Apple’s Chief Financial Officer Fred Anderson said the company’s aim is to expand its share of the computer market. Speaking at the Goldman Sachs Technology Symposium, Anderson said a “good intermediate” goal would be to reach 5% marketshare from 3% today (some statistic companies actually put Apple between 2,2% and 2,6%). Commentary: Very nice to see Apple understand the real problem here, which is its declining market share (from about 12% some years ago), which with time will affect the number of active developers. Without developers there are no apps, and without apps there is no platform. Apple will have to expand its market share and save the platform, even if they have to literally… give away computers at some point (or to become seriously competitive to the PC, price-wise) in order to succeed to this goal.
Apple Computer Says Goal Is to Raise Marketshare
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Their limitation is their business model. They provide both hardware and software, using software as a means to sell the hardware. What they should change is to use hardware as a means to sell software. In other words, they must be willing to say hello again to clones. Notice how much money Microsoft makes from Windows? I’m sure it would be possible for Apple to go to 5% if they open up their market a little.
Can they hope to get 5% without opening up their hardware business? Nope. Even if they wanted to, it is extremely hard to compete in terms of price with PC makers having such a high R&D expenditure. Having hardware companies that have little R&D, they can hope to price their hardware better – ala Dell.
A little commodotizing wouldn’t hurt.
However, to survive, they still have to remain a niche. My suggestion to Apple is to stick with the creative market. In other words, what is left with you – fight to keep it. What isn’t with you – fight to have it.
steve-o had the right idea at next. supporting like 4 platforms at once with these fat binaries… If apple could make their OS run on a couple popular platforms (power4/5, x86(maybe x86-64), and even something like SPARC) and have software run reasonably well between the platforms, then they have it made. They could keep selling hardware, but i think if they did multy platforms and moved to clones, that they wouldn’t be successful trying to be both MS and Compaq(selling the OSand the box that runs it). So if they did start clones, apple would have to move towards their servers more and things like the ipod, keyboards, mice and other digital hub accessories rather than the hub itself.
They just need more affordable hardware, if they offer those iMacs for few hundreds dollars less, people would buy them like crazy, see what happens with iBooks. So many poeple that never considered Apple because of the prices (including myself) are jumping to get one because it’s great product with even better price. Just days ago I saw an ad from IBM about their 12″ laptop. It’s almost double the price of iBook with comparable feature and Pentium III inside.
Apple need another drawing card to their platform, this time in desktop area.
I agree, especially on your maintainance that they must remain a niche. In fact, what they need to do is expand AND improve this area. They need to come up with even more innovative, useful, and just plain cool apps that are native to their OS. Look at their presentation app (I forget its name…shame on me). All right, it might be buggy right now (as reported by some), but I have every faith that Apple will iron this out soon.
Either this, or they’ll need to release an x86 version of OSX–which would effectively destroy their hardware business. But would that be a BAD thing? For them as a business, I doubt it. (Even if they did do this, though, they could turn to–gulp–manufacturing x86-based machines in order to continue the hardware business. They DO have the best eyes for aesthetics in the business.)
For laptops, the market is pretty much reserved for big companies, like Dell, IBM, Sony, Asus, etc. It is pretty hard to enter that market as a small company. For desktops on the other hand, the market have been so commoditized that the prices are far lower than of Macs.
It would be pretty hard for Apple to lower the prices of their hardware. Why? PC prices fall every day. The only time it rises or stays stagnant is when there is a shortage of parts (the RAM crisis, remember?)
Another thing is that what suites you for hardware may not suite me well. Let’s take the case of laptops for example. I may want a sub-notebook because I don’t need drives when I’m on the go. But you may want a full-blown notebook. Some cheesy AlienWare guy may want a desktop on the go. See the difference? Apple can never hope to fulfill everyone’s different needs.
“release an x86 version of OSX–which would effectively destroy their hardware business.”
I expect that they could retain hardware sales in the 2% range regardless because of styling and reputation for quality. But sales of Mac software, expecially the OS, would soar!
The other thing they have to do is get faster processors. Even if consumers know that when comparing same-speed processors Mac computers are faster, they still want to see the numbers. Imagine if Macs had faster architecture *combined* with faster processors. Apple could then charge significantly more and their hardware sales would still increase dramatically.
The stat numbers printed on the box have to be competitive – or else look for 1% market share.
-Bob
I can currently get a whole full complete PC computer for 350$
if not even cheaper
And where i live there is not a mac reseller
or any place that carries mac software for 300 miles
So basicly no credit=no mac
No sample of mac in stores=No interest in mac
those rules apply to most
But the biggest downfall for me is the price
And most people know if an x86 version were to be released
it would potentialy be the new monopoly
so from that stand point , i think thats exactly what they should do
There’s not much to go off of in this article, other than Apple’s goals…
“He also said the computer maker’s target is to get to $8 billion of annual revenue. Apple had revenue of about $5.7 billion in 2002.”
rajan r suggests:
“What they should change is to use hardware as a means to sell software. In other words, they must be willing to say hello again to clones. Notice how much money Microsoft makes from Windows? I’m sure it would be possible for Apple to go to 5% if they open up their market a little.”
and Captain Chris suggests:
Either this, or they’ll need to release an x86 version of OSX–which would effectively destroy their hardware business. But would that be a BAD thing? For them as a business, I doubt it.
As I understand it, Apple’s profit margins on OS X are around 5%. That means they need to charge at least $118 to cover their development costs.
So let’s make some very brash and stupid assumptions to see if we can make this business model you’re proposing work in a magical fantasy land. First, let’s say that Apple releases an x86 version of OS X. Second, let’s say this in no way affects their hardware sales (*gasp*). Now, let’s say that Apple has managed to meet their $8 billion of revenue/year goal, and has done this by selling OS X for x86 for twice the cost of the PPC version, $250. That’s about $40 more than Windows XP Professional.
So how many people did Apple sell OS X to in this magical fantasy land? Let’s do the math…
($8 billion – $5.7 billion) / ($250 per person – $118 development cost) = 17.4 million people
That’s over three times as many people are estimated to currently use OS X (~5 million)
And that’s not taking into account…
* Cost to Apple to release an OS X port to x86, including the cost of driver development.
* Obvious decreases in Apple hardware sales
* Piracy
* People unwilling to pay such a high price, especially when Windows is that much more mature and cheaper
* People who are dissatisfied with OS X and return it
* The extreme difficulty associated with getting application developers to release x86 builds (Apple has had enough trouble getting Quark to release QuarkXPress 6)
I see absolutely nothing wrong with Apple’s current business model. They’ll slowly garner market share, improve OS X, release more applications, bring down prices, and soon they’ll be infused with newer, more powerful hardware (PPC970 and its successors)
Unlike most other niche markets, Apple is growing out of its niche, not being gobbled up by x86 like is happening to other companies (i.e. Sun)
You know, these are all fairly tired arguments about Apple and its approach to the computer market.
