This entry was posted on Monday, February 6th, 2006 at 10:19 and is filed under Analysis & Commentary. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Site Search:
Monday, February 6, 2006
Connected Home posses an interesting question: why isn’t there an iLife for Windows? Paul Thurrott rightfully points out how excellent of a suite iLife ’06 is with all it’s wonderful and robust features. But what Thurrott doesn’t understand is why doesn’t Microsoft have anything that comes close to iLife. The reason is simple, Microsoft doesn’t need to.
Apple is struggling to keep big names from jumping off the OS X platform. Look at Macworld. Microsoft’s Office head received a huge chunk of air time while Intel’s top boss came out in a bunny suit and showed his head for 30 seconds. If you ask me, going to the Intel CPU is a bit more of news then keeping Microsoft around for another version of Office. But in the end, Steve Jobs knew he had to give Microsoft their dog-and-pony show time to keep them happy. Also note what was said during that time. ’We’ll be here for five more years.’ Ya, good indication that Microsoft and Apple signed a five year deal behind closed doors and thus the reason for the large amount of stage time for Redmond-based company.
Now, look to Microsoft. Does it have to beg any manufacturer to stay and code for Windows? Nope. Does it need to make a lite version of Office to get more purchases of its OS? Nope. Do people who buy Windows demand the applications of iLife for free? Nope. There’s no need for an iLife for Windows, that’s why Microsoft doesn’t have it. Why waste the $50 billion in the bank on something you don’t need?
Once OS X starts really taking off, you’ll see changes in iLife. It’ll mature and so will the price. It already has. In fact, it wouldn’t be surprising to find Apple to pull an Adobe and start selling each application individually and pricing each offering at the current suite price. Each product is worth it at this point, but once the masses buy into the new Mac way of life, then Apple can get away with higher pricing for it. Remember, all the previous iApps (except GarageBand and the newly added iWeb) use to be free. But until then, it’ll stay low and affordable.
Will iLife ever disappear and take the Windows road with it’s new life? Maybe. It’s hard to say since I don’t run the company but when you’re a publicly held company, you tend to do things like the other large public companies do. There is a pattern.
February 6th, 2006 at 13:53
I think you’ll find it wasn’t a case of begging but simply a case of mutual benefit. Microsoft makes a handsome profit selling the Office suite to Mac users and wants to assure them that they will continue to support the product. Apple also gains from this assurance but it doesn’t need to beg for it because, ultimately, it doesn’t need MS Office, and in fact, knowing Jobs, would probably prefer to have its control its own office suite. It wouldn’t surprise me if Gates is actually the one who has requested this arrangement, and possibly with a caveat that Apple do not develop their own enterprise level office suite.
Also the iLife apps are free, when you buy a new Mac, and my guess is they will continue to be so for the foreseeable future.
February 6th, 2006 at 14:15
iLife is free with the purchase of a new Mac. Always has been. If you want to purchase the latest and greatest version, you have to pay for it. That seems pretty fair to me.
February 6th, 2006 at 15:32
Sven, I think you’re missing the point here. Many of the commentators (Paul Thurrott is another) who are bemused there is no iLife for Windows are pointing out that Windows 3rd party developers as well as Microsoft themselves have dropped the ball consistently ever since iLife was released and have failed to field a suite of integrated apps with anything close to the capabilities and elegance (or price) of Apple’s iLife suite.
Even now MS’s attempt with Windows Movie Maker 2.0 and Media Player pale beside Apple’s iMovie, iDVD, iTunes, iPhoto, Garageband combination. At this stage of the game, it looks like Microsoft WILL have to try to do something better themselves to rectify the situation (if they can), because currently there is no competition.
Apple doesn’t have to beg developers to write these sorts of core apps for Mac OS X because they themselves appear to do so much better at it themselves (witness the pro apps as well – Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Logic, Shake, Motion. Versions 2 of Aperture might also end up in this category). Obviously they can’t do everything themselves which leaves plenty of room for 3rd party developers.
The move to Intel opens the door for VMWare/WINE/VirtualPC options to fill in the gaps with appropriate Windows apps, so we’ll just have to wait and see how it all pans out in the future.
