fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Andy McFadden) (10/10/90)
(this is intended to be a semi-intelligent discussion of Apple's market share. It's not an Apple flame and I don't want it to become one. If you're not interested, don't read it...) This is one of those magazines that you can get free for a year if you don't mind being put on every mailing list known to mankind. An item of interest to some readers is a discussion of RISC vs CISC. Anyway, the application form has the following question: 1A. If [you are a workstation user], please indicate EACH type of workstation your organization uses: A. Apollo H. Intergraph O. Sun Microsystems B. Computervision I. MIPS P. Tektronix C. Control Data J. NCR Q. Texas Instruments D. Data General K. NeXT R. Unisys E. DEC L. Silicon Graphics Z. Other (please specify) F. Hewlett-Packard M. Solbourne G. IBM RT/System 6000 N. Sony Note that the Mac //fx, which has more power than many of the products made by the above companies, has not earned Apple a spot on this list. Instead, it was pushed down into the "other computers" list. In addition, question 9. Which type(s) of network is used at your site? does not include AppleTalk. What exactly is going on here? It appears that, to be considered a workstation, a machine needs two components: - power - the ability to run a UNIX-like environment. An interesting case in point is the NeXT. It has a WIMP interface like the Mac, yet is considered a workstation. Another interesting case is the Amiga. It has enough power to at least be on the "other computers" list, but it doesn't appear there. I recall someone at Apple saying that they were moving primarily into the high-end market, concentrating on Mac IIs. But for some reason it appears that the *perception* of the Mac has not changed. Just as the Amiga is still perceived as a game machine, the Mac isn't accepted as a workstation. I worked for Control Data over the summer (I used to say CDC, but that sounded too much like the Center for Disease Control). Most work was done on the usual collection of PC-AT clones, but we had a Mac II for generating diagrams and proposals. It continues to be popular with those who aren't computer literate or who just aren't "into" computers. But could that same reputation be driving programmers away? Reminds me of the "Real Programmer's Guide"... maybe the reputation of the Mac as a computer "for the rest of us" suggests to heavy workstation users that it's not for them? How is all of this related to the Apple II? Apple hasn't been accepted into the workstation market with it's high end, IBM took away a large share of the low end while Apple was looking the other way, and Amiga is starting their usual end of the year push (full page ads in the campus newspapers, etc). If Apple posts a major loss, what limited support we do have could dry up. They've already stopped selling them overseas, probably expecting the hordes of prospective Apple II buyers to flock to the Macintosh. I don't mean to start a panic or cry that the sky is falling; I'm just trying to find out if other people have a different perception of where (if anywhere) Apple is going. Whether we like it or not, our future is tied very closely to the Mac. flames > /dev/null -- fadden@cory.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden) ..!ucbvax!cory!fadden
kgreen@pro-angmar.UUCP (Kevin Green) (10/12/90)
In-Reply-To: message from fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU I personally can't answer for Apple, but has anyone else be watching their stock lately? I've watched Apple stock on NASDAQ for several years and it is really in the dumper, despite the immiment debute of 3 new Macs. The closing price on 10/10/90 was around 26.5 which is really scary when you realize that the stocks reached 50 right around the time the IIfx debuted. Do you think Wall Street heard all the flames here and nobody wants to touch Apple stock?
bchurch@oucsace.cs.OHIOU.EDU (Bob Church) (10/12/90)
In article <8878.apple.net@pro-angmar>, kgreen@pro-angmar.UUCP (Kevin Green) writes: > In-Reply-To: message from fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU > > I personally can't answer for Apple, but has anyone else be watching their > stock lately? I've watched Apple stock on NASDAQ for several years and it is > really in the dumper, despite the immiment debute of 3 new Macs. Perhaps it's because of all the "imminent" debuts. Would you buy stock in a company that continually sends the message "don't buy our product because we are about to release a better version for less money" ? Apple could take a lesson from the auto and magazine industries. They put a future date on their products ( i.e. the 1990 cars are out in 1989 and newsweek always seems a week ahead of the calendar) so that you feel that you are getting something that is going to be current for awhile. Apple makes you feel like an impulsive idiot for buying one of their computers instead of waiting "just a little longer". bob church bchurch.oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu
nrunyon%peruvian.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Neil Runyon) (10/13/90)
In article <8878.apple.net@pro-angmar> kgreen@pro-angmar.UUCP (Kevin Green) writes: >In-Reply-To: message from fadden@cory.Berkeley.EDU > >I personally can't answer for Apple, but has anyone else be watching their >stock lately? I've watched Apple stock on NASDAQ for several years and it is >really in the dumper, despite the immiment debute of 3 new Macs. The closing >price on 10/10/90 was around 26.5 which is really scary when you realize that >the stocks reached 50 right around the time the IIfx debuted. Do you think >Wall Street heard all the flames here and nobody wants to touch Apple stock? Actually, as a shareholder in Apple stock, I also whatch what goes on with the price, and Apple always seems to dump around October through mid- December. Also, The economy is not great at the moment (obviously) and the computer companies are some of the first to get hit when money is being saved and not invested. If Apple have done a real downfall (like Digital, down 150 points since Oct '87), I would wonder, but as it is I do not think it is a real big problem at the moment. Apple use to hang around 25-30 when the Dow Jones was this low in the past. Also remember that the Market on a whole is down a bunch. The richest stock on the big board, Berkshire Hathaway has dropped from 8000+ a share to 5600 as of closing on the 10 of October '90. This is a powerful company with no problems with it, it is just a trend in the market at the moment. Apple stock should be fine as long as it stays above 15 or so. Also, watch it closely...it could become a 'real buy' quickly if it shows signs of shooting back up. It should level back to 35-40 in March if not earlier. Neil - Still picking winners... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Neil M. Runyon |Apple IIgs ROM 1 Woz Machine, 1.75 Megs RAM, University of Utah - CS Dept | 62.5 Meg Hard Drive, 4 Speakers, and a Sony. nrunyon@peruvian.utah.edu | An Apple ShareHolder & I want a NEW Apple II! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Neil M. Runyon |Apple IIgs ROM 1 Woz Machine, 1.75 Megs RAM, University of Utah - CS Dept | 62.5 Meg Hard Drive, 4 Speakers, and a Sony. nrunyon@peruvian.utah.edu | An Apple ShareHolder & I want a NEW Apple II!