Clones won’t work because Apple tried that and couldn’t keep up with the licensees. That’s most likely because Apple did *all* the hardware (mobo design) R&D and *all* the OS development, while these clone manufacturers had only to maintain the infrastructure to flesh out a box and push it to market. The clones chewed into Apple’s hardware sales – they were in some cases superior machines – and that’s why the plug was pulled.
Porting OS X to generic x86 hardware will, as was pointed out, kill off Apple as a hardware company. Since one G4 tower equals 20 copies of OS X in gross revenue, Apple would have to be assured of an immediate 20-fold increase in sales of their OS to survive, a jump to essentially 60% marketshare in an OS-world already owned (especially outside North America) by Microsoft. Bad idea.
Apple, in their infinite hurry and supposed wisdom to grab the mom’n’pop crowd and all the digital lifestyle victims, had made significant strides in the area of pissing off their most loyal (and highest $ value) customers, the graphic design and publishing market. When professional photographers have to scrap $4,000 SCSI scanners because Apple doesn’t think SCSI is important in OS X, Apple is screwing up bigtime.
Finally, there’s the old ‘too expensive’ argument. Know what? We’ve seen what happens when Apple tries to cut corners. It used to be called the Performa, and now it exists in the form of the eMac. Pretty garbage that breaks down if you look at it the wrong way. eMacs have a 25% out-of-box failure rate on the CRT.
I read a comparison a few months ago that I thought was very apropos: Mercedes has only a very small sliver of the global automobile market, and yet no one in that industry doggedly tolls the bell for them, or says that they should immediately start competing with Subaru, Hyandai, or Toyota if they wish to have a future. Quality will always have a place over quantity, just as it will never be the norm. The best in any category defines one end of a bell curve, not the middle. I sure as hell don’t see Dell or Compaq pushing the curve in hardware design or OS innovations. That’d be too expensive, wouldn’t it?
Here is what I think Apple might do:
1. Make is so that when you write software for OS X that it would work in Linux. This would help attact more developers to OS X and Linux…
2. Once #1 is done port some of the iApps to Linux and sell them to help subsidize Apple hardware.
3. Continue to work with and support open source software. The use of the khtml engine and other open source software is only going to help Apple.
4. Port OS X to AMD’s 64-bit architecture when it comes out??? I’de love to see it…
Give me decent (I mean, compeditive, within a reasonable margin of the latest x86) hardware, and you (Apple) can have some cash. You have the software I want (both OS and apps), you have always made quality machines (and lovely laptops), but the price/performance of current PowerMacs is less than flash, despite the “Mhz Myth” stuff you trot out every now and then.
Seriously, the second half of this year will be *very* interesting if PPC970 shows up on time (fingers crossed).
That, or dual Opterons here I come…
LW.
The switch to x86 killed Be and the BeOS (see http://www.labeille.net/items/FAQBeOSIntel.html ).
Doing Fat binaries otoh is easy the compile tools and base os doe compile on x86 (darwin comes fat and compiles fat by default). The real problem with x86 is driver development.
Going after a clone market would be a nice idea. But which wise compagny would start making mac clones when everyone can remember how the clone market was killed. Did it never occured to you that motorola stopped spending on PPC R&D because of the dead clone market ? Who would provide the chips ? How would they market the Mhzt Myth ?
ludo
—
http://homepage.mac.com/softkid/
yeah, I also think they should systamticly destroy each of its divisions.
First by porting i* to every other OS under the sun, this would help them gain market share (by the wonders of “rigours piracy”, that is Linux developers who believe everything should be free).
Stock x86s not custom PPC, as everyone knows a x86 is only £2.50, while Apple is exenive.
OpenSource it all, then make monney like most Linux outfits, begging on the street corner.
Who would provide the chips ?
IBM (PPC970 and beyond)
How would they market the Mhzt Myth ?
Performance graphs, like they did with the original G4 release.
>and Mercedes should compete with Subaru to insure survival
This is stupid. Car analogy does not apply here, and please stop doing this everytime.
A platform to survive HAS to have active support from devs and products. From the moment Apple is losing marketshare so much, no matter how much they will opt the price in order to make the same profit (as Mercedes does), their platform will still be declining. Platforms need software, cars only need gas. Your car analogy does not apply here.
I just ordered a fully-loaded P4 2.8ghz PC. But before I did that, I actually took a look at the Mac side of things. And do you know what I found that interested me? Absolutely nothing. Some people may hale OSX as the greatest thing since Astroglide, but I was not impressed at all.
As for Macs themselves, they have much more of the kind of apps I use than does Linux, but I can’t think of any reason to pay twice the amount of money for a Mac to do the same things I am currently doing on PCs.
I have personally been using PCs since the late 80s and have never had anything but hard drives die on machines until they were at least 6 years old. So all the Mac zealots who want to compare Macs to PCs like $100,000 luxury cars to Toyotas can kiss my ass. Honestly, those of us who are experienced with computers can smell your bullshit from 3 miles off.
PCs are like most anything else in this world – you can buy a P.O.S. one at Joe’s Computer Shack and have it die after 3 days, or you can buy quality parts/machines that will last a long time, and by doing the latter, you can still get a faster machine and spend half of what you would on a Mac.
I guess if using OSX really does give you a hardon, then by all means, go for it. But honestly, the rest of us just don’t care.
And, oh yeah … the one mouse button doesn’t help either
Haha, nicely said Darius.
[and I am the owner of two G4s here :]
>And, oh yeah … the one mouse button doesn’t help either
The thing I discovered with Macs is that A LOT of things require you to use the keyboard more than PCs require you to use the mouse. I consistently need to press control or alt or option or whatever all the time in order to do things with it! On PCs, I just have to right click stuff.
No, no, no, we do not want clones. They did that and lost money faster than they could count it.
OS X on x86 and closed hardware – possible.
But, nobody has really mentioned what Anderson said about software – there’s lots of it coming out. I really can’t wait to see what it is. This is intriguing.
This, I’m sure, is not the total answer, but I think what Eugenia was suggesting in her short commentary is on the mark. I think Apple *has* to come up with an iMac or some other type of model that goes for $799. And it has to be good too – not the eMac. I don’t know…maybe the 15″ iMac and the 12″ iBook. They have to bite the bullet on something and, as Eugenia said, practically give it away. They simply cannot attract new users with the prices as they are now.
I already have the sound system and 19″ monitor and all the peripherals I need. I just need a new box. For $600-700 I can get a sweet system and lots and lots of HD space.
Apple wants me to pony up $1500 just for a CPU..? Are you kidding?
I’m tempted by the laptops, I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to run OS X. But on the desktop, it’s not even possible.
They need entry level desktops that users can plop in place of their Dells. My 19″ monitor is 3 years old and still works perfectly — my 700MHZ box isn’t.