-Mart
February 6th, 2006 at 20:28
Prior to iLife, major updates to iPhoto were free. I specifically remember going to a Macworld where iPhoto was updated and it was free. “You can download it today,” is what I was told. It wasn’t until the following year did you have to pay for major upgrades.
Microsoft does not need Apple what so ever for it’s Office suite. I have spoken to sources at Microsoft who give mixed feedback to the Office profitability margin. In short, Microsoft would not shed tears if it stopped Mac development of the Office suite. Note it no longer supports IE or Windows Media player for the Mac. There have bee other Mac applications Bill Gates had no issue killing for the Mac in the past (remember MS SuperPaint?) and wouldn’t have issue with Office. So yes, Apple did some begging folks. Sorry, but the presentation at MacWorld seemed to indicate that.
Yes, there is no doubt Apple makes great applications. But again, I believe it’s because they have to. With little 3rd party development, Apple needs to give reason for that infamous “switch”.
As to DVD Studio Pro, Shake, and Motion, those were all developed by other companies Apple purchased.
February 6th, 2006 at 23:44
Actually… Apple is doing mighty fine on it’s own. Sure, Microsoft Office is a pretty big deal for Apple to keep, but the reality is that Apple OWNS the creative market carte blanche…. and that’s not going to change in my lifetime. If you’re watching something on television, odds are that it was cut on Final Cut Pro… in fact FCP is cutting close to 1/3 of films hitting the screens, and at the current growth rate in that market space they will be the dominant player within 5 years. Our studio moved from 10% Mac / 90% Windows to now 60% Mac / 40% Windows with the complete phasing out of Windows by year end. We purchase a good dozen+ machines every year and we intend to expand it further this year. Who cares if Apple bought existing technologies? DVD Studio Pro is a long, long, long way away from it’s version 1.0 release. Shake is a nice compliment to the rest of their applications and, actually, Motion was developed by Apple…. FCP was originally a Macromedia project that they were dropping because they weren’t sure they could penetrate the marketspace… Apple’s efforts with FCP has pretty much leveled every other competitor in the entry level space and they’ve marginalized almost anyone in the mid to high end space. Apple’s tight application inplementation and simplicity makes it an in demand tool for creatives. We’re already dealing with an overwhelming amount of technical issues for the media we work with… the last thing we need is the major headaches and technical issues that plague Windows…. we know… we’ve lived through that misery for enough years to know that we don’t want to revisit that nightmare again. Fact is, Apple is on the rebound and grabbing marketshare. I’m not saying they are going to even come remotely close to ousting Windows… but they could certainly get a good 20-25% marketshare in the next decade. Their machines are tight, their applications well executed… and most of all… they design with the end-user in mind… making an operating system that is much more intuitive than it’s Windows counterpart. If you really want to see some really nice objective comparisons, visit http://www.xvsxp.com
February 6th, 2006 at 23:48
On a side-note… you make the point very clear in your opening statement: “But what Cordero doesn’t understand is why doesn’t Microsoft have anything that comes close to iLife. The reason is simple, Microsoft doesn’t need to.”
They don’t need to because they are now so big and bloated, they can afford to be complacent. That is why pretty much everything that is exciting and innovative is happening on the Mac. It’s called capitalism… pure and simple. Make a better product, market the hell out of it… and people move over… and the numbers are showing this is what is happening.
February 7th, 2006 at 0:34
Just to make this clear: Microsoft sells more copies of its Mac Office Suite than it does on its own OS, primarly because in case of the latter Office is mostly pirated. So I don’t think Apple is giving Microsoft more credit than any other company. Just be honest: you too would prefer Roz Ho to some guy in a bunny suit
February 7th, 2006 at 6:07
No offense, but ActiveMac didn’t ask the question, I did: They link to my article on Connected Home. Please attribute this question appropriately, though obviously I’m not the first to ask it.
Thanks, Paul
February 7th, 2006 at 16:43
Jasper, according to 2002 sales alone of Windows XP SP1, I’d say your statement is waaaay off. “Microsoft said sales of its latest desktop operating system, Windows XP, hit 32 million OEM and retail copies as of April.” [Source]
Now since we know only a little more then a tenth of that number is about the what the Mac base install is (about 4 million,) that would mean even with every Mac user running Mac Office, you still wouldn’t be able to back up your claim.
