>Simon wrote:
>"The only thing keeping the Mac around nowadays is Shareware - and Mac OS X
>is the only killer app to appear on scene in the last 10 years."
>
>Hmm... I think graphic arts, music, and education (schools) are the ones
>keeping Apple going, and OS X is going to bring more developers to the Mac.
>But as far as killer apps, how about iMovie?
You proved my point, iMovie came out last year. Point to something
as absolutely fantastic as iMovie, lets say from 1994. Something so
great that a flurry of development and consumer based products rose
up around it.
>iMovie is one of the best designed programs ever, IMHO, because it does
>something very complicated (video editing), but is extremely easy to use.
>Very powerful, AND very easy to use... this is an extremely difficult thing
>for a program to accomplish.
Well, it's a stripped down version of Final Cut pro which Apple
bought from Macromedia. As for being easy to use, I've never owned
anything bought from Apple which was difficult to use.
>OS X will bring many UNIX programs and programmers to the Mac, which is both
>good and bad. Good in that it will bring more cool programs to the
>platform, bad in that some of those ports will be terribly ugly. As stated
>before on this list, UNIX folks think that having a great gui interface
>means using more than ONE shade of gray. But anyway... :)
This is true which is why it's the killer app. Many developers and
consumer based products will rise up around OS X. This is what I'm
saying, hell, as mentioned in my last email, Windows is the only none
UNIX based OS around now. The easiest platform to port to is UNIX
nowadays. Apps like iMovie, iTunes, iDVD etc were just hacked titles
put together to keep people interested in OS 9 and the current
hardware long enough for Apple to get OS X complete. This is clear
as day.
iMovie --> hack of Final Cut (which Apple bought)
iTunes --> hack of Cassedy and Greens SoundJam Pro (which Apple bought)
iDVD --> hack of Astart's DVD authoring package (which Apple bought)
And there are more, yes Steve Jobs is good I agree. But none of
these are *killer* apps and Apple surely programmed none of them
(their entire development focus was OS X). I have a dozen friends
with iMacs and maybe 2 bought it for the iMovie/DV capability. The
rest use the USB port for their cameras, and only 1 uses iDisk. Hi
Ian!
>MetaCard should be pitched as a tool that is easy for beginners but will be
>able to keep you happy as you grow in ability. Many of us ex-HyperCard
>users would still be using it if we hadn't hit the wall with it's
>limitations (and there were many.)
You lost me, HC limitations or MC's? What do you use it for? Don't
say database and QuickTime...that's become the default response.
Valid mind you, but it would be good to know more - that way it helps
Scott.
>MetaCard is expensive, but there's no real competition for what it does
>(card-based design that's cross platform and powerful.) The problem is that
>it is priced out of reach of general hobbyists, and those are the people who
>would really benefit from starting on MetaCard. So the pricing is aimed
>squarely at people who can make money with MetaCard (ie programmers), but
>who are not already schooled in a different language such as C++. This is,
>to my mind, a small market. I think MetaCard needs an influx of newbies,
>because the target crowd here is just too small. I'd say that a good way to
>do this would be to ditch MetaCard's current price ($995) and charge $499
>for it. Then charge $299 for the subscription price. I'd wait until the
>Mac OS X version is ready, then spend a little on marketing, and sell
>MetaCard for $499. This would grab a ton of HyperCard users, and also some
>other newbies, most of which would consider $499 to be expensive but not
>unreasonable. The other piece to the puzzle is a beginner's book. But
>that's another thread...
Well, in the end it's all up to Scott. But lowering the price
indefinitely is not the answer, the theme of the last month has been
about Hypercard and why it's still in use. Well, after reading each
thread and even receiving a few personal reply's I have to say that
there is no evidence that MC can replace HC for what the remaining
users of HC use it to do. Some have not switched due to the price,
others due to the feature set, none have steadfastly refused to pay
up for MC if they had to. So, should the price really be lowered
when the potential client base is not assured? I think not. A safer
course of action would be to offer a limited time offer or
rebate/tradeup program. If the fish don't bite then no harm done, if
the price falls to $499 and 10 switch and that's the end of it then
Scott's losing money. There are more than enough HC users on this
list to ensure the word got out, that and the dozens of Mac Daily
news sites to which we can help Scott post this info to.
Leave things as they are, Scott would be wise to follow the OS X
trend and offer a deal this summer and be done with it. If anyone
here has any weight with Apple then help Scott get the starter kit
onto Apple's installer disk for OS X! Or get MC listed on Apple's
store.
Scott, I have a few partners that do packaging and publishing. If
you need anything at .60cents per US dollar just ask!
>:)
>Richard MacLemale
>Instructional Technology Specialist
>James W. Mitchell High School
>
>
>Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm
>Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
--
Cheers,
Simon
All your .com .net and .org domains for only $14.50 each.
Get them while they last... http://www.amigo-3.com/hosting/
--------------------------------------------------
"The great discoveries in science are not punctuated by 'Eureka! I've
found it!' but rather "Hmmm,that's funny...." Isaac Asimov
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm
Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
