.
Page 1: daybydaywithVOA_2-01Oct2002.html
Page 1
. . . Day by Day with VOA .. . . Early Results From Pakistan Election Indicate No Clear Winner . VOA News 11 Oct 2002 17:50 UTC   . Results from Pakistan's general election indicate that no single party is likely to gain a clear majority in the new National Assembly. The Election Commission has declared the results of 197 seats so far out of 272 at stake. The rest of the seats in the 342-member legislature are set aside for women and minority communities. A newly formed pro-military government party, Pakistan Muslim League-Q is leading with 61 seats, followed by the Pakistan People's Party of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto which has captured 47 seats. A coalition of Islamic fundamentalist parties has won 40 seats, a huge gain compared to only three seats held by religious parties in the last assembly. Independent candidates have won a total of 32 seats, with smaller parties taking 17 seats. Ms. Bhutto made a statement from London, alleging that votes were rigged and her party was cheated out of an outright victory. A reporter for VOA in Islamabad says the independents are expected to play a crucial role in forming a government. He says according to an ordinance passed by President Pervez Musharraf on the eve of the election, the independents must join a political party of their choice by Monday. Thursday's balloting for the National Assembly and four provincial legislatures was the first general election in Pakistan since General Pervez Musharraf seized power in a bloodless military coup in 1999. Commonwealth election observers said the balloting was "for the most part, transparent." But the observers expressed concern about what they called widespread allegations that the military government allowed the use of its resources to favor certain parties. Some Pakistani and international human rights groups have accused President Musharraf of manipulating the electoral process to ensure the military's dominant role in governing the country. General Musharraf denies the charge. He says that although he will remain president of Pakistan, the new prime minister will run the day-to-day affairs of government. A new prime minister is expected to take the oath of office in early November.
. Abidjan's Shantytown Residents Deny Role in Current Conflict . . . In Ivory Coast's main city, Abidjan, government forces are continuing to destroy shantytowns housing mostly poor West African immigrants. The Ivorian government denies targeting foreigners, but says the shantytowns could harbor rebels responsible for the September 19 coup attempt, which has plunged the once-peaceful nation into chaos. But, local residents say they are being blamed for a conflict they had no role in starting. As late as Thursday afternoon, the long row of immigrant-owned wooden shack garages and restaurants along the road leading to Agbon shantytown in central Abidjan was open for business, as usual. By early Friday morning, the shacks were just a pile of smashed, smoldering wood, showcasing the violence that has rocked dozens of immigrant areas in and around the city for the past three weeks. Most residents are afraid to talk to foreigners, but one witness, an immigrant from neighboring Burkina Faso, says a group of paramilitary policemen carrying hammers and clubs showed up during the night, demanding money. Those who resisted were robbed of their belongings and their shops and homes were destroyed. Some of those who did not resist watched their shops and homes disappear anyway. A few kilometers away, at another shantytown called Aghien Village, men, women and children walk aimlessly around smoking holes in the ground where their houses once stood. Odd bits of clothing and shoes are strewn around the holes. Another immigrant from Burkina Faso, who identified himself as Salif Yigo, says the police came Monday, ordering everyone to leave the area. "The police shouted that they were going to burn down everything we left behind," he said. "But they came in the morning, when we were at work. We didn't have a chance to grab anything and everything burned." The government of President Laurent Gbagbo has justified the raids as part of an on-going effort to rid the country of shantytowns, which are illegal. It insists security forces are also destroying homes to make certain they do not become a haven for rebels and rebel sympathizers. But Salif Yago believes there is another reason. He says since September 19, the police have been harassing people from Burkina Faso and other neighboring countries for no reason, accusing them of destroying the country. The Ivory Coast government has repeatedly accused foreign countries of being behind the rebellion. It claims the rebels - who now hold much of the north and center of the country had the backing of a "rogue state" which many Ivorians believe is Burkina Faso. That country has denied any role in the coup attempt, but that has apparently not lessened government suspicion of Burkinabes and other foreigners in Ivory Coast. Some five million West Africans including three million from Burkina Faso have flocked to Ivory Coast in recent decades to work on cocoa and fruit plantations or to seek their fortunes in cities like Abidjan. Human rights activists charge the government is encouraging the targeting of immigrants for extortion, intimidation, and persecution. On Friday, Burkina Faso issued a warning to Ivory Coast saying it is ready to face what it called all eventualities if attacks against its citizens did not stop. President Gbagbo denies that his government is targeting foreigners. In a nationally televised speech on Tuesday, he urged Ivorians to stop attacking immigrant communities, saying the enemy is not foreigners, but rather, the army rebels. But the residents of Aghien shantytown are not so sure. A frightened woman from Togo whispers that she heard the police promising to come back to finish burning down the shanties. "Where will I go then?" she asks.