But Apple won’t sell to me.
No, no, no, we do not want clones. They did that and lost money faster than they could count it.
The problem is, they can’t really increase their market share until their prices and options are comparable to those of PC’s.
They can’t get their prices that low until they have the economies of scale the Wintel world has.
They can’t get the economies of scale without opening up their platform (perhaps even semi-open – a few select licensees).
But they can’t afford open their platform until they develop other revenue streams to pick up the loses from hardware.
But, nobody has really mentioned what Anderson said about software – there’s lots of it coming out. I really can’t wait to see what it is. This is intriguing.
This may be one of the ways they intend to develop new sources of revenue – things like software, the iPod, perhaps some other consumer electronics.
It seems clear Apple is going to have to find a way to become less dependent on hardware as a revenue source if they want to grow the audience for the Mac. One company can only provide and support a finite amount of choices, which won’t do when the PC world offers almost unlimited options.
“The switch to x86 killed Be and the BeOS.”
That is one of the funniest, dumbest, untrue things I’ve heard in a while. Everyone knows that BeBoxes were just about to take over the computing universe, right? It’s even dumber than saying the focus shift killed Be (the focus shift, even though it failed, was an effort to save the company). For those of you who haven’t figured it out yet, running out of money killed Be.
Apple could make a good inexpensive machine. All they have to do is make a cheap tower without a MONITOR. The problem is that you always have to buy another MONITOR, when you buy one of the “economy” models. APPLE, HEAR ME NOW make a cheap tower with
NO MONITOR! Some PC people may switch because they already have a nice monitor, printer, mouse (3 button), et cetra. I work for a school district and we have a bunch of old macs with integrated monitors. I am drowning in monitors.
Dan
ps. !!!!!NO MONITOR!!!!!!!
How many manufactures have interesting to license Mac OS (even Apple would do it) to produce the clone Macs as they have the lesson in six years ago?
(mouse – keyboard).. what did u actually try to say regarding the keyboard mouse usage? While I obviously know I can do all the stuff with the mouse (PC), I know as well, that I could do it with the keyboard alternatively and in fact, I do the most stuff on the PC with the keyboard because it’s quicker.. like all those Windows-button shortcuts…
Yeah, but I do most stuff with the mouse. So for me, the PC is quicker, and the Mac has a learning curve, which takes more time. The Mac is more keyboard-oriented and less mouse-driven. The PC is both mouse-driven and keyboard oriented (depends on the user). So the PC has the best of both worlds. Mac has the best of only one world.
Bruno, you do make sense – this is the bind that Apple is in. One way or another, they have to move out of where they are.
Darius, I always love your skeptical remarks. You made me think of something. If I have the opportunity, I’m going to try to write it up and submit it.
pi wrote:
2. Once #1 is done port some of the iApps to Linux and sell them to help subsidize Apple hardware.
I could never really see this happening. I think it must be the impossible dream to actually sell anything on Linux and make some money.
Loki are the perfect example of this. Linux users everywhere asking Loki to sell games for Linux, and then when they are ready and people suddenly realise that Loki actually want money for this (they have to pay for the licences after all) they don’t buy. I feel sorry for the Loki guys, they seem to have put in a lot of effort and then been screwed by the very people they were trying to help – at least it appears that way.
No reflection on your good self of course.
4. Port OS X to AMD’s 64-bit architecture when it comes out??? I’de love to see it…
Yeah yeah … you could always go try GnuStep …www.gnustep.org although I don’t know where they are currently up to.
>And, oh yeah … the one mouse button doesn’t help either
Every time I read a debate on Mac vs PC, there’s always a dumbass who will say that stupid remark. HELLO!! Just plug your 3 button wheelmouse in the mac and USE IT !!
Anyways, each time I see this stupid remark, I know it’s coming from a guy who never used a Mac before.
>but I can’t think of any reason to pay twice the amount of money for a Mac to do the same things I am currently doing on PCs.
Why would you pay twice the amount of money on a Mercedes to do the same thing you’re doing on a Toyota ??? It’s all about choices… Some people like to drive a luxury car like Mercedes, and some people just want a regular car. If you could afford a Mercedes, BMW or Porshe, you would probably buy one.
By the way, I’m a MSCE and Linux+ certified. I’ve been using PCs for 12 years, and I had an iBook for 4 months (had to sell it for money).. and I’m selling my 2 PCs to buy a MAC again next month (dual G4)…WITH A 3 BUTTON WHEELMOUSE!!
– then release MacOSX for x86. Think about all potential customers Apple then would have.
– then release MacOSX for x86. Think about all potential customers Apple then would have.
Please see my previous post in this thread. Porting OS X makes absolutely no financial sense whatsoever.
Porting OS X to x86 does NOT significantly increase Apple’s *potential* customer base, which seems to be the main argument people are making. The majority of PC owners have the financial resources to purchase a Mac, they just choose not to. The same goes for OS X on x86… how many people would chose to run that instead of Windows? Would it be enough to justify the potential loss in hardware sales? Wouldn’t rampant piracy destroy any chance of financial gain for Apple?
At any rate, see my previous post where I actually did the math…
First a question, since I hate the one mousebutton idiom, what happens if you attach another USB mouse? What will the extra buttons do in MacOS X?
As previously state selling only the OS isn’t something that Apple can live by, and they are slipping behind in the performace wars. No graph anywhere could make me belive that a G4 can keep pace with a P4 or an Itanium 2 (I2?) anymore, and if Apple want to bet their future on some future IBM CPU they better check it out hard.
So what does Apple have going for them? They can play on design and ease of use. Put everything into these areas, together with sensible extensions to MacOS X (Quartz Extreme is a good example, so is more hardware support) and you have the Mac concept. Not as this comes as any news;)
But Apple doesn’t need to attract just developers, but also users that buys software (why would I otherwise spend a big chunk of money to develop it?), this is even more important than developers. And I do think that cheap entry-level machines is the way to go here. Especially laptops (since the speedgap isn’t nearly as crippling there). The 12″ was a very good idea.
But now to what none of you have suggested yet;) Why doesn’t Apple start to produce workstations? And I am not talking about what they have now, but in the field of Sun/SGI/IBM etc. They obviously can’t do it on their own, but they could do it together with another company. Make a jointly owned company, add the neccessary parts to MacOS X (hardware support, certain features for the companies old OS (IRIX/Solaris/HP-UX/AIX/etc) and split the profit. You’ve got faster hardware (Itanium 2 anyone?) with 64-bit technology (workstations need this WAY more than the home user) and a spiffy and easy to use OS. I’d bet that markets such as CAD would love this.
And this with an OS that both has the ease of use (these people need to crank out stuff, not fiddle around and/or fight the OS) and a UNIX background which should ease moving important software (this is why the target company’s has to incorperate their own OS specialities in MacOS X, maybe just as extension for just workstations) into MacOS X. Heck, you could even run the servers with MacOS X server.
