting into apple, is that it's really an all or nothing proposition.  They have a great tablet, but if you get that, you really have to get an apple phone, itunes... and eventually, might get sucked into their entire echosphere.  Microsoft for all of its faults is much easier to pick and choose where I get my stuff.


    So in short, Apple wins the company valuation/stock battle.  Grtz.
    I explictly more than once said DONT LOOK AT STOCKS.

    quote:
    'One thing is for sure the population does not buy the best quality. I am saying ....well..fuck it...what I already said please go back and read it as if you are an investor and both companies had separate stocks for

    JUST products.'


    for the 3rd goddamn time


    what does it take for one to see that 
    A. in products ONLY
    B. over the past 15 years ONLY
    C. Apple has a much larger success rate them microsoft
    D. (added) not quality but sales

    the lengths people go to avoid reading those three keep requirements!

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • mgilbrtsnmgilbrtsn Member EpicPosts: 3,430
    SEANMCAD said:
    mgilbrtsn said:

    Well, Apple stock is in the 150s, and Microsoft in the 70s.  

    Company

    Cash

    Debt

    Net Income

    Free Cash Flow

    Microsoft

    $137 billion

    $76 billion

    $16.6 billion

    $26.8 billion

    Apple

    $238 billion

    $87 billion

    $46 billion

    $53 billion


    So, stock wise, Apple gets it.  This doesn't mean anything.  I say again, that I evaluate individual products when I'm deciding which to jump into.  The problem with getting into apple, is that it's really an all or nothing proposition.  They have a great tablet, but if you get that, you really have to get an apple phone, itunes... and eventually, might get sucked into their entire echosphere.  Microsoft for all of its faults is much easier to pick and choose where I get my stuff.


    So in short, Apple wins the company valuation/stock battle.  Grtz.
    I explictly more than once said DONT LOOK AT STOCKS.

    quote:
    'One thing is for sure the population does not buy the best quality. I am saying ....well..fuck it...what I already said please go back and read it as if you are an investor and both companies had separate stocks for

    JUST products.'


    for the 3rd goddamn time


    what does it take for one to see that 
    A. in products ONLY
    B. over the past 15 years ONLY
    C. Apple has a much larger success rate them microsoft
    D. (added) not quality but sales

    the lengths people go to avoid reading those three keep requirements!
    Little too intense for me.  Sorry to get you going.

    I self identify as a monkey.

  • postlarvalpostlarval Member EpicPosts: 2,003
    edited June 2017
    SEANMCAD said:

    there is ZERO dispute that Microsoft was MAJOR success in the Information Systems industry and even in gaming in the past and even in the IS industry today.

    In fact its not even the question.


    The question is the last 15 years in Products (includuing internet services for the public aka Bing) ONLY and as it related to Apples success in Products industry in the past 15 years and most importantly including now.

    In general under the current management and under Steve Balamer if you were to bet money on a product produced by Apple vs a product produced by MS you are likely to be more successful in that investment by going Apple. (That is NOT to say the stocks...its to say products and internet services to the public only.

    -Bing is horrible
    -MSN is basically a non-thing even when they came out
    -really all internet apps like maps, youtube etc (if you told me MS would basically not have a serious presence on the internet 20 years ago I would call you crazy)
    -Zune (which was a counter to the iPod which was a HUGELY successful music player)
    -nearly completely missing the entire cell phone market
    -nearly completely missing the entire smart phone market
    -coming VERY late to the party with 'smart pads'
    -a huge expensive Touch device that didnt go anywhere
    -I might even suggest Xbox One was a huge mis-step. not a failure but they have the resources and presence in gaming that Sony should not have been able to out do them

    how do people here not know this?

    Having worked at Apple for 4 years and Microsoft for 17 years, I can tell you exactly why and it's the same problem with MMOs. Ironically, it comes from Apple's Steve Jobs:

    "We think the Mac will sell zillions, but we didn’t build the Mac for anybody else. We built it for ourselves. We were the group of people who were going to judge whether it was great or not. We weren’t going to go out and do market research. We just wanted to build the best thing we could build."

    Microsoft injected so much market research into their corporate decision-making they became paralyzed. It's one of the reasons I left in 2008. The company didn't even know the meaning of innovation anymore. Microsoft didn't innovate, they acquired. Almost 10 years later and it's not much better.
    that is a facilitating story but not related to what I said above so I am not sure what your underlining point in that reply is exactly unless its just an aside.
    Of course it's related. It just doesn't happen to align with whatever agenda you have this week. 
    MrMelGibsonTamanous
    ______________________________________________________________________
    ~~ postlarval ~~

  • postlarvalpostlarval Member EpicPosts: 2,003
    mgilbrtsn said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    mgilbrtsn said:

    Well, Apple stock is in the 150s, and Microsoft in the 70s.  