. American Opposition to War with Iraq Still Largely Muted . . . The U.S. Congress has given President Bush authority to take military action against Iraq, if Baghdad fails to disarm. While the president says he still has not decided whether to use force in Iraq, the prospect of such action has drawn tens of thousands of people onto the streets in other countries. But in the United States, anti-war activists are struggling to mobilize opposition to any U.S. military action. Analysts say it may take actual involvement in a war to provoke strong public reaction either way. Anti-war demonstrations in London and Rome in recent weeks brought tens-of-thousands of people out onto the streets. In contrast, American public opposition to possible war with Iraq has been relatively muted.
Not in Our Name is teaming up with another group, the ANSWER Coalition, to try to mobilize people to bring their message to the U.S. capital later this month. ANSWER Coalition co-director Brian Becker says politicians in Washington have been debating the issue in a vacuum. "There won't be real debate in Washington, until the people are on the streets," he said.
Todd Gitlin, a professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia University, says the U.S. public appears ambivalent on the issue of possible war with Iraq in the wake of last year's September 11 terrorist attacks and the ensuing campaign against terrorism. "I think there's some inhibition about acting in public after September 11, acting in a dissentful way," he said. "And I think there's some reluctance to turn out for political manifestations, and some reluctance to be oppositional - some bad conscience about it, maybe. Or maybe, it's that, for many people, there's doubt in the virtue of the president's approach, but there's doubt also about their own doubt. And doubt about doubt isn't conducive to public turnouts." In the battle to sway the public, other groups are seeking support for the Bush administration's stance on Iraq. Empower America, a conservative public policy organization, is holding what it calls "teach-ins" at universities around the country to counter what the organization sees as strong and active dissent on college campuses. Seth Leibsohn, the group's policy director, says he feels American college students need to be better educated about all aspects of the U.S.-led war against terrorism, in which he says Iraq poses a threat. Mr. Leibsohn says more than 200 students attended the group's first session at George Washington University. He says many asked dissenting questions, but were very respectful. He expects a tougher reception at Columbia University in New York and the University of California at Berkeley, two schools traditionally known for activism. "I expect Columbia and Berkeley will be much more heated," said Seth Leibsohn. "But we're going there because that's where the fight is. Columbia and Berkeley have been particularly angry in their dissent, strong in their dissent, loud in their dissent, so we want to go there." Mr. Leibsohn says he is sure that support for the U.S. military effort would rise in a war-time setting, but he acknowledges that, at the same time, anti-war protests also would be likely to intensify. Hamilton College history professor Maurice Isserman agrees, saying public sentiment could go either way, if the United States does become embroiled in a war in Iraq. "If things go well, if it's a quick war and an easy triumph, as Afghanistan proved to be, then I have no doubt this will prove to be a stellar foreign policy triumph for the Bush administration," he said. "If things don't go so well, if the war is prolonged, if several thousand or more Americans are killed, then I think public opinion could rapidly turn against the Bush administration." The American public could also register its support or disapproval at the ballot box, in Congressional elections next month.