So why do I think this would work, while clones and x86 would fail big time? Because this would be a joint venture with Apple (they still would make money) and attacking a niche market (with money) that Apple isn’t owning themselves. Thus both making money, adding value to Apple, and increase market share. This is so brilliant that Jobs should be flogged for not doing it.
If anyone think that it is dreadfully dumb, do tell me why, I honestly would like to know.
And for the linux d00d. Linux has severe problems in several areas, and open source philosophies isn’t helping it, but hurting it, bad. And for those not already knowing, here they come.
* Awful documentation (I hate develop on Linux because of this)
* No central control. You’ve got versions of this and that splatting out all over the place, which makes it hard to keep track of things. If you don’t think this is a problem, you obviously never have been in a situation where this is important. I have.
* No real support. I am not just talking eagerness to fix problems for certain popular pieces of software. What happens if your 2 year old production server running Red Hat all of a sudden needs patching because of security reasons and there are no RPMs to fix this. Do you upgrade to a new version? Which is incompatible with your software (gcc ABI changes anyone?). And who pays for the downtime? Will you be forced to buy new hardware because of this?
* Hard to make money on and keeping it free. I haven’t paid a dime for linux, and I never will, sorry people. If you GPL it I will rip you off.
These are real life problems, and would crush a company like Apple. So why in the whole world should they bother with software for that? The idea is that you need a Mac to run Mac software. That is what sells Apple’s hardware. When I can run photoshop on my PC I will, because it beats the snuff out of the Macs.
DISCLAIMER: I run XP as main OS, I just did a compile from stage 1 of gentoo at home, I work with Linux/Windows/Java/whatever comes along, I hated the old MacOS a lot, I couldn’t stand using it, I envy my friend who has a brand new 12″ Apple laptop in the mail with MacOS X. I wish Apple could send me one for free…
Eugenia: Could you, or could you make someone at OsNews, talk to Apple about a joint Apple/OsNews competition? For instance “best idea to improve Apple marketshare” or something, and have a Mac laptop as 1st prize?
> Loki are the perfect example of this.
What a load of toss. Loki bombed because
a) They were hopeleslly mismanaged, in fact it was rife with fraud from management
b) Games were released a loooong time after they came out for Windows.
Linux users are mostly like other people, why should they pay for a Linux version of the game they’ve already bought, played and got bored with?
There are plenty of companies out there making money from Linux. Obviously you have your Red Hats, but check out CodeWeavers, TransGaming also.
Macs are simply too expensive for many users to consider them as an alternative to their x86 boxes.
Here in Europe ( at least at Spain ) Macs are nore expensive than in the U.S.A ( about a 10% – 15% sometimes ) and this is NOT CAUSED by special taxes
e.g: Power mac G$ ( new )
1 – USA store: 1499 $
2 – EU store: 1739 € ( about 1610 $ )
I don’t know why….
And not taking into account this, MACs are expensive ( and their perfomance related to a new *cheaper* AMD or INTEL box with three or for upgrades as SCSI Hard drive, SCSI CDRW and powerful graphics card is , in the best of the cases, similar, even lower )
This is not a personal opinion.I have tested new ( and old ) full equiped G4’s and AMD’s and with 500-600$ of difference between them, there’s no doubt of my choice ( at least for me ).
And frankly, what an average user needs is not a 1000$ mac ( the cheapest I found ,withouth any recording media ); they could be satisfied with a tiny DURON…
I know dozens of people still working with PII and 64Ram covering all their computers needs, in many cases they add a CDburner and a 17″ screen…and that’s all.
I love macs, but probably I will never buy one of them…
Do you know that a Powerbook 12″ Combo costs $1,799.00 in the US and more or less $2455 (+20% taxes in Italy) or $2373 in Germany?
The 17″ is $3299 in the US and $5428 (after taxes) in Italy?
How can they compete at all in these countries with the other PC manufacturers?
Apple could make a good inexpensive machine. All they have to do is make a cheap tower without a MONITOR. The problem is that you always have to buy another MONITOR, when you buy one of the “economy” models. APPLE, HEAR ME NOW make a cheap tower with
NO MONITOR! Some PC people may switch because they already have a nice monitor, printer, mouse (3 button), et cetra. I work for a school district and we have a bunch of old macs with integrated monitors. I am drowning in monitors.
Dan
ps. !!!!!NO MONITOR!!!!!!!
Wile Apple Does not make such a Machine,Terrasoft Solutions sells a Power PC based ATX Linux tower (which you can run Mac OS X on with Mac On Linux).
http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com/store/index.php?submit=hardware&s…][boxer]
To be honest with you outside of the US I kind worry about the support I would receive from a company like yellow dog linux.
Last but not least you run Macos X with an emulator( yeah i know native speed bla bla).
At the end of the day all you get is some kind of curiosity.
There was some cheap mac in the past (LC 475 anyone).
I still use mine from time to time and it does what I want it to do.
internet, mail, word (OK Word6 sucks big time)and Excel.
Never had a problem with it.
I want a LC 475 with G4 and no screen…..
– then release MacOSX for x86. Think about all potential customers Apple then would have.
I can see the OSNews crowd all spontaneously ejaculate at the though of this.
MacOS/x86 is more of a wet dream than Linux being proclaimed the world’s only OS with 100.1% market share to these would-be slashdotters.
>What a load of toss. Loki bombed because
>a) They were hopeleslly mismanaged, in fact it was rife >with fraud from management
I didn’t know about the fraud. Haven’t seen anything related to this. Could you point me to some discussion on this or is this an ungrounded comment?
>b) Games were released a loooong time after they came out >for Windows.
Not I guess because they had much choice about that. If the major games companies are uninterested in delivering for Linux, why should they licence them early.
>There are plenty of companies out there making money from >Linux. Obviously you have your Red Hats, but check out >CodeWeavers, TransGaming also.
I’d be interested to see how many people *are* actually buying stuff from these companies. Sure they are making stuff available for sale, are many people actually buying them. I’ve seen plenty of posts from (possibly adolescent) linux users complaining that they need to pay for something.
Surprisingly I’m not down on Linux, I like it a lot, but there is *soo* much attitude associated with *some* of the user base, mostly related to the cost of things rather than the freedom it gives.
Car analogies are pointless when discussing computers. Firstly the automotive market has no monopoly players. Most car makers are huge diversified conglomerates making products such as helicopters (MBB/DaimlerChrysler), ships (Fuji Heavy Industries/Subaru)and nuclear reactors (Mitsubishi).
BMW, Mercedes and other prestige vehicle makers only charge a small premium compared with Japanese car makers similarly specified models.
Apple should be charging no more than 10-20% premium over a PC with similar performance.
Maybe Apple should just go into the business of making pretty Windows boxes.
