Macintosh Forever? Uh-oh…

<snarky mode enabled> Jason Snell, writing for MacWorld today about the 30th anniversary of the launch of the original 128K Macintosh, gave a quote by Phil Schiller. He said:

“There is a super-important role [for the Mac] that will always be,” Schiller said. “We don’t see an end to that role. There’s a role for the Mac as far as our eye can see. A role in conjunction with smartphones and tablets, that allows you to make the choice of what you want to use. Our view is, the Mac keeps going forever, because the differences it brings are really valuable.” (emphasis mine)

Based on our past experience with the Apple II, I would give the Mac just a few more years before it is gone. “Apple II Forever” was the theme at the launch of the Apple IIc in April 1984, and forever lasted only nine years before they pulled the plug.

Macintosh forever
Making life better and better
Macintosh forever and ever
Bringing the rainbow to you
Macintosh forever!

<snarky mode disabled>

Actually, I don’t want that to happen, because I use my MacBook Pro on a daily basis, and want to continue to do so. But I just couldn’t help but make that connection to an old nit to pick.

6 Replies to “Macintosh Forever? Uh-oh…”

  1. In the last times we have seen more and more signs of the Mac becoming the new Apple II. But in 2014, things are a bit different.

    Contrarily to what happened with the Apple II, Apple does not need the Mac to fund iOS’ development. But they will not, they can not kill the Macintosh, at least in a few years. Because iOS isn’t self-hosting, and they need a development platform for it. But they can (and will, I’m afraid) let the Macintosh ecosystem die a slow death, and continue updating only the base OS and XCode.

  2. Isn’t a classic Mac already dead? The current Macs have Intel CPUs and OS X. These Macs cannot run the old software. In essence, they are Macs in name only…

  3. Yesterday I reviewed current Mac offerings for possible purchase by a friend. The performance of all models could be surpassed by building a PC with off the shelf components that are commonly available to anyone. The containers are superbly designed, for sure, but the capabilities of what is inside are just as necessary to maintain innovation as the aesthetics.

    Apple’s new hire of the former CEO for Burberry reminds me of the hire of John Sculley so many years ago. The “toner-heads” that once ruled Xerox are getting the upper hand.

  4. As Jobs once said, “A players hire A players; B players hire C players”.

    I hope to be wrong, but Apple is taking the same paths it took in 1985 after the forced exit of Jobs. And, sadly, this time Jobs can’t return to save the company.

    If history teaches us something, in a few years, after Android (the new PC) has eroded enough market share, Apple will engage in a price war with Android handset makers, and the customers that love Apple for its quality will flee. That is, if Tim Cook doesn’t stop it (IMHO, Jonathan Ive would have made a better CEO, as he had a lot of affinity with Jobs, but that’s another matter).

  5. Antonio: Interesting quote from Jobs. B and C players run the world.

    Jon Ive is a great designer, an A player in that field. Great design has become kryptonite to Apple.

  6. Ive is a great designer, but he has no business sense (and, in honesty, doesn’t claim to either). There is no replacement for Jobs, who for all his faults (and they were manifold and severe) had a clear vision and the energy to implement and enforce it. There isn’t anyone out there who really has that level of singular drive. Besides, the only reason Steve Jobs could have done the things he did was his own history with the company and the leverage he had with them. Had he went to any other company, he couldn’t have been Steve Jobs, in the way he was at Apple the second time around.

    If I had the answer, I’d be a lot richer than I am. It will be interesting to see play out.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *