[Moof_in_Charge]

>You mean other than presenting a Keynote, plopping down mega-bucks for an enormous booth, announcing new products?
I am not sure why you're taking it personal or being snide, we have a difference of opinion, stop making/taking it personal.
Yeah I mean Steve Jobs.. When Apple's Stock takes a nose dive because of Steve's health then at some point, not only me but people who matter far more than me think Jobs is Apple, Apple is Jobs. (at the time, not so much now)
If you want to sell me a story that the keynote is not a significant part of Macworld, then so be it, if you want to sell me another story about the last keynote being all it was the year before then so be it... it's your world but I am not buying.
According to you, 2009 Macworld was just as much as a significant Earth shattering event as the years past! Okay you got me... Bottom line is that by next year, People who run Macworld will have had two Macworlds worth of time to transition the event in to something else.
Macworld will die in three years unless you get Apple back in some capacity and by "some" I mean "significant".

Peace!

[Jason Snell]

I wouldn't call the three week's notice IDG received from Apple in advance of Macworld Expo 2009 "a Macworlds worth of time." There's no transitioning to be done 20 days before your conference and trade show start. And even then, the Expo people scrambled and set up the town-hall meeting in order to hear from attendees about what they wanted in 2010.
Essentially, IDG World Expo has been given one year (and now, an additional month) to transition the event into something else. Which they appear to be trying very hard to do, as indicated by what Paul Kent says above.

[Jason Snell]

Moof

Macworld will die in three years unless you get Apple back in some capacity and by "some" I mean "significant".

From your posts your ultimate argument seems to be, "Get Apple back or the event will die."

That may or may not be true, but let me tell you this: Apple ain't coming back. And that's Apple's decision.

[Chris Breen]

Moof

> I am not sure why you're taking it personal or being snide, we have a difference of opinion, stop making/taking it personal.

When I'm taking it personally or being snide, believe me, you'll know it.

I was simply holding a mirror up to your statement that Apple wasn't "really" present in 2009, which, I grant you, I think is a silly thing to say. (But I mean that in a completely detached, non-personal sort of way).

[TeaEarleGreyHot]

Per Jason Snell's comment that Apple ain't coming back...


Wow. ok. Well I think this really opens some doors for Macworld Expo, then, in a "cat's away so the mice will play" sense! I understand that Apple didn't run the Expo, but... one has to wonder how the exhibitors might respond, knowing they will not be in the shadow of Mother Apple. I think it might actually be good. Now developers might more freely demonstrate software and products that are not necessarily condoned by Apple. We might even see a booth by Psystar! And imagine the freedom that Microsoft might feel, as it pursues a Mac market. Those who have been punished by Apple in the past (for example, by prematurely announcing their chip in a new Mac model) might be more inclined to demonstrate their products and peripherals, without an Apple presence. We might see some folks demonstrating their "unlocked" iPhone technology, or software for "jail-broken" iPhones. Or some unauthorized stuff for the AppleTV. etc. Let's try to remember that change creates opportunity. Apple's departure from Macworld Expo might open up a niche for the unforseen!

[Jason Snell]

TeaEarleGreyHot said:

>Well I think this really opens some doors for Macworld Expo, then, in a "cat's away so the mice will play" sense!

I agree with you.

[folklore]

[quote name='Jason Snell']
>

TeaEarleGreyHot said:

>Well I think this really opens some doors for Macworld Expo, then, in a "cat's away so the mice will play" sense!

I agree with you.

Count me in that category too. If the conference organizers can transition the event away from the "Apple will announce something great" mentality to something more sustainable, it's all to the good. Even at that, you're still going to have people grumbling that it's not the same ol' Macworld Expo. Those people will be right, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

[Peter Cohen]

folklore said:

Even at that, you're still going to have people grumbling that it's not the same ol' Macworld Expo.

I've been hearing that for nigh on a decade now, once vendors started to phase out selling product on the show floor. Which was, in retrospect, much more related to the way that commerce changed with the Internet. A lot of people out there tend to get stuck in a rut and look at events like this through the rosy tint of nostalgia.

If you spend all your time looking backwards, you're bound to walk into a wall or something.

[Steve_S]

Moof

Kent Said:

"This is the first in a series of announcements that will continue to show how Expo is evolving"

I think he should have said:

"This is the first in a series of announcements that will continue to show how Expo is going extinct"

At the risk of getting the same bashing as I did once Apple pulled out of Boston, I am going to say it again. "Macworld Expo in SF is dead"

Moof, I see your opinion isn't popular with the Macworld editors. Hey, it's their job. Nobody wants to hear their parent company is about to fail on some endeavor. That said, I agree with your overall assessment. My prediction is there will be a modest turnout this year (2010 expo). Mostly because people don't know what to expect. The 2011 expo will be drastically reduced as people realize it just doesn't work without Apple. I expect that would be the end. I'd be very surprised to see a 2012 expo.

However, Kent did say the event would have to evolve to survive. If by evolve, he means drastically reducing vendor pricing, etc. in order to reflect these "economic conditions", then possibly. Of course, they could hold the even in Jason's back yard in 2012 and still claim victory in that the event isn't completely dead. But, for all intents and purposes, the event doesn't have a future. I'm afraid some are simply in denial. Of course, I hope I'm wrong on this... I just wouldn't bet on it.

[Moof_in_Charge]

Quote

"cat's away so the mice will play" sense!