They need to get their original 15 inch crt imacs down to $300 – 400 and sell them at Walmart (you can still buy them new for $700!!). If macs are as addictive as their current user base seems to think they are, these users who bought in cheap will eventually want to trade up to faster machines. Faced with a choice between the Lindows PC (which would require the purchase of a monitor) the simplicity of the “all in one” imac would be an attractive choice. A larger user base (even a low end one) would attract more 3rd party apps, which might convince more users, and the ball would be rolling.
Of course this will never happen under Jobs, he is obsessed with the “Experience”. He wants you to buy a mac in an upscale retail environment, believing you have made purchase of Mercedes / BMW caliber. I am starting to get off topic but you buy a high end car to make a statement about your wealth and status – buying a pretty computer that is a few hundred bucks more than someone else’s (no matter how cool it looks) just doesn’t do this.
when i read this i wasn’t quite sure whether to be upset, or to see it as good news. the reason is simply that i just love apple, and i grew up loving it. i am just disappointed, as i have been over the years, with their business model. i see how such bad news may actually turn out to be good, if they eventually realize that the key out is to sell OSX for intel as a product on a general shelves, and start offering intel and AMD processors in their hardware. I think it won’t destroy their hardware business simply because those who buy apple machines buy they because they are so differentiated from commodity; apple is in no effective competition with beige boxes because their buyers are entirely different consumers. i had a snow imac quietly (no fan noise!) running os x (beautiful blue screen!) and i had it on a pinewood table in the living room next to a pyrex full of pot pouri layered with half-roasted chestnuts. the thing just simply looked so beauriful and inspiring. no ugly beige box PC would’ve gave me that feeling of satisfaction. i don’t see no hardware competition. also, it would expand their market share for os x enabling developers to take an interest, and it would give people a chance to try os x and apple software, who may later decide that they like it enough to buy apple hardware. it should also be a high margin cash cow, after all, how much could a cd cost them to manufacture and pack? also, their software is pretty competitive, iphoto, itunes, imovie, and the whole ilife suite, they should capitalize on that, not just simply give it away in the hope of selling hardware.
my prediction? apple will lose more and more market share regardless of what they’re talking up. They really should continue their software house buying spree while they still have the funds (eg. Emagic) because they can’t make people stick to their platform successfully without forcefully cutting development of Windows software once they buy these software companies.
Apple is a sad company to me nowadays, who still think they offer something special and unique, and still think people will be bowled over by their marketing and so-called good looks, regardless of their inflated prices. Sorry. It’s just not happening.
I’ve read before that Apple has a fairly large profit margin from their hardware (which makes sense if you’ve seen some of their prices). It seems like a huge gamble to give up that hardware profit margin, open up OS X to the masses by allow x86 clones, and then hope that an OS that so few people use at the moment suddenly gains wild popularity. That’s what would need to happen for that business model to work. Apple hardware sales would decrease more than likely, requiring a very strong increase in sales on the OS side to make up for it. Now OS X is a direct competitor to Windows XP, Microsoft yanks support for Office on OS X, and Apple’s left hanging in the breeze.
I just don’t think the opening up of the hardware is the right solution. They need to keep the hardware somehow proprietary. Even if they use an x86 chip, or AMD’s upcoming 64bit chip, they can’t just let it out as another PC OS. What they really need is a better chip manufacturer and maybe they need to really go after a particular market (possibly laptops). Who really knows? But my main point is that, in my opinion, opening up the hardware market to clones only makes sense if they wanted to take on Microsoft head-on. That doesn’t seem to be their goal.
Apple can get their marketshare up. However, it requires really good products at a really good price. Look at Nissan, undergoing a sales revival because they are offering good performance at affordable prices.
Today, Apple offers neither. They have the worst performing machines on the market at the highest prices on the market. Not the recipe for increasing marketshare as we can see from the daily decline in the number of people who are interested in paying top dollar for obsolete machines. It is only rich people who can afford an Apple computer. And they buy it because of emotional insecurity for the most part, just like people buy luxury cars so they can feel better about themselves. The lengths the current Apple owners go to justify their machines is absurd. They are too insecure to say, “yeah, I bought my Mac because it’s expensive and it differentiates me from poor people!” Even the average Mercedes buyer can admit they are buying an expensive car for status.
An Apple computer today doesn’t do anything a PC doesn’t. For the most part, it can’t do many of the cool things a PC can do today. There are far more interesting apps available for Windows/Linux than Mac. Most of the developer mindshare is invested in Windows/Linux because it is where the action is. And with China undergoing a massive growth spurt and all that growth going to Windows/Linux, it is clear as day that Apple’s global market share is going to take a massive hit.
So what can Apple do?
1. Stop lying.
Any modern Mac running OS X doesn’t hold a candle to the PC when it comes to performance. When you cannot even scroll or drag a window at a reasonable speed, it is way bad karma to be calling your machine a “supercomputer”. It is a sick lie and part of corrupt capitalism and the karma is very anti-customer and bad for Apple.
2. Get back to computing basics.
Spend time building function and not on style. Get Logitech to make a really cool Apple mouse with more than one button. Get some other company to make a really cool Apple keyboard. Realize work is done with the mouse and the keyboard. Get rid of ADC across the line and go with DVI.
3. Offer a cheap 64 bit machine.
Resist the temptation to build an expensive 64 bit tower Mac and rape the hell out of the Mac user base. Another bad karma move. An expensive 64 bit PowerMac will only build revenue, not share. So build an entry level 64 bit computer that developers can afford to buy two of. A big challenge, but what is needed to grow the marketshare. Whatever happens, do not ship this machine with less than 8 DIMM slots!
4. Offer a super cheap Mac without a monitor. Take the iMac, add USB2 and then figure out how to reduce cost to a minimum.
5. Drop the focus on Superdrive. Who cares about making their own DVD’s? This is not something mainstream people do.
6. Drop the focus on “iLife” and all that other Apple bullshit. Real people have real lives, not some fake Gap-world “iLife”. The digital hub… is only for rich people, not for average people. Most people don’t have the time or money to build a white plastic iLife and run it with their white plastic iExpensiveHardware.
7. Stop killing software. Offering all the iApps ensures no one else will build normal fun software for Mac. There is very little choice of software for Mac, something Apple is making worse by purchasing companies and then reselling their offering which usually becomes the ONLY option on Mac. That is just plain stupid. You cannot grow a large ecosystem that way. Offer some basic things with the machine, but make sure there is a BUSINESS CASE for ISV’s to write code for the machine.
One could go into much more detail, but the basic fact is that Apple has to drop prices,up performance, and focus on computing realities, not marketing hype.
I can only see Apple being able to do this by using AMD’s 64 bit chip, not a boutique 64 bit chip from IBM. If Apple used the x86-64 machine, they could pick up cheap chipsets and offer much better prices. And device drivers would port so much more easily. Going their own road with PPC970 will offer many more challenges.
