Robert X Cringley has a very good post theorizing the rationale for Apple developing a Windows-based version of Safari.
Hightlights of the post are:
"Here is the complex package of goods Apple is trying to sell to AT&T: There's the iPhone, of course, but there is also the Apple TV as a potential set-top box. Three hundred dollars for a set-top box? You have to be crazy! Not so crazy. Compared to not spending the kind of money Verizon is spending on fiber, Apple TVs are cheap even if AT&T gives them away. Remember that $400 rebate you used to be able to get on a new PC by signing up for two years of MSN? That didn't appear to make sense, either, yet it ran for years.
For Apple TV to be successful as an IPTV set-top box, Apple has to convince us that we really want to download our video, NOT stream it. Not incidentally, this is also the key to iTunes' long-term success. Downloading makes much more efficient use of network resources, works fine on a copper wiring plant, and fits our emerging TiVoesque world view. Steve will tell us that we are busy dynamic people who really ought to plan our viewing. And enough of us will believe him to make AT&T's copper video service a credible success"
Cingley points out that this move isn't about taking down Microsoft, it isn't about making Macintosh computers the dominant computing platform, it IS about performing a massive cashectomy on AT&T After all, AT&T works closely with Microsoft's IPTV group and uses Microsoft technology for their middleware.
But Wait - There's More to the Story
I think Cringley is right- but did not tell the other half of the story.
AT&T working with Apple can now leverage Apple's initial run at the disruption of how music is sold - via iTunes and now repeat history with the video content providers and producers in Hollywood.
To me, Safari for Windows could be even more strategic than having the exclusive on iPhone for five years.









Recent Comments