Now this is the most important point I want to make. Stop concentrating on what Aperture WON’T do, and start concentrating on what it WILL do. You’ll get a bunch more out of the program if you take that approach. It is not, nor has it ever been, designed to be a Photoshop replacement.

Why are people so obsessively comparing Aperture to Photoshop? The blame has to be shared by three groups. The media hasn’t helped because in the interest of getting a story done quickly, they used the easy comparison, i.e., Photoshop. The photo community is partly to blame for not being willing or able to open their minds to a new paradigm, and Apple is partly to blame as well. I think Apple made three big mistakes with Aperture. One: They over-hyped it - but then again, all companies seem to do this lately. Two: They overpriced it. $299 would have probably been a more reasonable price point and would have helped to manage expectations. Three: Apple rushed to market in order to get it out before Xmas and/or MacWorld. But the past is the past. It’s time for everyone to take a deep breath and look at the future.

AVC: Right, right. Culturally, how do you feel about it?

AM: It may sound weird, but I don't really look for culture, particularly in an American city. I went to Havana, and I was like, "Wow, there's culture everywhere!" I don't think the American government has a lot of respect for culture. That was one thing that I did notice when I went to Cuba was that artists are paid to be artists, and poets are paid to be poets, and musicians are paid to be musicians by the government. The government—and I'm not saying that the Cuban government's perfect—but the government does place a value on culture. Much more so than here, where culture is just a matter of commerce. So, you know, I don't really look for that, and I don't expect to find it in any city. You know, I'm not crazy impressed with New York. I mean, I don't buy into that whole thing: Everyone in New York is all sophisticated, and they're into art and sophisticated things, and everyone in L.A. is just shallow entertainment people. I think people are just shallow across the board.

AVC: You mentioned going to Havana. What was it like meeting Fidel Castro?

AM: It was really cool. It's cool because it's Fidel, and it's a world leader, and there's so much history behind the man and who he is in this hemisphere. And then at the end of the day, he's, I think, just like a big mayor. There's only, like, 11 million people in Cuba. He's a big mayor. He just talked a long time, and he talked and he talked and he talked and he talked... and he talked. I think it was about four hours. But I guess that's part of the Castro spirit. But, you know, it was cool, and Cuba was fantastic, at least just in terms of... Not to romanticize or glorify it, but just seeing a place that had not really been touched by the hand of American capitalism. Because it's a genuinely different place. A lot of times when you travel, things start to feel the same from place to place to place, because the same people own everything all around the world, you know?

Ted Turner: "I am absolutely convinced that the North Koreans are absolutely sincere. There’s really no reason for them to cheat [on nukes]....I looked them right in the eyes. And they looked like they meant the truth. You know, just because somebody’s done something wrong in the past doesn’t mean they can’t do right in the future or the present. That happens all the, all the time."

Wolf Blitzer: "But this is one of the most despotic regimes and Kim Jong-Il is one of the worst men on Earth. Isn’t that a fair assessment?"

Turner: "Well, I didn’t get to meet him, but he didn’t look — in the pictures that I’ve seen of him on CNN, he didn’t look too much different than most other people."

Blitzer: "But, look at the way, look at the way he’s, look at the way he’s treating his own people."

Turner: "Well, hey, listen. I saw a lot of people over there. They were thin and they were riding bicycles instead of driving in cars, but–"

Blitzer: "A lot of those people are starving."

Turner: "I didn’t see any, I didn’t see any brutality...."

— Exchange on CNN’s The Situation Room, Sept. 19.

UPDATE: Okay, I kinda didn't want to ruin the sheer impact of the direct quotes with too much blathering on my part, but—in the pictures that I’ve seen of him on CNN, he didn’t look too much different than most other people?! What is this guy, an infant? I'm completely at a loss as to how someone can say something like that with a straight face, on national TV no less. How does such a toddling naif get to be in such a position of financial power? Did he free a genie from a lamp or something? Geez Louise.

A much under-discussed aspect of the new Intel Macs is that, as far as I have been able to glean, Apple has no plans to restrict the ability of users to install Windows on the machines. And why would they? That’s the secret weapon! In the market for a new laptop? Has to run Windows? Why buy a Dell when you can buy a Powerbook with all the same abilities, a sexier design, and the added bonus of being capable of running Mac OS X? Apple is about start selling PCs, and the slightest bit of marketing or consumer word-of-mouth about this fact should ignite a huge increase in hardware sales for Apple at the expense of other Intel-based computer manufacturers.

When’s the last time you sat in a room with a bunch of Linux/Unix nerds? Have you noticed what kind of computers they use? Sure, there are a bunch of PC-compatible laptops, but in many rooms I’ve observed that perhaps the majority of these users are using Apple Powerbooks. Why? Because people like nice hardware. Apple gained many of these customers without selling them on Mac OS X. They install Linux, BSD, or Darwin on their machine and otherwise continue their GTK/X-Windows/Whatever lifestyle as they did before. These users are the warning bell for Dell’s collapsing customer base. People who run Windows in 2006 will be doing so more and more often on Apple hardware.

When Apple releases their first Intel-based computer, it will also be the first computer in history that has the ability to triple-boot Windows, Mac OS, and Linux, all with full performance and compatibility. When the computer maker whose designs have been the envy of the technology world for decades suddenly becomes the most compatible player on the block (Apple!?), you’re looking at a dangerous combination.

Let’s imagine a hypothetical analogy. You’ve got all the car makers in the world. The Fords, Toyotas, Porsches, etc. They all make cars, and people don’t love them, but they don’t hate them. They get them from point A to point B, and some of them are even somewhat well designed. Now imagine the “Superlacar” that looks prettier and performs better than any on the market. It’s sexier than a Maserati, safer than a Volvo, and more fuel efficient than a Toyota Prius. The only problem is it runs on corn oil, while every other car on the market runs on gasoline. A small niche of the public buys into the car because it’s just too sexy to pass up. They make excuses for the vats of corn oil they keep in their garage. They argue into the night with Honda owners that the Superlacar is a better choice, because it’s just so sexy, reliable, safe, and (in the long run) affordable. The Honda owner agrees with most of the points, but it’s damn inconvenient to store those giant vats of corn oil! For most people, it’s just not worth it.

When Superlacar announces that, from this day forward the vehicle will run on gasoline, every other car maker in the world is screwed.

UPDATE: For that matter, the "Superlacar" metaphor is flawed; it only holds if the Superlacar still retains all its desirable traits if you run it on gasoline instead of corn oil. But to make the metaphor consistent, the Superlacar would have to become dowdy, unsafe, and inefficient if you ran it on gasoline; if you wanted it to remain sexy and safe and economical, you'd have to stock all that corn oil like you normally would.

A Mac that you only run Windows on is just a Windows computer that looks stylish; it's no Superlacar. You've still got to run Mac OS X and buy Mac OS X applications in order to get access to the Mac-ness you bought.

UPDATE: Bob Crosley has a much more sober set of predictions.