Ler em inglês

Partilhar via

I'm not unemployed!

  • Artigo

Dear Jason: You were wrong. We're not getting out of the Macintosh business, thankyouverymuch. :P

Heh. Okay, sorry, I just thought back to that post when our GM, Roz Ho, took the stage with Steve this morning.

As Roz said, we're in it for the long haul. I can't speak for the rest of MacBU, but I love being here. We make a great set of products, we've got great things in store for the next version, not to mention the update to Office 2004 that Roz announced on-stage.

Comments

  • Anonymous
    January 10, 2006
    Jason sometimes forgets that Steve has the RDF, not him.
  • Anonymous
    January 10, 2006
    What's the point in trying to make patches for Office 2004 so it runs better under Rosetta? You're trying to optimize code to run better under emulation, how much could you optimize it by? By the time Merom/Conroe ship, Rosetta performance is going to be off the scale, so what is the point of doing what you're doing? Why don't you get on with Office 12 for x86 and sort out VPC to run native.....

  • Anonymous
    January 11, 2006
    The comment has been removed
  • Anonymous
    January 11, 2006
    The comment has been removed
  • Anonymous
    January 12, 2006
    "We're responding to the needs of our customers"

    - By dropping Windows Media Player?

    What's next, MSN Messenger for mac?
  • Anonymous
    January 14, 2006
    What about VPC? Are you going to drag your heels with that or are you going to do something really nice and make VPC run native on the x86 platform. Why don't you get on with using the new virtualization technology on new Intel chips. Is VPC going to be in that release of Office:Mac 2006?
  • Anonymous
    January 14, 2006
    Paul - The next update of Entourage uses Sync Services, which is a collection of Tiger technologies that allows you to synchronise files to other devices and databases. Sync Services support in Entourage will enable you to synchronise your Entourage information and data (calendar events, contacts, tasks, and notes) to handheld devices and other applications that also support Sync Services. Other apps that use Sync Services include iSync and .Mac.

    Bill - The Windows Media Player was never handled by MacBU, it is an application that was created and maintained by the Windows Media team. The decision by the Windows Media team to stop developing the Windows Media Player for the Mac doesn't reflect the MacBU's commitment to the platform.

    Asam - You seem to be intent on believing that the folks in the MacBU don't actually do anything. I'm not sure if there's anything that I can do to change this highly negative viewpoint that you have. To answer your question, Virtual PC is a complex application that is closely tied to both the operating system and to the hardware, both of which have undergone significant changes in the past year. We are in close contact with Apple as we work to determine the feasibility of bringing Virtual PC to the Intel-based Macs. As we evaluate the feasibility of Virtual PC on Intel-based Macs, we will also consider replacement options to include in the next version of Office:Mac Professional Edition if they are necessary.
  • Anonymous
    January 14, 2006
    Its not that MacBU doesn't do anything Nadyne :) it's just that they are so slow to move with the flow. As a Mac gal you know how long we've had spotlight and the syncing, you too think that the way address book works with bluetooth is sooo cool, so why does it take so long? Everyone is told exactly whats planned at each WWDC, wasn't MacBU at WWDC 2004 and WWDC 2005?
  • Anonymous
    January 14, 2006
    Knowing what Apple is planning doesn't mean that [ working with that | enabling it | whatever else might be needed ] is an easy task. Furthermore, knowing what Apple is planning doesn't necessarily mean that there's a business case for [ working with it | enabling it | whatever]. If they announce something new, we have to figure out whether we should support it, and where it fits in with the rest of our priorities. If we do decide to support it, then we have to reallocate resources from elsewhere.

    Let's take the example of the Intel-based Macs: even though it was announced at WWDC '05 that they're coming, how many third-party applications are already running natively? For that matter, if Apple couldn't get all of their applications running natively on their own architecture when they presumably had more time to work on it, why would you think that knowing their plans means that the rest of us can issue updates overnight?

    I don't understand how you could have earlier complained that we should 'get on with Office 12 for x86', but are now saying that we should release updates to the existing version more often.
  • Anonymous
    January 14, 2006
    Make x86 Office:Mac, make VPC work with Virtualization, make them work with AddressBook.app, stop diverting and get on with it. We do things the Mac way, not your way.....
  • Anonymous
    January 14, 2006
    The comment has been removed
  • Anonymous
    January 15, 2006
    The comment has been removed
  • Anonymous
    January 15, 2006
    The comment has been removed
  • Anonymous
    January 18, 2006
    Nadyne, I subscribe to your RSS so I don't always read the comments - looks like there is no holds barred from some :)

    Certainly for Mac users that have a reason to run Windows applications (eg anyone that buys Virtual PC), Apple moving to Intel has offered the potential of near native speed virtualisation rather than slow as molasses emulation. Most of us have already used Virtual PC for Windows or VMware workstation and there definately is a big user base eager to use it.

    Rumors are that VMware is working on a OS X version, and so are some of the other smaller players (Paralllels?). I haven't heard of anyone working on Xen port yet though?

    Of course it is going to be a lot of work (I imagine that parts of the Virtual PC for Windows codebase will actually be more useful than the current Virtual PC for Mac codebase).

    Seriously, there really is only one reason that Microsoft shouldn't be moving to develop Virtual PC for Intel Mac as fast as you can bring it to market - that is that Apple is building it into Leopard. Would make sense from Apple's point of view, but it would go against their "we aren't going to help people run Windows on Intel Macs"

    Just a bit off topic, but what is Microsoft's biggest revenue earner on the desktop after Office? Are there any other desktop apps that are contenders for the MacBU etc?
  • Anonymous
    January 18, 2006
    Troy, I have no clue how much MS earns on anything. I don't know if it's that I'm too new to MS to have heard that kind of thing or if we don't break it out by application. I found our most recent earnings report (http://www.microsoft.com/msft/earnings/FY06/earn_rel_q1_06.mspx), but didn't look at it to see if it answers your questions.

    MacBU is constantly looking at potential new applications. When we do so, there are several questions: what resources are necessary to make it happen, what existing applications are in the market, what kind of return on investment we think we'd get, etc. That kind of decision happens in planning and marketing.
  • Anonymous
    March 24, 2006
    another day, another pundit opining that my job is going to disappear