Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 29th Jun 2011 15:04 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 479123
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-07-14
The pros that kept Apple alive weren't using Apple applications on top of classic Mac OS. They were using third party applications on Mac OS. Apple started investing in third party applications when classic was dying and OSX was new. It was a requirement to help keep the whole platform ( classic and OSX) alive as third party apps were starting to baulk at continuing classic aps and/or porting to a completely.
So yes, its stupid to rely on Apple as a media app developer. No, its not stupid to rely on them as a OS provider for media apps.
I would say the same for Microsoft as well ( Expression Studio for example).