Briefly About the Show

Buried somewhere in our genetic makeup, is mankind's need to find a conspiracy in the most mundane things. Obviously this applies to views on governments (perhaps appropriately) but even the most analytical man in history (Sigmund Freud) said that sometimes it is what it is.

Apple recently announced that it's new OS X 10.5 (codenamed Leopard) would be delayed until October instead of being released in June as originally planned. They blamed the delay on having to shift resources to get the iPhone ready. Despite this sounding like a completely reasonable explanation, some people need to locate a lie. Maybe it's the need for drama. Maybe they need to feel special.

Ed Oswald over at BetaNews (a favorite publication of ours) writes that Apple Can't Face the Truth. He suggests Apple's using the iPhone excuse to avoid having to admit that they just underestimated how long it would take them to get the OS done. He begins...

Okay, so we basically take a risk by delaying an already established product in favor of finishing a product on time that hasn't even been proven yet?

OS X is established, but it's also a product that they are responsible for. If the date slips, they are only beholden to themselves and users. The iPhone is a huge partnership with Cingular and the dates effect another company "as well as" customers on both sides. I'd say it's a much bigger deal to push the iPhone. It has nothing to do with what product is established, it has to do with accountability and in this case Apple has to deal with their customers, Cingular's customers, and Cingular itself if they miss the deadline.

We do know from Microsoft OS launches that they also in turn boost PC sales. The profit margins on PCs are far higher than phones, so why would Apple take such a risk?

While this is true for a company that puts out OSes once every 5 to 7 years, I'm not sure it's nearly as true for Apple. Windows begins to show its age, users compare it to the latest OS X, and they start getting pissed off at security problems. So yeah, a new OS is going to boost sales a lot. Tiger on the other hand is perfectly capable of competing with Vista. It only came out a little over a year ago and users aren't "in need" of the OS as much as they just want the next bit of cool. I don't think the tie-in is as strong in how it relates to hardware sales.

There's also far more hype around the iPhone than there is around Leopard. Leopard only markets to Mac users while the iPhone has a much broader audience. Ed argues that Apple faces an uphill battle and may not do well with the iPhone, but the same could be said about the iPod shortly before its launch. No one had ever made good money on an MP3 player before that.

With no hard evidence other than Ed's "loose" interpretation of the facts bundled with a number of assumptions, he comes across looking like little more than a high school girl looking for gossip about the popular kids to make herself feel superior. If you're going to suggest someone is lying and that they're hypocrites, shouldn't you have some factual foundation to stand on?

And the comparison to Microsoft's Vista delays is laughable. Apple's pushing a date by 4 months for reasons that make sense. Microsoft's date slipped by years. It's just no the same.

Ed's not the only one either, the good folks at Red Sweater extrapolate a lot of meaning from an otherwise sensible and straightforward announcement. Software gets delayed, resources are spread thin. You don't go on a hiring spree for a temporary situation like having to launch two huge products at once, you just deal with the issue and move on.

But hey, Ed's article did get a lot of attention, so maybe he got what he really wanted in the end. Wait, that sounds like a conspiracy. Now I'm the hypocrite.