. Carter Pleased That Nobel Committee Recognized His Efforts in Middle East and Work of Carter Center . . .
Former President Jimmy Carter told a news conference in his hometown of Plains, Georgia, of his appreciation that the Nobel Committee recognized his mediation efforts in the Middle East and the activities of the Carter Center, the non-governmental organization he established 20 years ago. "I was also thankful that when they mentioned the reasons for giving me the award they talked about the peace treaty between Israel and Egypt and especially emphasized the work of the Carter Center," he said. Mr. Carter said he does not view the award as a direct criticism of the Bush administration. But he left no doubt he believes the United States, as the world's remaining superpower, should act in accordance with international law and should not take any action against Iraq without the support of the world community. "I think the message that I derive from this is a commitment to peace, to the honoring of international law, to the partnership that the United States must maintain as the only superpower now, but also as an integral part of the world community," said Jimmy Carter. "My hope is that the message that I've been delivering in the last few months in a very small way, that we should work through the United Nations, in dealing with crises on earth like the Iraq issue, will be heard clearly." President Bush called Mr. Carter after the Nobel announcement to say he was pleased to congratulate a former American president for winning such a prestigious award. The 78-year-old Mr. Carter said almost all the prize money of more than $1 million will go towards continuing the Carter Center's work to advance peace and health worldwide.
. Los Angeles Has New Police Chief . . .
He has been credited with reducing the crime rate dramatically in New York, where he served as police commissioner under Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. But Mr. Bratton faces other problems in Los Angeles: a police force that was scarred by a scandal after a handful of officers admitted to planting false evidence and lying in court, and many minority residents who are deeply suspicious of their police force. Mr. Bratton was selected by Mayor Jim Hahn as the man who, in the mayor's words, can remove the tarnish from the badge of the city's officers. Friday, the Los Angeles city council voted 14 to one to confirm the appointment. "Ladies and gentlemen, the council hereby confirms the 54th chief of police of the Los Angeles police department, Mr. William J. Bratton," he said. Mr. Bratton is a supporter of community policing, which means putting officers into neighborhoods to deal with problems as they arise, rather than simply responding to emergency situations. He has gained the support of most elected officials and community leaders through a series of private meetings in recent days. Mr. Bratton says he will apply some of the same methods in Los Angeles that he used to reduce the crime rate in New York, including careful tracking of criminal activity and focusing resources on problem communities. Mr. Bratton will be sworn in as chief October 28, and will serve a five-year term. The mayor had refused to renew the contract of former chief Bernard Parks, and the only "no" vote on city council came from councilman Nate Holden, a close friend and supporter of Mr. Parks. The first task for the new chief is to recruit new officers to a department depleted by sagging morale.
. Post-Iraq Vote, Congressional Democrats Turn Focus to Economy . . .
Even though the formal debate and vote on the Iraq resolution are over, some Democrats are continuing to urge President Bush to explain to the American people why the United States might take unilateral military action against Iraq and what such an operation would involve. The resolution gives Mr. Bush the broad authority he sought to use force against Iraq, with or without United Nations support.
"He has not yet made the case to the American people that the United States may have to solve this problem alone, or with relatively few people, or has he told us of the sacrifices that such a course of action will involve," he said. "I am confident he will do so if and when it proves necessary."
Mr. Byrd believes the measure hands to the executive branch Congress' Constitutional power to declare war. He is urging Americans who agree with him to lobby the White House - a call he made on the Senate floor shortly before passage of the resolution. "I urge the people to keep on, who have encouraged us, in our efforts," he said. "I urge them to turn their attention to the president of the United States. Call him! Write him! e-mail him! Urge him to heed the Constitution, and not short-circuit this Constitution by exercising the broad grant of authority that the Iraq resolution provides." In the Senate, nearly half the Democrats, including Mr. Byrd, voted against the measure, while, in the House, a majority of Democrats opposed it.