Also by going with the x86-64, there will be a clear map on performance. People will know what they are getting and when. Makes much more sense than the growing overclocked G4’s in the dark like mushrooms.
Anyway, Apple has to listen, care and deliver. They’ve been very poor at listening to their customer base, very poor at caring a whit about them and very poor at delivering on price/performance. Let’s see if Mr. Anderson’s words mean something or if they are just more Apple hype.
Intel has pulled a fast one on people. Your 1.2ghz PC is sooo slow according to Intel so you need to upgrade to a 2.8ghz in order to surf the web. Meanwhile Apple is in a bind because Motorola dropped the ball. So Apple is trying to downplay the performance gap. And yes there is one. Does it make a difference to what most people use their computers for? No.
But help IS on the way for Apple. Whether its the IBM PPC970 or the AMD 64-bit chip. Things will change.
[quote]First a question, since I hate the one mousebutton idiom, what happens if you attach another USB mouse? What will the extra buttons do in MacOS X? [/quote]
Well with the scrollwheel mouse that I’m using at the moment (bought off the shelf at PC World) I plugged it in and it just works, the right mouse button calls up contextual menus like control clicking used to. The scrollwheel also works exactly as expected with most apps, but some ignore it (eg Flash).
OSX on x86 is never going to happen, and not just because of the reasons that Bascule pointed out of it being economically stupid. If the Mac goes onto x86 Microsoft will start to see them as a competitor again. Then MS Paranoia kicks in and they will use all the usual dirty tricks to crush them. They may not even have to do anything illegal this time, just pull Office. Apple knows this very well.
Going into the workstaion area could be a good idea, but they would still need a processor that could compete with the likes of the SPARC’s that are already there.
Good! At least someone at Cupertino hasn’t been dragged by the Jobs Reality Distortion Field 😉
Ok, let’s go to “kickometry”.
Why Apple needs to carry the iMac baggage? There’s no way Apple can compete on prices with not only the Dells, but also (and mainly, in the end of the day) with the white-boxes makers.
But on laptops, there’s no white-box market (OK, there’s the desknotes, but…), it’s the object of desire of most people, price margins are higher *and* brand matters. (To make easier to Jobs to understand, add “and Sony knows it all…” 🙂
Apple should dump the iMac and fortify the ‘Book line. Get the 1Ghz IBM G3 and make a ultra-cheap, back-to-basics iBook, AND make it rugged like the original one. Also get the 1Ghz G3 and make a way-cool subnotebook, at least it’ll be a hit in Japan. Create docking stations for the Powerbook so people can double it as a home computer (it helps to make people realize they’re getting a better value), AND bundle it with the laptop. Apple can be to be the #1 laptop maker in the world.
Also, the PowerMac should be upgraded to “technical workstation” level (yes, competing with Itanics and so on). They should get the PPC970 from day zero. Bundle it with third-party software insted of those iDumbLife apps. Make it customizable by the customer in terms of both hardware and software.
And PAY for people to port stuff to OS X. Maybe if Apple paid to Quark the QuarkXPress for OS X would be on the street now.
Apple has come to terms with the real problem and that is great. Its even better that they are publicly admitting it.
If apple wants greater market share then they need lower prices. End of story. They’ll need a legitimate mini-tower (and not one that has had its functionality stripped to nothing) at about the $1000 to $1200 price point.
Now as many of you have mentioned, apple can’t do this without destroying their business…..unless. Apple needs to and in fact seems to be moving into the turf of servers, work stations etc. This outward push into the domain of linux servers, Sun, and SGI will save Apple as will the push into consumer electronics. 64 bit capabilities, which seem to be comming, will be an important part of that movement.
Think of this like the car model. Traditionally, very few car companies made money off of selling economy cars, not even the japanese car makers even they fudged their books. Car makers maintain a rounded product line and they make money (profits) off of parts, and most importantly mid-sized and luxury cars and now (much to my dislike) SUVs.
Apple is doing the same. Just look at their product line. They are clearly moving into other markets. That will make the consumer desktop less important from a profit perspective. However, the volumes and market share of that desktop become important to the business model for everything from iPods to servers.
So you’re saying they have to have clones and commodity hardware but they almost must stay in the niche market? Make up your mind! If they go with clones their strategy HAS to be to massively increase marketshare. That’s the only way they could profit from it. They make money on hardware. If they lose HW sales they need to either increase the price of their SW massively or sell huge numbers in SW. Clones aren’t going to happen because they aren’t a good idea for Apple. All they would do is kill themselves.
Apple does not need clones.
What they need are volumes for their chips and mother boards. How do you get volumes without clones?
1) lower prices
2) get a partner to sell power pc based computers that use linux to businesses. Who might do that???????? IBM?
3) maintain a steady supply of contract manufacturers
4) push into new markets segments
5) promote and improve ability to run windblows apps.
ms and intel (yes i am thinking about the itanium disaster) have dropped the ball. Apple and ibm need to pick it and roll. IBM is giving every signal to the world that they want to displace intel, and they may take a nice chunk out of the intel pie.
HELLO!! Just plug your 3 button wheelmouse in the mac and USE IT !!
Actually, I have a 5-button mouse, with buttons I can customize to do different things with every program on my computer. Why do I do this? Because I’m a power user and I can
It DOES have pratical uses, which I won’t get into here.
Why would you pay twice the amount of money on a Mercedes to do the same thing you’re doing on a Toyota ???
*sigh* Once again .. what does a Mac have to do with a Mercedes when compared with PCs as Toyotas? Are Mecerdes slower than Toyotas?
Really, your analogy is flawed in that you assume Macs are luxury cars, which they’re not. On a high-end PC, I can get SCSI, USB 2.0, Fireware, Gigabit, wireless, 21 inch flat screen, or whatever, have the thing last for as long as I want it to, and STILL pay less than I would for an equivant Mac. So, my question is, as far as Macs are concerned, where does the ‘luxury’ part come in? The price? Or is it OSX, which is little more than a prettier version of KDE that’s better integrated with the OS?
If you could afford a Mercedes, BMW or Porshe, you would probably buy one.
In this case, if Toyotas basically did the same thing as Mercedes, the only people who are going to be interested in a Mercedes is people who want to show off for their friends, and show them that they are really stupid enough to pay twice as much for a ‘prettier’ and more stylish version of the same damn car.
2) get a partner to sell power pc based computers that use linux to businesses. Who might do that???????? IBM?
IBM is giving signals that it’ll sell Linux/PPC general business machines. That’s why they launched the PPC970, not because of Jobs’ prayers for something to replace the ager-and-ager-every-day G4.
