I think I can see where you're going with this, Fabrizio. Like Mac Java, which might have been profitable based on hardware sales to developers but represented no value beyond that to the company (haters, feel free to argue that Apple is "threatened" by Java), the XServe might have made some tiny amount of profit above and beyond its costs, but is irrelevant to the small-device focus the company seems to be orienting itself around.
A lesson that could be learned is that Apple is far more focused than most other companies in our field: it keeps its product line small and rarely indulges flights of marketing fancy. It will kill borderline- viable products if it thinks they're a distraction or have run their course. By contrast, imagine if Sun had put resources into real Java desktop and mobile development instead of silly indulgences like Looking Glass, Wonderland, Darkstar, etc. As for the Xserve, it may be that people who insist on Apple servers are using Mac Minis instead for small offices and sites, while anything in the rack-mount form factor really doesn't benefit from anything Apple brings to the table (pretty control panels, etc). There are a number of colos that offer Mac Mini hosting, after all. --Chris On Nov 5, 8:12 am, "fabrizio\.giudi...@tidalwave\.it" <[email protected]> wrote: > Question: was a product line where Apple was losing money? Or does this mean > that Apple can drop products that, even though profitable, aren't any longer > interesting for them? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