"I know the president was very pleased to receive such outstanding and overwhelming bipartisan support from both houses," he said. "The president recognizes that this is a very difficult issue for many."
"I'm very proud of the debate we had and the role the Democrats played in fashioning a resolution that brought about the kind of bipartisan support you saw last night," he said. At the same time, Mr. Daschle and other Democrats wasted no time in trying to change the subject. With public opinion polls showing that Republicans are benefiting from the Iraq debate just one month before elections, Democrats are scrambling to focus attention on domestic issues, which traditionally benefit them.
"The most recent polls are evidence that people are deeply concerned about the economy, and want us to do something about it," he said. Many participants, including Senator Hillary Clinton, used the session to criticize Bush administration economic policy. "We have no economic plan, we have a lot of problems," she said. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer derided the Democrats' forum, calling it "a publicity stunt or tax hikers."
. Powell Confirms US has Contingency Plans for Post-Saddam Government . . .
Mr. Powell says the Congressional resolution, given final approval in the Senate early Friday, shows the "unity of purpose" of the United States in the standoff with Iraq, and said it will help him convey to his colleagues on the Security Council that it is time for them to show the same kind of unity. In a U.S. public radio interview, Mr. Powell said the Bush administration has not gone to the U.N. looking for a reason to go to war, but rather, he said, looking for a way to disarm what he termed "this very dangerous regime." The secretary of state reaffirmed U.S. support for a single council resolution both demanding that Iraq give up its weapons of mass destruction, and threatening it with the use of force if it doesn't comply. He said while Iraqi compliance is unlikely in any case, he is sure Saddam Hussein will not comply unless he believes it is likely he will be forced to. That is why, Mr. Powell said, that it is so important for the international community to "come together" and to "not show weakness at this time." In the interview, Mr. Powell confirmed the administration is doing "contingency planning" for a U.S.-led military government in Iraq in case American forces went into the country to topple Saddam Hussein. He said it is obvious that in the aftermath of such an invasion, there would have to be "some presence" of U.S. forces in Iraq, until what he termed "a better system" of governance by Iraqis can be established. Citing historical precedents, Mr. Powell said U.S. forces have always tried to exit quickly once peace is restored in a country and a stable system of government is in place. "It is never our intention," Mr. Powell said, "to go and stay in a place and impose our will by the presence of military force." The comments follow a New York Times report Friday that the White House was developing a plan for a U.S.-led military government of Iraq based on the post-World War II US occupation of Japan.
Mr. Powell said nothing had been decided upon, and that the Times account reflected only one possible model, a point also made by State Department spokesman Richard Boucher who said the United States main interests are the political stability and the unity of Iraq as events unfold: "All I can tell you at this point is that you can't settle on a particular plan because one can't say exactly how events are going to turn out," Mr. Boucher explained. "But I think the commitment of the United States towards a stable Iraq that can provide for its own people is there. And we will work with Iraqis inside and outside in the future to help achieve that." The Bush administration, in line with its stated policy objective of "regime change" in Baghdad, has convened unity meetings of Iraqi opposition groups. And since last April, it has held a series of seminars with Iraqi expatriates on practical issues involved in a governmental transition, including maintaining essential services, and establishing democratic rule. The most recent such meeting, on a transitional justice system in Iraq, was held in Italy two weeks ago.
. Search for Elusive Washington DC Area Sniper Continues . . .
Authorities say the way Friday's shooting was carried out, apparently at long range, is strikingly similar to the way seven other people have been gunned down over the past nine days. But police say it's too early to determine whether this latest killing is the work of the same sniper who has left an increasingly nervous capital region on edge.
