Macintosh Version

[danf]

With the Mac now with 91% of the $1000+ CPU market, according to NPD, maybe you should think about a Mac version of your software. You used to have it, how about bringing it back?

Please, I really don't want to run windows on my Mac....

[John Moran_2]

With the Mac now with 91% of the $1000+ CPU market, according to NPD, maybe you should think about a Mac version of your software. You used to have it, how about bringing it back?

Please, I really don't want to run windows on my Mac....

And your point is?

[dakboy]

With the Mac now with 91% of the $1000+ CPU market, according to NPD, maybe you should think about a Mac version of your software. You used to have it, how about bringing it back?

Please, I really don't want to run windows on my Mac....

And your point is?

That there is an existing and growing market for Mac-native software?

I'd love a native MacOS version of TopoUSA so I didn't have to run it on my company-issued Thinkpad.

[lee_rimar]

.

[dakboy]

I'd also like to see DeLorme expand their Mac efforts, with unified, native software packages instead of a bunch of disparate pieces. Latest information is that the PN-40's next FIRMWARE update will only be available (and useful) for people buying Topo 9 -- and no Mac version of that is in sight.

I haven't seen anything written yet that indicates that there won't be a Cache Register update to get in sync.

But I also haven't seen anything that says that there will be an update, either.

[lee_rimar]

.

[dakboy]

A Cache Register update seems besides the point. Chip said in his blog that:

The 2.8 firmware update is available only with Topo USA 9.0—PN-40s and 30s, with the 2.8 firmware update will not work with Topo USA 8.0 and earlier versions.

So... without a Mac version of the firmware, that's the end of the line for Mac users. What we have will still work but w/o firmware there won't be any improvements - no geocache attributes, no file management of pocket queries (beyond the not-quite-finished parts in 2.7), etc.

But the firmware isn't tied to the host OS, it's tied to the communication protocol the host software understands. There's no reason why there can't be a CR update that can talk to 2.8.

[lee_rimar]

.

[dakboy]

Dakboy, I think you mean a "Cache Register update" rather than a "T9 update." And the rest of your comment makes sense. It doesn't matter if the communication protocol is wrapped in a mapping package or Cache Register.

Edited to correct, thanks.

Except that Chip's blog suggested the only way to even GET the 2.8 firmware upgrade will be to buy T9, and that a PN udated with the new firmware wouldn't work with the old software. Maybe they'll bundle Cache Register, both PC & Mac versions, in the T9 package -- that would be one way out of muddle of the incompatible versions.

That'd likely be the only way. I would be extremely disappointed if 2.7 on the PN-30/40 were the end of the line for DeLorme units on the Mac.

I posted a question about CR on the Mac on one of the blog posts but have yet to see an answer pop up.

[RRLover]

I too have publicly pondered, and candidly queried about the DeLorme/Macintosh future, . . .
so far to no avail.

Norm

[CaelumMagnum]

With the Mac now with 91% of the $1000+ CPU market, according to NPD, maybe you should think about a Mac version of your software. You used to have it, how about bringing it back?

Please, I really don't want to run windows on my Mac....

And your point is?

Perhaps the point is that the vast majority of people who have money to spend on computers buy Macs... in other words, market share with regards to dollar value spent is mostly Apple users. Even though the number of Apple computers being sold is smaller than the number of computers running Windows that are sold, the people buying Macs actually have money... If people are not willing to spend money on a computer, how likely are they to spend money on GPSr/mapping software? Forget computer market share, think demographic of people who want to buy a product like the one you are selling (and who can afford to pay for it). I think maybe that is the point...

[CaelumMagnum]

http://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/28/apple-tops-microsoft-in-third-quarter-revenue/

Apple Tops Microsoft in Third Quarter Revenue

Thursday October 28, 2010 04:17 PM EST
Written by Eric Slivka
Back in late May, Apple passed Microsoft to become the second-largest U.S. company as measured by market capitalization. Just a few months later, Apple has reached another milestone lined to its longtime rival: For the first time in nearly 15 years, Apple has brought in more quarterly revenue than Microsoft, as Apple's $20.34 billion quarter announced last week topped that of Microsoft, which today reported revenue of $16.20 billion for the third calendar quarter of 2010.


Comparison of AAPL and MSFT quarterly revenues for Q4 2000 - Q2 2010 (Source: YCharts)

While revenue is only one measure of the size of a company and Microsoft's high profit margins achievable through its primary focus on software mean that it still generates more profit than Apple, today's news offers yet another sign of Apple's resurgence over the past decade.

And Apple continues to show how relevant it is in the market...