    Company

    Cash

    Debt

    Net Income

    Free Cash Flow

    Microsoft

    $137 billion

    $76 billion

    $16.6 billion

    $26.8 billion

    Apple

    $238 billion

    $87 billion

    $46 billion

    $53 billion


    So, stock wise, Apple gets it.  This doesn't mean anything.  I say again, that I evaluate individual products when I'm deciding which to jump into.  The problem with getting into apple, is that it's really an all or nothing proposition.  They have a great tablet, but if you get that, you really have to get an apple phone, itunes... and eventually, might get sucked into their entire echosphere.  Microsoft for all of its faults is much easier to pick and choose where I get my stuff.


    So in short, Apple wins the company valuation/stock battle.  Grtz.
    I explictly more than once said DONT LOOK AT STOCKS.

    quote:
    'One thing is for sure the population does not buy the best quality. I am saying ....well..fuck it...what I already said please go back and read it as if you are an investor and both companies had separate stocks for

    JUST products.'


    for the 3rd goddamn time


    what does it take for one to see that 
    A. in products ONLY
    B. over the past 15 years ONLY
    C. Apple has a much larger success rate them microsoft
    D. (added) not quality but sales

    the lengths people go to avoid reading those three keep requirements!
    Little too intense for me.  Sorry to get you going.
    It's his normal state of mind. You just have to run with it. 
    MrMelGibsonTamanousmgilbrtsn
    ______________________________________________________________________
    ~~ postlarval ~~

  • postlarvalpostlarval Member EpicPosts: 2,003
    SEANMCAD said:
    laserit said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    This seems destined to fail.  Not a fan of any Apple products so it won't affect me either way if it's successful or not.  But I don't really see a huge market for $5000 Macs when you could have an insane PC for half that price.
    has any Apple Product failed? not that I know of
    has any Microsoft Product failed? a lot
    Didn't it take a 150 million dollar bail out by none other than Mr Bill Gates to keep Apple from Bankruptcy

    https://www.wired.com/2009/08/dayintech_0806/

    Because Bill Gates knows a good investment when he sees one, which is why he didn't bother investing the money back into his own company?

    or...

    They had money left over once they realized there was no future in cell phones?
    I think in the era of technology looking at the actions of 30 years ago while at the same time ignoring the patterns of the past 10 years is well...idiotic.

    In the consumer product space Apple has a considerably higher success rate then Microsoft does covering about  the past 15 years or so.

    For a company like Microsoft to not get strong into cell phone market successful if flat out blind blowing. Its 'grab them by the P**y' level floored stunning.

    Microsoft getting beat out on sales by Sony is a bit odd as well but not as much as above
    There's a book I recommend everyone read, written by Neal Stephenson (Zodiac, Snow Crash, Cryptonomicon) called In the Beginning was the Command Line. It's a bit dated but the ideas still ring true.

    He goes into great detail about how operating systems became "productized" (selling 1's and 0's) and uses a car analogy to illustrate how Microsoft (clunky station wagons), Apple (hermetically-sealed rocket cars), and the collective that is Linux (indestructible tanks) have presented themselves and why - given you can have a rocket car if you have the money or a indestructible tank for free, people still choose the clunky station wagon.

    Brilliant book. He released it on the internet as a text file years ago for free and I'll bet a Google search would get you a copy.
    It's actually an essay that comes at the end of the also brilliant Cryptonomicon, but yes it's worth a read.
    When I bought it, it had a front and back cover, a spine, and came from a bookstore....so...a book.
    Phaserlight
    ______________________________________________________________________
    ~~ postlarval ~~

  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 3,075
    SEANMCAD said:
    laserit said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    This seems destined to fail.  Not a fan of any Apple products so it won't affect me either way if it's successful or not.  But I don't really see a huge market for $5000 Macs when you could have an insane PC for half that price.
    has any Apple Product failed? not that I know of
    has any Microsoft Product failed? a lot
    Didn't it take a 150 million dollar bail out by none other than Mr Bill Gates to keep Apple from Bankruptcy

    https://www.wired.com/2009/08/dayintech_0806/

    Because Bill Gates knows a good investment when he sees one, which is why he didn't bother investing the money back into his own company?

    or...

    They had money left over once they realized there was no future in cell phones?
    I think in the era of technology looking at the actions of 30 years ago while at the same time ignoring the patterns of the past 10 years is well...idiotic.

    In the consumer product space Apple has a considerably higher success rate then Microsoft does covering about  the past 15 years or so.