"Obviously with a uniformed trooper right across the street, obviously we're dealing with an individual that's extremely violent and obviously doesn't care," he said. Since early this month, seven people in the Washington region have been shot dead by an elusive sniper while going about the mundane chores of everyday life activities as ordinary as putting gas in their car to shopping. Two others have been shot and wounded by a suspect who investigators believe is roaming Washington and its suburbs with a military-style assault weapon or a hunting rifle - picking off targets from a distance. FBI agents are examining evidence from the crime scenes, and at the White House, spokesman Ari Fleischer told reporters President Bush is now receiving updates on the investigation and did not rule out the possibility of terrorism. "The president has made it clear to the FBI and to the government, all agencies of the federal government, the importance of dedicating federal resources to help the local law enforcement community catch whoever is behind this," he said. "It is now a daily part of the president's FBI briefing."
. US Navy Changes 'Missing' Status of Gulf War Pilot to 'Missing-Captured' . . . The U.S. Navy has changed the status of a Gulf War pilot from missing in action to "missing-captured." It is the latest twist in the case of Captain Michael "Scott" Speicher.
But in January of last year, the Navy changed his status to "missing in action" - a decision the Navy says was based on an absence of evidence that he died in the crash of his plane and the lack of any satisfactory accounting of his case from the government of Iraq. Now Navy Secretary Gordon England says he believes "missing-captured" is a more appropriate category because he is personally convinced the Iraqis seized Captain Speicher after his plane went down. He says study of the wreckage of the plane indicates Captain Speicher ejected successfully and notes that an undamaged flight suit was later found near the crash site. He also says International Red Cross officials who visited the crash site determined there had been excavations around the wreckage and all significant debris removed. Mr. England says "the cumulative information received since Captain Speicher was shot down continues to suggest strongly that the government of Iraq can account for him." Mr. England says his decision does not mean the United States knows where Captain Speicher is or even whether he is alive. He says only Iraq can provide that information. The announcement came the same day U.S. military officials announced yet another air-strike in southern Iraq - this time against a mobile surface-to-air missile site. The Pentagon says the missile site constituted what it terms a significant threat to the safety of U.S. and British aircraft patrolling the so-called no-fly zone in the south since the end of the Gulf War.
. US Welcomes Pakistan Elections . . .
Bush administration officials are expressing satisfaction with the way the vote was conducted and are professing not to be overly-concerned by the gains made by an Islamic coalition, whose candidates campaigned against President Pervez Musharraf and his support for the U.S.-led war on terror. At a briefing here, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said initial reports from U.S. diplomats and others who monitored the voting are that Thursday's election proceeded in a "relatively free and orderly fashion." He said if those assessments hold up, the United States will accept the results of the polling as a "credible representation" of Pakistani opinion, and he called the vote an "important milestone" in the country's ongoing transition to democracy. Mr. Boucher had no detailed reaction to the still-incomplete results of the voting, which will leave a divided parliament with no single party holding a clear majority. But he did suggest that the dramatic gains of the Islamic parties do not mean a radical shift in the country's overall political course. "There is an alliance of six religious parties who did quite well in Baluchistan and in the Northwest Frontier province," he said. "It will be one of several parties in the parliament. We think that the Pakistani people and the government have already demonstrated their strong opposition to terrorism and extremism, and their desire to move their society in a more moderate and stable direction. We certainly welcome that. We look forward to working with them on that, and we hope that all the parties will be committed to moving in that direction." Mr. Boucher said in the wake of the election, the Musharraf government and the various party leaders now have a "joint responsibility" to ensure a smooth transition to a sustainable form of democratic and civilian rules. He said the next crucial step is the transfer of power to the new National Assembly and to establish its role, and he said the United States welcomes Mr. Musharraf's expressed intention to hand over executive authority to a new prime minister early next month. Mr. Musharraf, who seized power in a military coup in 1999, will retain the presidency though he says the new prime minister will run the day-to-day affairs of government. Critics say he has manipulated the constitutional process to ensure a dominant role for the military in the government.
. Venezuela's Business Endorses Labor Call for General Strike . . .