So how many people did Apple sell OS X to in this magical fantasy land? Let’s do the math…
($8 billion – $5.7 billion) / ($250 per person – $118 development cost) = 17.4 million people
That’s over three times as many people are estimated to currently use OS X (~5 million)
The development costs for an x86 port are largely ‘sunk costs’. That is because development costs are fixed (I know conversion to x86 will cost something) and have already been spent.
Anyway as sales of x86 OSX scale the Average Fixed Cost becomes much smaller. Anyway the 12.6 million sales of x86 OSX would be nothing in my opinion. Especially long term. Even 25% of market share would be huge for Apple.
“Wouldn’t rampant piracy destroy any chance of financial gain for Apple?”
— Well, this is not a valid argument – All MS products have always been THE #1 target for rampant piracy and they have more money than ever. In fact, the opposite is true, piracy is even a good thing, since it increases your marketshare… if not “everybody” had grown up with pirated MS products, they wouldn’t be at where they are today – that is MS in every household. Same goes for 3DStudio Max, Photoshop, etc, etc… none of the students can afford it, still all of them “have” it – once you enter the business world, you start buying these apps… that’s how it works and Adobe knows it and MS knows as well. Back in the day in the good ole Benews-forums, someone posted a quote from the Lightwave-boss… Being asked his opionion on piracy, he said “it makes good Lightwavers..” So basically, if they couldn’t use Lighwave while they get educated to a media artist, they’d very well end up with a different product altogether, this is certainly not what is desired because they will by “the other” software when they leave school — If you don’t see the correlation between warez and business success, well you don’t see it. In this light all those claimed losses about piracy are plain false – these firms wouldn’t even be known to the larger public without warez and NOONE would buy their stuff at all.
Michael your post is so full of crap I don’t even know ware to begin, but I will try to correct you errors sense it is clear you have know Idea what the hell your talking about.
1. Stop lying.
Any modern Mac running OS X doesn’t hold a candle to the PC when it comes to performance. When you cannot even scroll or drag a window at a reasonable speed, it is way bad karma to be calling your machine a “supercomputer”. It is a sick lie and part of corrupt capitalism and the karma is very anti-customer and bad for Apple.
1. Stop Trolling
Thats nonsense, My 400 MHz iMac is definitely not the fastest computer out there but it runs OS X just fine, windows move just fine and scrolls great also. It even runs Virtual PC Half way decent.
2. Get back to computing basics.
Spend time building function and not on style.
They don’t have to choose one way or the other, they do both just fine.
Get Logitech to make a really cool Apple mouse with more than one button.
There is something like that already
http://shop.store.yahoo.com/intcad/kenstudmousw.html
Get some other company to make a really cool Apple keyboard. Realize work is done with the mouse and the keyboard.
There keyboard are cool enough already, and despite what Eugenia says, most stuff on the mac is done with the mouse (and the second button works in OS X to, but you don’t need it).
Get rid of ADC across the line and go with DVI.
just buy a $10 adapter of you want to use a DVI screen. Most PC LCD’s still use VGA anyway.
3. Offer a cheap 64 bit machine.
Resist the temptation to build an expensive 64 bit tower Mac and rape the hell out of the Mac user base. Another bad karma move. An expensive 64 bit PowerMac will only build revenue, not share. So build an entry level 64 bit computer that developers can afford to buy two of. A big challenge, but what is needed to grow the marketshare. Whatever happens, do not ship this machine with less than 8 DIMM slots!
Not going to happen. When Apple does come out with a 64 bit machine, expect it to be on the very High end only. Thats not an Apple issue that’s just the way the computer industry works, the brand new stuff is always expensive (just look at the price of an Itanium machine, they cost more then any Mac). If you want a cheap 64 bit machine buy an old Alpha from eBay.
4. Offer a super cheap Mac without a monitor. Take the iMac, add USB2 and then figure out how to reduce cost to a minimum.
There in the businise to make Money selling Quality computers, if you want some cheap junk, then dude get a Dell.
5. Drop the focus on Superdrive. Who cares about making their own DVD’s? This is not something mainstream people do.
It’s only a choice to people that are interested in it, if you don’t want it you can buy a cheaper one without it.
Also I read some ware that DVD burning will eventually become as common as CDR.
6. Drop the focus on “iLife” and all that other Apple bullshit. Real people have real lives, not some fake Gap-world “iLife”.
I don’t use the other iApps much, but I find iTunes to be the best MP3 app that I’ve used. Windows Media player looks like crap compared to it and others like Winamp don’t even come close.
The digital hub… is only for rich people, not for average people. Most people don’t have the time or money to build a white plastic iLife and run it with their white plastic iExpensiveHardware.
Not necaserally, you don’t have to be rich to buy a cheap scanner and scan some photos in to iPhoto or to get a cheap Mp3 player for iTunes (it works with other ones besides the iPod). Just because you don’t use them all does not mean there useless to regular people.
And no I’m not rich .
7. Stop killing software. Offering all the iApps ensures no one else will build normal fun software for Mac. There is very little choice of software for Mac, something Apple is making worse by purchasing companies and then reselling their offering which usually becomes the ONLY option on Mac. That is just plain stupid. You cannot grow a large ecosystem that way. Offer some basic things with the machine, but make sure there is a BUSINESS CASE for ISV’s to write code for the machine.
Microsoft is much worse when it comes to bundling stuff with windows, on the Mac you can just delete them and use something else, on Windows the stuff is much more integrated in the OS and much harder to remove.
One could go into much more detail, but the basic fact is that Apple has to drop prices,up performance, and focus on computing realities, not marketing hype.
Steve Jobs can run Apple just fine and does not give a rats ass what you thing.
I can only see Apple being able to do this by using AMD’s 64 bit chip, not a boutique 64 bit chip from IBM. If Apple used the x86-64 machine, they could pick up cheap chipsets and offer much better prices. And device drivers would port so much more easily. Going their own road with PPC970 will offer many more challenges.
Compleatly untrue. The PPC 970 is based on one of the highest prefromance sever chips in the world, the Power 4 (rather then another hack on to the 25 year old Intel 8080).
Also If they did go with the AMD chip it whould brake compatability with all OS X software and then Developers whould be pissed and leave the platfrom, but if they go with IBM’s chip all current 32 bit software will run fine on it.
Also by going with the x86-64, there will be a clear map on performance. People will know what they are getting and when. Makes much more sense than the growing overclocked G4’s in the dark like mushrooms.
The G4’s in the newest macs macs are not over clocked, that was just a dumb rumor.
Some of you morons astound me.
Most people probably use their computer more than they do their automobile, yet you cheap-ass ninny’s freak out about paying a grand more and getting OS X and a Mac.
Here’s a clue for you pathetic losers…..COMPUTERS INCLUDING MACS ARE DIRT FREAKIN’ CHEAP!!
By God, you wouldn’t think twice about spending an extra few thousand dollars to get a Honda instead of a Hyandai, but bring up the few hundreds of dollars difference between a spying, bloated, privacy-intrusive, product-activated crap that is Windows, and most of you show what cheap whores you really are.
