Linked by David Adams on Tue 7th Jun 2011 17:54 UTC
Editorial Bob Cringeley makes a bold statement in a blog post responding to Apple's iCloud announcement: "Jobs is going to sacrifice the Macintosh in order to kill Windows." He says, "The incumbent platform today is Windows because it is in Windows machines that nearly all of our data and our ability to use that data have been trapped. But the Apple announcement changes all that. Suddenly the competition isn't about platforms at all, but about data, with that data being crunched on a variety of platforms through the use of cheap downloaded apps."
Thread beginning with comment 476543
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Thu 9th Jun 2011 02:09 UTC
Member since:

I love reading these articles that try to speculate only to turn out to be spectacular failures - anyone remember the analysts in the past who claimed that Itanium would be a $30-$50billion market, RISC processors all dead, and Dvorak claiming at one point that Apple would sell a customised version of Windows NT. Yes, it seems that any two bit schmuck with a blog is automatically given more credence than he deserves simply because of a platform he might own (aka domain name plus descent marketing).

iCloud is in response to two factors; firstly the fact that they could no longer justify charging for something that quite frankly is being provided free of charge by Google, Yahoo and Microsoft. MobileMe was never any better than the free alternatives to justify the price tag of AUS$108 per year and from what I had heard the growth had pretty much stagnated (many opting for 'DropBox' instead of MobileMe when it came to cross platform file sharing). The second part was the biggest bane of ones experience on iTunes was pretty much when it came to having to re-download music where you'd have to send an email off to Apple, plead to them to allow you to re-download it, and if you're lucky they'll let you. On top of that then add the need to get all devices synchronised beyond contacts etc. I hardly see iCloud as something revolutionary, the changes just bought everything in line - that you can re-download your music just like you can re-download the applications you bought from the AppStore. What held up this basic change? the record companies fought tooth and nail every step of the way.

iCloud is simply a natural evolution of MobileMe into something more than just a set of services one can get for free but with a price tag. The 30% cut they take from software sold on AppStore? that pays for the services that they expose to developers through the iCloud API, the cheaper operating system? to get users to upgrade faster, developers to take advantage of new features faster and thus propel Mac sales forward in much the same way that software propels i-device sales forward.

Edited 2011-06-09 02:15 UTC

Reply Score: 2