What's the point of running ads when you still haven't figured out what
it is that you're trying to sell?
In 1984, Apple had a much better product to sell than IBM. They had a
very compelling story about ease of use.
In 1994, Apple still had the advantage of good integration between
hardware and software, and Win 3.1 was still no MacOS.
In 1997, Apple has no compelling advantage. They've ruined their
hardware/software integration story by selling broken hardware and
broken software. And MacOS is no longer compellingly better than Windows
(if it is better at all).
A 1984-type commercial from Apple in 1997 would be a palpable lie. At
one point Apple represented revolution. But those of us who know history
(or have read Animal Farm) know what can happen to revolutions...
To spell it out: Scully presided over Brezhnev-style stagnation. Copland
was their Chernobyl (gross technical incompetence), Newton their
Afghanistan (costly and useless war fought and lost). Looks like we've
just seen the passing of Gil Andropov - hi, bye, leaving so soon? If
Apple is lucky, they'll get a Gorbachev, someone who can semi-gracefully
disassemble Apple, so that the remaining parts can fend for themselves.
(Of course the purchase of NeXT doesn't quite fit - it's almost as if
Italy joined the USSR in the Andropov era...)
- Joe
Joseph S. Barrera III (joebar@microsoft.com)
http://research.microsoft.com/~joebar
Phone, Office: (415) 778-8227; Cellular: (415) 601-3719; Home: (415)
588-4801
The opinions expressed in this message are my own personal views and do
not reflect the official views of Microsoft Corporation.