By your assessment, Boston should still be thriving!

In my opinion, here is what is going to happen.

1. In 2010, the attendance will be poor but it will get blamed on the economy.
2. In 2011, the attendance numbers will be lower still with significantly less companies on the floor.
3. In 2012, last year of iconic Macworld Expo.

You are not going to see Paystar. Macworld is not going to take that PR chance with Apple.

I HOPE I AM WRONG but I think I am right :-(

[folklore]

It seems that the argument Moof and Steve_S have is that third party development and the Mac experience so dominated by Apple that a completely independent event simply cannot occur.

I think they're wrong. Gosh, I hope they're wrong. Apple should hope that they're wrong too, because if the Mac experience for users and developers is that shallow, the platform is in trouble. If the show changes from "What will Apple announce?" to "What do you use your Mac for, how do you do it, and why do you do it?" then I think the future is bright.

Ultimately, that's what it's about, isn't it? The shiny new doodad from Apple is nice and all, but my Mac matters to me because it helps me get work done. Other Mac users get work done too, and developers make software that help us get work done - and other developers make software that lets us take a break from all that work and play. We might as well get together and chat about it all once a year. If Apple shows up to the party, great. If not, I can still talk about what I do on my Mac, how I do it, and why I do it.

[Moof_in_Charge]

It seems that the argument Moof and Steve_S have is that third party development and the Mac experience so dominated by Apple that a completely independent event simply cannot occur.
You are not assessing the problem nor are you interpreting how/why I am predicting its demise . These are the same type of automatic defense mechanisms I heard out of Boston!
Can you explain why Boston went out of business a year or 2 after Apple pulled out?
The problem here is attendance. Majority of my friends went to SF to hear Jobs and be the first to see new Apple hardware, then they hung out for a couple of days to see what was new with everyone else.
* No more Jobs
* No guarantee of new hardware announcements
* See Apple hardware in Apple Store
* See the rest of the hardware in box stores like Best Buy or 3D on the net
* Everyone else that mattered pulled out (ie no Adobe, no more Macromedia...
psstttt the Mac experience is dominated by Apple... but don't let anyone know

[folklore]

Moof

It seems that the argument Moof and Steve_S have is that third party development and the Mac experience so dominated by Apple that a completely independent event simply cannot occur.

You are not assessing the problem nor are you interpreting how/why I am predicting its demise . These are the same type of automatic defense mechanisms I heard out of Boston!

Can you explain why Boston went out of business a year or 2 after Apple pulled out?

I don't have firsthand knowledge, so I'm guessing. It was probably a combination of two things. First, the event probably didn't change enough. It probably looked like an "Apple-less Macworld Expo" instead of a truly new event. Second, it had to compete with the west coast Macworld Expo, which didn't have to change at the time.

Quote

The problem here is attendance. Majority of my friends went to SF to hear Jobs and be the first to see new Apple hardware, then they hung out for a couple of days to see what was new with everyone else.

* No more Jobs
* No guarantee of new hardware announcements
* See Apple hardware in Apple Store
* See the rest of the hardware in box stores like Best Buy or 3D on the net
* Everyone else that mattered pulled out (ie no Adobe, no more Macromedia...

psstttt the Mac experience is dominated by Apple... but don't let anyone know

What I (and others) have said is that Macworld Expo doesn't have to be about major Apple announcements. It just doesn't. Of course the Mac experience is dominated by Apple - but not to the extent that a completely independent event is just out of the question.

So you and I see entirely different problems. The problem I see is rebranding.

I hope the folks at IDG are reading this thread. Your statement above tells them exactly how hard rebranding Macworld Expo will be. As long as people think "major Apple announcement" when they hear "Macworld Expo," then you're right. Future shows are doomed. But if enough people can Think Different(ly) about the show, and if the show can evolve away from its past, it can survive.

Note that I'm not saying IDG is necessarily going to pull that off. I'm only saying it's possible to have a major conference based around the Mac platform without the involvement of Apple. There is so much more to the Mac than just Apple.

[Chris Breen]

folklore said:

Your statement above tells them exactly how hard rebranding Macworld Expo will be.

And this nicely illustrates how different people bring different expectations to Expo.

If your whole reason for going to Expo was to see Jobs do his show and hang out at the Apple booth to gawk at whatever Apple's announced, then yeah, Expo is dead for you. As Apple suggests, you might as well go hang out at an Apple Store because, as far as you and Apple are concerned, you're getting nearly the same experience (though you're unlikely to bump into Steve).

But Apple's line also works in Expo's favor. If Apple's involvement in Expo is nothing more than a bigger and badder version of an Apple Store, what do we really lose from Expo with Apple's departure? A PR opportunity for Apple (so less press coverage), people like Moof who are floor walkers rather than conference attendees/learners, and vendors who believe they gain benefit only when they share the same air as Apple.

What we gain are developers who see an opportunity in not being drowned out by an Apple announcement, no Daddy looking over the shoulder of conference programs (meaning more interesting and daring content), and, frankly, more interesting ideas from a show management that understands it needs those ideas to keep the show alive.

As someone who's been involved in the conference as well as floor elements of Expo, I'm more excited about 2010 than I have been about an Expo in years. Next year's Expo presents the possibility that some very interesting things could happen. Sure, it may not succeed if the floor walkers/Apple droolers are really what's kept the show alive all this time. My hope is that the Apple community runs a little deeper than that.