    For a company like Microsoft to not get strong into cell phone market successful if flat out blind blowing. Its 'grab them by the P**y' level floored stunning.

    Microsoft getting beat out on sales by Sony is a bit odd as well but not as much as above
    There's a book I recommend everyone read, written by Neal Stephenson (Zodiac, Snow Crash, Cryptonomicon) called In the Beginning was the Command Line. It's a bit dated but the ideas still ring true.

    He goes into great detail about how operating systems became "productized" (selling 1's and 0's) and uses a car analogy to illustrate how Microsoft (clunky station wagons), Apple (hermetically-sealed rocket cars), and the collective that is Linux (indestructible tanks) have presented themselves and why - given you can have a rocket car if you have the money or a indestructible tank for free, people still choose the clunky station wagon.

    Brilliant book. He released it on the internet as a text file years ago for free and I'll bet a Google search would get you a copy.
    It's actually an essay that comes at the end of the also brilliant Cryptonomicon, but yes it's worth a read.
    When I bought it, it had a front and back cover, a spine, and came from a bookstore....so...a book.
    Interesting.  I'm really wishing I could find my paperback copy of Cryptonomicon, because I swear ITBWTCL came at the end.  Perhaps I've just stumbled onto my own iteration of the Mandela effect.  Does it still count as the Mandela effect if I'm the only one who remembers it?

    "The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
    Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance

  • postlarvalpostlarval Member EpicPosts: 2,003
    edited June 2017
    SEANMCAD said:
    laserit said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    This seems destined to fail.  Not a fan of any Apple products so it won't affect me either way if it's successful or not.  But I don't really see a huge market for $5000 Macs when you could have an insane PC for half that price.
    has any Apple Product failed? not that I know of
    has any Microsoft Product failed? a lot
    Didn't it take a 150 million dollar bail out by none other than Mr Bill Gates to keep Apple from Bankruptcy

    https://www.wired.com/2009/08/dayintech_0806/

    Because Bill Gates knows a good investment when he sees one, which is why he didn't bother investing the money back into his own company?

    or...

    They had money left over once they realized there was no future in cell phones?
    I think in the era of technology looking at the actions of 30 years ago while at the same time ignoring the patterns of the past 10 years is well...idiotic.

    In the consumer product space Apple has a considerably higher success rate then Microsoft does covering about  the past 15 years or so.

    For a company like Microsoft to not get strong into cell phone market successful if flat out blind blowing. Its 'grab them by the P**y' level floored stunning.

    Microsoft getting beat out on sales by Sony is a bit odd as well but not as much as above
    There's a book I recommend everyone read, written by Neal Stephenson (Zodiac, Snow Crash, Cryptonomicon) called In the Beginning was the Command Line. It's a bit dated but the ideas still ring true.

    He goes into great detail about how operating systems became "productized" (selling 1's and 0's) and uses a car analogy to illustrate how Microsoft (clunky station wagons), Apple (hermetically-sealed rocket cars), and the collective that is Linux (indestructible tanks) have presented themselves and why - given you can have a rocket car if you have the money or a indestructible tank for free, people still choose the clunky station wagon.

    Brilliant book. He released it on the internet as a text file years ago for free and I'll bet a Google search would get you a copy.
    It's actually an essay that comes at the end of the also brilliant Cryptonomicon, but yes it's worth a read.
    When I bought it, it had a front and back cover, a spine, and came from a bookstore....so...a book.
    Interesting.  I'm really wishing I could find my paperback copy of Cryptonomicon, because I swear ITBWTCL came at the end.  Perhaps I've just stumbled onto my own iteration of the Mandela effect.  Does it still count as the Mandela effect if I'm the only one who remembers it?
    I have a hard cover of Crypto....and pretty much all of his other books as well. I don't remember if ITBWTCL is in it. Maybe it's an older copy.

    Stephenson is in a lot of ways the grandfather of the MMO. He coined the term 'metaverse'. One off the first virtual worlds Active Worlds was modeled after the metaverse in his book Snow Crash, and Philip Linden used Stephenson's model when he designed Second Life. We owe this dude a lot.

    Snow Crash is basically the Book of Genesis of online worlds.
    Phaserlightlaserit
    ______________________________________________________________________
    ~~ postlarval ~~

  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 3,075
    This is great, just wanted to share it here:



    John Carmack explains VR at 5 different levels.

    "The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
    Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance

  • Dred07Dred07 Member CommonPosts: 3
    Well, lets wait several years for discovering VR Sport, VR Love, VR Casino for gamblers, not for gaming.... Virtual Reality is coming, be ready...
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383
    I'm not holding my breath.
    [Deleted User]
Sign In or Register to comment.