Venezuela's largest business association, Fedecamaras, Friday joined the strike call issued Thursday by the country's biggest labor confederation.
The announcement came one day after hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans marched through the streets of Caracas in the biggest anti-Chavez demonstration ever.
Mr. Rangel went on to describe Thursday's massive protest as an example of democracy and said a planned demonstration Sunday by pro-Chavez backers will show that the Venezuelan leader is still supported by most of his countrymen. Mr. Chavez, a former paratrooper and coup leader, was elected president by an overwhelming majority in 1998. He was re-elected in 2000 under a new constitution to serve a six-year term. Since then, his popular support has declined dramatically though surveys show he still has the backing of a about 30 percent of the population. The Venezuelan leader has offered to hold a referendum in August 2003 on whether he should step down. But the opposition wants him to leave office now, saying the oil rich nation is sinking economically because of his leftist policies.
. x. |
.
Page 2
. . . Day by Day with VOA .. . Apple's Place in Home Computing . David Clements Washington, DC 12 Oct 2002 05:59 UTC .  Listen
to David Clements' report (RealAudio) Clements
report - Download 1.28MB (RealAudio) .
Since its legendary start in 1977 by two young engineers working out of their California garage, Apple Computer has made a business out of being a little bit different. Part of that difference lies in how the company's computers are made and how they function.
Before 1984, most computers relied on text-only commands to run programs. Microsoft's DOS, or Disk Operating System, was the standard software, and required users to type every coded command into the computer. In 1984, Apple changed the face of computing forever with the introduction of the Macintosh, the first affordable personal computer to use a mouse and a graphics-based operating system. To launch the Macintosh on the market, Apple ran a critically acclaimed TV commercial during the 1984 Superbowl, a championship American football match watched by tens of millions of sports fans.
The commercial shows an athletic woman running from soldiers in a futuristic setting. Against the gray, sterile background, her colorful clothing stands out. She is wearing red shorts and a white shirt that features a picture of a Macintosh computer on the front. The woman is running towards a room with a large movie screen, where hundreds of men are seated in rows watching like zombies, as if they are being brainwashed. With the soldiers still chasing her, the woman hurls a sledgehammer towards the screen.
"1984" is a reference to George Orwell's famous novel of the same name, set in a bleak future where "Big Brother", the government, uses technology to help control the population and prohibit individual expression. The commercial raises the question, who really is Big Brother? Ted Friedman is an Assistant Professor of Communication at Georgia State University, who's written about Apple's image and media campaigns. "Certainly I think that just about anyone who was plugged into computers at the time who saw that ad, would have assumed the bad guy represented more or less, IBM," he says. "When people worried about this 'Big Brother' computerization, people often thought of IBM, the sort of punchcard, labcoated, bureaucracy of IBM, because IBM had been a monopoly that was regulated by the government." Mr. Friedman says the lone heroine in the commercial also provided a powerful symbol for many viewers. "In some sense, she's a computer user and represents this young, athletic, in-control, computer user. In another sense, she's the Mac itself. The [new] computer user is a kind of challenge to the traditional stereotypes of the computer user being this lab-coated man. I think in a lot of ways it really challenged traditional notions of what computers were, in ways that were very effective," he says.
In the years since 1984, a lot has changed in the computer industry. IBM did not become the 'Big Brother' of home computing. Compaq and several other companies were able to produce their own DOS-compatible computers for less money and outsold IBM. Instead, Microsoft became the dominant force in home computing, by making the software on which most IBM compatible computers run. With the release of Microsoft's Windows 3.1 and Windows 95, the company started to include graphical user interfaces similar to the Macintosh. The lines that once set Apple apart from the crowd were beginning to blur. While Windows-based PCs now had a graphical user interface, Apple still claimed that they had one up on the competition.
At the time this advertisement aired in 1999, the Macintosh G4 computer was equipped with Motorola's G4 processor chip, and the U.S. government had determined that it was capable of achieving supercomputer speeds.
