Subject:
|
Re: Of Interest To Robotics Folks? Perhaps...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 4 Jul 2001 17:26:15 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Carlos Perez <carlos@cs.^avoidspam^buap.mx>
|
Viewed:
|
618 times
|
| |
|
|
All this is besides the point! Lego should support Mac, simply because it
should!
The Mac is an option for consumers (whom some people say is much superior to
Windoze), and while it's there companies and organisms -especially those in
education- should support it! Now don't tell me the Lego is not in
education. Lego is DEFINITLY in the business educating (education is also
achieved at home, not only in school, and that is where those who say that
the DACTA product is enough are dead wrong)!
If we simply wanted our children to have fun we would buy them G.I Joes (or
whatever is hot nowadays)! We buy Lego because it not only entertains, it
also educates. I (want to) believe that Lego is an 'enlightened' company for
this reason. It is a company that cares about its consumers, and about
giving them a good product; not just about stats and figures, or what is
more profitable! Now, supporting the Mac is what an 'enlightened' company
would do.
Lets not forget that Lego bricks in general, and the RCX in particular, are
an educational TOY. They are meant for children. As a CS graduate I *love*
Linux (and most flavors of UNIX for that matter, and truly dislike Windoze
for the crappy OS that it is). I prefer NQC, and particularly LegOS over the
RIS packaged SW; but I would NEVER want my 6 year old having to install
LegOS!
The ideal situation is this: He plugs the USB tower directly to my home Imac
(yes I use Mac at home, even if I use Solaris at work), inserts the CD that
automatically install itself, and starts playing! A while later he turns
back at me SMILING and says: "Look dad it follows the line!"
I think that Lego is more about childrens' smiles than about supporting only
"profitable" OSs.
--
Carlos Antonio Pérez Delgado ICQ # 41048818
carlitos@programmer.net carlos@cs.buap.mx
on 7/4/01 1:28 PM, Steve Baker at sjbaker1@airmail.net wrote:
> Matthew Gerber wrote:
>
> > 32 reasonable arguments, coming up (most current data I could find-may not
> > all apply directly to home use vs. educational vs. business, but provided
> > for market share information):
> >
> > *In a nationwide survey of 22,000 creative firms, 77% of them plan to
> > purchase Macintosh computers in 1999, outselling both Windows and Windows NT
> > by an astounding margin of over 3 to 1. The research company stated, "Apple
> > continues to dominate the creative markets."
> > (TrendWatch 1999 Creative Atlas Guide)
>
> Do 'creative firms' buy lots of Lego?
>
> > * 72% of the alumni of Rochester Institute of Technology - arguably the
> > world's oldest (1830s), largest and best school of photography and printing
> > in the world - own Macs.
> > ("Contact Sheet", the RIT alumni news letter)
>
> Are photographers and printers part of Lego's core market?
>
> > * More than 57% of Web sites that use video use Apple's QuickTime to
> > deliver it.
> > (Apple Computer)
>
> So people who serve quicktime from their websites are big Lego purchasers?
>
> > * On average, the cost to develop and support Windows applications is
> > 50%
> > higher per dollar of revenue than the cost to develop for Macintosh.
> > (Software and Information Industry Association)
>
> Undeniably true...That's why Lego have no money left to support a Mac version
> - it
> all has to be spent on those 90% of *HOME* users with Windoze machines.
>
> > * Mac users are 50% more accurate and 44% more productive than Wintel
> > users.
> > (A.D. Little report)
>
> ...and so they have more time left to buy Lego?
>
> > * 20% of all the personal computers in use today are Macs.
> > (Minneapolis Star Tribune, 5/11/98)
>
> A 1998 figure. The December 2000 figure is 5%...same as Linux. By now, if the
> growth rates have held firm, MacOS is the THIRD most popular OS...now there
> are
> actually TWO Mac OS's...and one of them is UNIX...the number of non-UNIX Mac's
> will plummet.
>
> > * Macintosh software comprises over 18% of all software sold.
> > Macintosh
> > users actually use more applications than Windows users, citing ease of
> > installation of Mac applications as one of the reasons.
> > (Software and Information Industry Association)
>
> We aren't talking about software sales - we are talking about Lego sales.
> Mac software sales are higher than you'd expect from the proportion of
> computers out there because Apple don't bundle as much stuff as Microsoft
> do - so there is more need to buy software after the fact - hardly anybody
> buys software for Linux 'cos its basically all free.
>
> I'm also betting that's 18% of the revenue and not 18% of the disks - and so
> that could just be a reflection of the generally higher price of Mac software.
>
> > * Apple computers account for 15% of CompUSA's CPU sales.
> > (From the WWDC Keynote Speech by Steve Jobs, 11 May 98)
>
> Another 1998 figure.
>
> <snip lots more Mac propaganda>
>
> The fact is that NONE of the things you mention matter IN THIS CONTEXT.
> The one and ONLY figure that matters to Lego is the number of Lego purchasers
> who have MacOS and the number who have Windoze.
>
> Taking even the most WILDLY inflated figures, Mac has no more than a 5 to 10%
> share of the *HOME* market. Windoze undoubtedly has 90%.
>
> So, unless you have some figures to show that Apple users buy TEN TIMES as
> much Lego (maybe TWENTY TIMES) per capita compared to the Windoze community
> you don't have an argument. It's just silly to quote the number of worthless
> patents Apple and Microsoft can wave at each other!
>
> Linux is in a similar position - so much as I *love* the OS, I'm realistic
> about the likelyhood of getting much support.
>
> > Sounds like a major OS on a major platform to me.
>
> Oh Nonsense. It's a tiny minority of home users that have Mac's. It's
> undoubtedly a *great* OS on a *great* platform - but just as VHS beat
> Betamax (and they both beat the technically superior V2000), technical
> superiority doesn't *always* count.
>
> Lego are doing the right thing in order to assure their future.
>
> Sad but true.
>
> ----------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------------
> HomeMail : <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkMail: <sjbaker@link.com>
> HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
> Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net http://tuxkart.sf.net
> http://agtoys.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net
> http://freeglut.sf.net http://toobular.sf.net
>
>
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Of Interest To Robotics Folks? Perhaps...
|
| ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carlos Perez" <carlos@cs.buap.mx> To: <sjbaker1@airmail.net>; "Matthew Gerber" <matthew@digitaliris.com> Cc: <lego-robotics@crynwr.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 7:26 PM Subject: Re: Of Interest To Robotics (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jul-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Of Interest To Robotics Folks? Perhaps...
|
| (...) Do 'creative firms' buy lots of Lego? (...) Are photographers and printers part of Lego's core market? (...) So people who serve quicktime from their websites are big Lego purchasers? (...) Undeniably true...That's why Lego have no money left (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jul-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