As a side note, of all the Mac users I know (and I know a good chunk of them,) I am the only one running Mac Office. So I still stand behind my comment.
Paul, sorry about the misquote, I’ll get that corrected. Thanks for letting me know.
February 8th, 2006 at 7:52
Microsoft sells more copies of its Mac Office Suite than it does on its own OS
You really didn’t think before writing that, Jasper, did you? A little reflection would indicate that Office can’t have got that huge a monopoly on Mac sales alone. Corporations buy Office (for the PC) by the absolute truckload. Or site licences, which comes to the same thing.
As to why Microsoft hasn’t done an iLife, I agree with the sentiment: it really doesn’t need to, because that’s not a dealbreaker for anyone considering getting a new PC. That Macs have iLife might attract a few, but you’re forgetting that the sound of the advertising for iLife doesn’t reach much beyond the Macoblogosphere.
February 8th, 2006 at 7:55
btw on posting a comment got a whole stack of PHP warning/error messages re Spam Karma. Have you donated, Sven? It might be karma coming back at ya if you haven’t… or just the penalty for being cutting edge if you have.
Comment appears OK, though. (This one can be deleted once the fault is sorted.)
February 8th, 2006 at 7:59
Sven, Charles, sorry… to make myself clear: Microsoft sells more copies of its Office suite on the Mac than it does on the PC if you take into account their market share (big oops).
Regards,
Jasper.
February 8th, 2006 at 9:03
The way I look at it… Mac doesn’t have any worries… oh people have predicted their doom since the first Macintosh box opened, but such is not the case. Mac users being overly concerned that their machine platform may not last or be viable is a bit like BMW drivers worrying that their car may not be viable because everyone else drives a Hyundai. They are both cars and they will both get you places.
February 23rd, 2006 at 8:32
I also think that MS has proven they have no idea how to design easy to use software but that’s just part of their company culture. They’re used to designing apps that either sell MS servers or have a huge checklist of features that stack up against competitors because IT buyers want quantifiable measurements (easy to use, blah blah blah cannot be measured by IT standards).
It’s simply the difference between a Chevy Cargo Van and a BMW. There’s nothing wrong in either – their main DNA is just different.
And we can see when Ms tries to deviate into consumer territory, we get apps like the Music jukebox that was missing a CD burning feature until lo and behold itunes came out and it was re-designed to look suspiciously like itunes and now added the CD burning feature for free. And of course, other than if you work at MS, who honestly has EVER created a DVD using MovieMaker that worked correctly or didn’t require you to spend weeks and weeks? Again, just not in their DNA.
MS’ problem is when they try to be all things to all people – no one can do all that – jist like it’s not in Apple’s DNA to create corporate machines – different markets. Different agendas – different DNA’s.
But Apple has made it astonishly simple for WIN users. For $499, you can have ilife – you also get a mac with it – the mac mini – get a KVM switcher and you are set to go. You can even hide the mini under a magazine.
February 23rd, 2006 at 8:33
I also think that MS has proven they have no idea how to design easy to use software but that’s just part of their company culture. They’re used to designing apps that either sell MS servers or have a huge checklist of features that stack up against competitors because IT buyers want quantifiable measurements (easy to use, blah blah blah cannot be measured by IT standards).
It’s simply the difference between a Chevy Cargo Van and a BMW. There’s nothing wrong in either – their main DNA is just different.
And we can see when Ms tries to deviate into consumer territory, we get apps like the Music jukebox that was missing a CD burning feature until lo and behold itunes came out and it was re-designed to look suspiciously like itunes and now added the CD burning feature for free. And of course, other than if you work at MS, who honestly has EVER created a DVD using MovieMaker that worked correctly or didn’t require you to spend weeks and weeks? Again, just not in their DNA.
MS’ problem is when they try to be all things to all people – no one can do all that – jist like it’s not in Apple’s DNA to create corporate machines – different markets. Different agendas – different DNA’s.
But Apple has made it astonishly simple for WIN users. For $499, you can have ilife – you also get a mac with it – the mac mini – get a KVM switcher and you are set to go. You can even hide the mini under a magazine.