Apple Adding A Second Button To Laptops? (A lesson in Speculation)

Speculating about the future is a common practice for many people. Stock brokers, gamblers and even outstanding Apple pundits like Jon “Hannibal” Stokes enjoy making predictions. While making predictions can be entertaining the real fun comes when the prediction turns out to be correct. Jon’s latest speculation is that the stated reasons for the switch to Intel are but a charade. The real reason, Jon is certain, is because Apple intends to downplay the personal computing market and focus squarely on the gadget market. His argument, seemingly, got a little stronger with the revelation that a super low power G5 is on the way. Since, as previously mentioned, people love it when their predictions are validated it is no wonder why Jon is feeling a little giddy lately. Unfortunately Jon, as anyone can see, is dead wrong on this one. Apple isn’t deemphasizing or getting out of the PC side, they’re just getting started.

With that noted it is time to re-examine the switch to Intel. The reasons Steve gave seemed sufficient for the moment but events since the switch was announced leave the careful observer with only one possible conclusion: Apple isn’t going after Microsoft, Apple is going straight after the high end windows PC market. Before proceeding let us note that the high PC market is, in fact, a coveted niche. Dell has recently made overtures to that market segment and Sony lives there. The reasoning is simple: that segment offers higher margins and lower support costs.

Now stop and think for a moment of where Apple really excels. The answer must be industrial design. Apple’s computers simply look better than anything else on the market, in fact nothing else is even close. Put a Mac and a comparable Dell in a beauty contest and the winner is unmistakable. Yet, for all of Apple’s design acumen, a Mac simply isn’t an option for most people. Sure the Mac may look fantastic and take up a comparatively miniscule amount of desk space but unless it runs the latest version of Norton Anti Virus people don’t view it as a possible choice. How can Apple make the Mac a viable option for the majority of computer buyers? Windows compatibility.

There is, of course, more to this story. Quickly, name the reason most people turn to the Mac. Did you say the plethora of malware, spyware and viruses for present on the Windows platform? Most people would agree, the majority of switchers do seem driven to the Mac more by a horrible Windows experience than by the Mac’s inherent advantages. That may be about to change. Windows Vista is, finally, on the horizon. Vista promises, among other upgrades, a much more secure platform. If Vista comes through Windows users can finally have a relatively safe, if garish, operating system residing on their computer.

If security issues are suddenly not a major problem on Windows computers in the future then Apple has a very serious problem. Their market share suddenly becomes static. It is at this point lessons learned from the iPod are heard loudly and clearly. Apparently, given a choice, people will go for Apple design over uglier and slightly worse mp3 players. Extrapolating this behavior to computers it is easy to see why Apple would think that a slightly more expensive, but infinitely better-designed PC would sell to the masses. In addition, when it comes to case design, Apple has no competition. The only computer maker that even attempts to add a dash of style to their offerings is Sony. Sony does a passable job and compared to most PC makers they clearly come out on top. Compared to Apple’s designs you’re looking at the difference between a Yugo and a Porsche.

Yet surely if Apple were seriously considering going after this market segment, being the BMW of all PCs, we would see something indicating this sea change of philosophy besides a hidden processor switch. Friends I give you the Mighty Mouse. When the Mighty Mouse first came on the scene it was easy to argue that Apple was just selling another gizmo to rake in a few more dollars. That notion changed when the mouse began shipping as standard equipment with the refreshed Power Macs and wildly updated iMacs. The Mighty Mouse became more than just a new gimmick, it became a signal that Apple was shedding their old anti PC philosophy and would soon be courting the PC world.

It isn’t a surprise really. Steve Jobs has always loved hardware. When he started NeXT they made computers. When he purchased Pixar guess what their business model was? Making movies? No. Adding special effects to other people’s movies?  Incorrect. Pixar existed to sell absurdly high-end systems. Systems so advanced you had to use a Sun Workstation to interface with the things. In short expecting Steve to voluntarily give up producing computers is akin to anticipating the day when Hallmark stops producing overly sentimental greeting cards geared towards the better half of the population. Hardware is what Steve, and by extension, Apple lives to create.

Now how much would you pay? Don’t answer yet because we also have promises from Intel that their chips will be able to run multiple systems simultaneously. With Windows on one core and Mac OS X running on another it is plain to see that Apple is anticipating the day when their boxes will do it all. So here’s how you’ll know that Apple is definitely courting the Widows market: When a second mouse button shows up on an Apple laptop. Remember you heard it here first.

All that sounds semi-compelling. We’ve uncovered the real reason for the switch to Intel and learned that if moving more computers means running Windows Apple will swallow that pill. Except everything posited is the purest grade of shinola. Yes the facts are generally correct but the conclusions reached are, at best, farfetched. The arguments have been carefully picked to wildly favor the conclusion. More telling than the examples used are the reasons why such a move would be sheer nonsense. None of which is surprising, cherry-picking arguments to support your position is the nature of punditry. Yet with the Intel switch people, even excellent writers such as Jon “Hannibal” Stokes, are adding in a conspiracy factor that can favor any particular conclusion. Put differently: Once you assume a secret motive the “motive” defines the argument rather than the argument defining the motive.

The motive in this case is fairly clear: Apple has nothing for laptops and Intel promised a way out of PowerBook stagnation. There may have been other technologies on the horizon but Steve had recently been burned about the scalability of PowerPC chips. Faced with the option of trusting that IBM would come through, going with a start up company that was promising great stuff a few years or going to Intel Steve chose safely (the same reason people buy Dells! The Irony). Not that it was the right choice necessarily, Steve Jobs is fallible, but it was a sensible choice that doesn’t demand extraordinary reasoning.