Today the tables may be turned yet again. Apple computers have lost some of their speed advantage to Intel's Pentium 4 chips, the processors that power most Windows-based computers. Robert Arthur Morgan is a computer consultant and long-time Mac enthusiast. On his website, barefeats.com, he runs tests to see how the current crop of Macintosh computers perform against their Windows PC rivals. He is disappointed with the Mac's current performance. Most of the test results on his site suggest that today's Windows-based computers are faster at most real-world applications than Apple computers. "I think that all the Mac users feel that way," he says. "I'm sure there are a few diehards that would debate me on it, but the consensus is that Apple has fallen behind and that these new models are not helping the situation. Part of the frustration has to do with what appears to be Motorola's priorities and their willingness and their ability to produce something that's equivalent to the Pentium Fours and the dual Athlons." However, Mr. Morgan says that the decision to buy a Macintosh comes down to more than raw speed. He believes that while it may be a little slower for some tasks, the Macintosh is a much finer piece of computing equipment. He prefers the look, feel and usability of the Macintosh to Windows PCs. According to Apple's most recent ad campaign, many former Windows users agree with him.
Apple's latest campaign is called, "Switch." As the name suggests, it is aimed at getting Windows users to switch to the Macintosh. The company says it is letting real people vent their frustrations and point out how much simpler and more reliable Macintosh computers are compared with Windows-based machines. While Apple's corporate office wouldn't comment directly on the campaign or its effectiveness, the company did let us visit the place where most of this "switching" is happening: Apple stores. While many other computer stores carry Apple products in addition to more common PCs, the purpose of the Apple Store is to give consumers the whole story about their computers, from people who use and understand them. Like their computers, Apple Stores have a decidedly different look and feel.
The sales people are decidedly different as well. David Livingston is a charismatic middle-aged gentleman with a ponytail. He's dressed in a way that makes him appear more like a customer- no stuffy uniform, no pretense, just an average person. He's on the front lines of the "Switch" campaign. "A day doesn't go by that I don't talk to at least four or five people who are currently Windows users, who are interested in switching," he says. "I get to talk to them and point out differences. I don't think any of us are trying to hard-sell anybody on switching or what not, but we certainly present the Mac, what it can do, features, what it ships with and all that kind of stuff. It's nothing to worry about, because it pretty much sells itself." Part of Mr. Livingston's job is also to give technical support for Apple products. This couple from Maryland recently switched to the Macintosh and came to the store seeking some advice. Customer:"It's been a hard switch you know, switching
operating systems and computers, but it's definitely been worth it. This is the
second Apple Shop we've been into and every time we actually get help, as
opposed to Best Buy and having some pimply-face kid kind of like, 'I don't
know.'" Even if Apple's "Switch" campaign is a success, most experts in the computer industry agree that Apple computers are unlikely to become the largest segment of the home computer industry, at least in the foreseeable future. However, that's not necessarily a bad thing: one thing that draws many people to Apple is the feeling that they belong to an exclusive club. Here's one example: Apple Pi, a forum where Mac users can become acquainted and help each other with technical questions. To David Ottalini, the user group's vice president, Apple ownership and the concept of community go hand in hand. "There's a camaraderie there and just a feeling among Mac users that we're using something more than a personal computer. Everybody has a little black box on their desk of some kind, but when you have a Macintosh, you're special and you are doing something a little differently, a little better," he says. "Maybe there's a high calling there among Mac users. There is just a much bigger sense of community among Macintosh users than you will ever find with folks using PCs. " But questions linger about the future of Apple and its Macintosh computers. Slumping sales and mismanagement almost sank Apple in the mid-1990s. The company might have collapsed, had it not been for a $150 million investment from their largest competitor turned ally, Microsoft.
Many experts agree that one key to Apple's continued success is to remain unique and innovative. |