Don't go quietly into the Night

Today I ran upon to pieces on information regarding Apple's future software and hardware strategy. On 6/22 news on xlr8yourmac.com, an anonymous poster claimed that Apple will remove the "Unsupported Install" option from shipping versions of MacOS-X client. Also today, I ran across This article (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/9906/apple-g4.shtml) Quite simply, this rumor, in essence, makes claim that Apple is taking steps to limit the hardware upgradability of current machines, to assure their obsolescence.

I cannot substantiate either of these claims, but they are consistent with the mindset that Jobs' Apple has been projecting. From a business perspective, Apple's steps make sense- since Apple is primarily a hardware vendor, by limiting the customer's options for software, it can force a purchase of new hardware- and by building in planned obsolescence into the hardware, it can force the purchase yet again. As long as competition can be effectively avoided, this model works like a charm. Apple's business hasn't been better for years.

This model, ironically, has historically only worked with expensive purpose built systems, such as SGIs or IBM's enterprise products. It is ironic because the Apple computer was designed as the computer for the rest of us- accessible, consumer friendly, the "smart" consumer choice, if you will. Apple built a very inviting mystique surrounding it and its products, effectively recruiting thousands (millions?) of loyal customers who can nitpick consumer reports complaining about the propensity of tire stems on Hondas to leak, but are rabidly defendant of their computers OS even if it does lack multitasking which the "other" brand had for years.

And these are precisely the folks that Apple likes to alienate and abuse. Instead of rewarding their loyal customers and flag-bearers, Apple intentionally handicaps their products to assure that their customers buy more and more, even if they don't need it or even want a new computer. Traditionally, Mac owners took this in stride, because, after all, they were convinced of their computer's "superiority," and you need to pay for this superiority. In psychology, I believe this is called codependency.

But what do we, Mac owners, gain out of this? We are roped into a closed system, controlled by a company who wants to make sure we spend $2500 every year on a new computer. This company manipulates the software and the hardware to assure we will HAVE to buy more hardware from THEM, if we wish to use the magnificent MacOS ("and this time we promise everything will be fixed! It's a must own!") This would be acceptable if it was par for the course- and it was, 20 years ago. Today, SGI sells NT workstations. IBM sells hardware with Linux, with a version of DB/2 to match. PC hardware is virtually open source, as Intel continuously loosens the reigns on hardware specs to avoid antitrust probes. Software is equally independent, as Microsoft has no stake in hardware sales (well, indirectly) and viable alternatives based on Linux are beginning to proliferate. How can we, otherwise intelligent consumers, allow ourselves to be treated like this by Apple?

I can't help but think that every Mac flag bearer eventually will "lose the faith" if Apple continues this pattern, for it is really an antagonistic and opposite to the entire industry. There is nothing wrong with current machines; they provide good performance for good value. But they do not offer any significant performance or features then my current 2 year old upgraded S900, and I absolutely refuse to have to buy a new Apple machine. If push comes to shove, If Apple will prevent YOUR Mac from being upgraded, and force you to upgrade even though they didn't provide honestly better hardware, what would be your breaking point? Apple bent on taking my dollar without providing the value- I won't put up with it. Would you?