Pathetic.
By God, you wouldn’t think twice about spending an extra few thousand dollars to get a Honda instead of a Hyandai … blah blah blah …
I wonder if you even bothered reading any of my earlier comments before posting this crap ?
a spying, bloated, privacy-intrusive, product-activated crap that is Windows …
Again, typical Mac zealotry in full force. I mean, Jesus .. what do they feed these people ??
Michael, I have to say that the iApps are not something for plastic people living plastic lives. Do you have a family? Children? This is one of the things Apple has done right. And those apps are more integrated with each other than ever. People are buying camcorders and digital cameras in droves and they are mostly family people. It’s just like people of the previous generations making photo albums by hand and showing home movies.
There are other things Apple is doing right. Their implementation of Rendezvous, AirPort Extreme, 800 Firewire, etc. And all this software…well we’ll have to see what it is. But again, the problem is price. I’m convinced more than ever (having slept on it 🙂 that Eugenia is right – they must have an entry level desktop and notebook of $799 and it has to be good. They should have done that and *then* had their Switch campaign.
Processors…it’s fun to talk about that, speculation…but we’ve pretty much tapped out all the possibilites. It seems likely that Apple will stick with the PPC platform, especially if things come through well with the new chips. Assuming all that, for the sake of argument, it all comes back to price.
Ironically, during the last quarter, it was evident that, actually, the consumer Macs sold pretty well – it was the G4 desktops that plummeted (the PoerBooks did really well though), even with dual processors. If the consumer Macs are selling well, that seems to contradict my point. However, if gaining market share is important, as Anderson indicates, then they need to bring in new users. And, to me, that means a consumer desktop and notebook well under $1000. It still comes down to that.
The question of what Apple should or should not do is one that I am sure Apple employees have been discussing for a long time. Adding insults and derision do not help when giving advice.
I do most of my assistance (work) for folks with computer problems on the Wintel platform. My personal preference for my own computing needs is the Mac. This preference has nothing to do with price or speed. I find the system, personally, has less hassle. To quell those who think Mac users are rich, I am definitely not. But my Macs have been free of serious defects for up to 9 years. I call that a good investment. For those who buy strictly on price I have only one comment: You can buy a $15 shirt or a $3 shirt. Do you always opt for the $3 shirt?
Both Mac and Wintel enthusiasts are quick to deride another operating system when they have not fully mastered how to use it. This a similar to people who loudly proclaim that English is the best language in the world for expressing feelings and ideas and they cannot speak and understand another language. That is both IGNORANCE and ARROGANCE. If that steps on a fanatics toes I am sorry.
It would be so pleasant to hear good comments without the oversupply of ignorance and arrogance.
I think miost of you are missing the big picture, and trying to use the PC model and apply it to Apple. That’s not going tpo work. I think that Apple is headed in the right direction. The only thing that is slowing them down is CPU speed. I don’t even think that price is a major problem. I still think they should have a $999 entry level flat panel iMac, but other than that they are priced where they need to be. But, until they can get their CPU speed up their pro machines will suffer (save the Powermacs)
If they can get their hands on the PPC970 then you will see a spike in Pro desktop sales. Even at 1.8Ghz, and a 900Mhz FSB, I think that will be enough to boost sales. A lot.
The only other thing I think Apple could do would be to put some of their computers in Best Buy (in cities that don’t have an Apple store) and open Apple stores worldwide.
As a person that works at Best Buy part-time (in the camera/camcorder dpet) Apple could sell a ton of machines based on iMovie alone. Everybody who wants to be a digital camcorder is interested in making DVDs, but the most if not all of the PC solutions (on the consumer level and bundled apps) suck. All I would put in a best buy would be the eMacs and iMacs. They could sell a ton.
As someone who works with OS X users, I strongly believe that Apple’s market share will increase shortly after two events occur:
– Performance improves/a new processor is released.
– Quark is released for OS X.
OS X is a hit among the geek set. I think that a lot of their current sales are to new, geekier users, while their established base is waiting for the next new processor and/or for Quark. When that happens, Apple market share will spike, as those events will set off an upgrade cycle.
Maintaining that spike will depend on Apple pushing the new processors into its’ lower end lines faster than they have in the past.
..and you’re wrong, too. Macs aren’t cheap.
Sure, it’s not house or car expensive, but some of us need multiple machines and paying an extra $750-1200 per machine for what we want adds up. And yes, I make plenty of money.
The fact is, cars and houses last a lot longer. Relative to the length of time a machine is good for primary use, it’s depreciation over time is hazardously ugly next to a car or a house (which, should, appreciate). It’s a bad analogy.
My last machine cost me $3000 3 years ago. That’s not necessary anymore. Plenty of my friends have recently bought really sweet, 2.4-2.6 GHz machines and haven’t spent more than $1300. My neighbor just bought a nice Gateway with a 17″ LCD monitor for $1250. A machine I would happily migrate too.
Most people here aren’t advocating that Apple give up the higher priceline — but fill out their offerings downward a bit, and solve the f#$@ing speed problem already.
Yes, I know they’re fast ENOUGH to get work done, but we’re talking medium-term investments — I don’t see myself running a 1GHz machine 2-3 years from now no matter what.
I think Apple needs to bring back another anacronism from the NeXT days… the slab!
http://www.blakespot.com/list/images/slab.jpg
Either take one of the existing logic boards (such as the iMac’s) or design a new one. Package all components into the slab, and market it as a low end Mac.
And PAY for people to port stuff to OS X. Maybe if Apple paid to Quark the QuarkXPress for OS X would be on the street now.
Apple offered their own people to Quark, saying they would foot the bill in order to port QuarkXPress to OS X. Quark refused.
As someone who works with OS X users, I strongly believe that Apple’s market share will increase shortly after two events occur:
– Performance improves/a new processor is released.
– Quark is released for OS X.
Supposedly QuarkXPress 6 will be released RSN. See:
http://www.quark.com/products/xpress/60_series1.html
If you don’t like it, fine ..
Uh, no .. it’s not fine when you refer to anyone who doesn’t by a Mac as ‘cheap whores.’
gladly pay for and use Mac because IMHO it is the best OS out there, period.
And you are most certainly entitled to your opinion, but when you insult and belittle those who don’t agree with you, that makes you a zealot.
why would I possibly want an OS “that’s better integrated with the OS”? LOL, Einstein, I think you’ve got it figured out!
Well, I said it was better integrated than KDE, but KDE/Gnome aren’t exactly high standards to be measured against either.
And call it what you want, Microsoft users BEND OVER and take it when they “activate” XP
If MS users are bending over and taking it, I’d venture to guess that Mac users, who pay $1,000 plus for the privilege of running OSX just to use the same kinds of apps that MS/PC users do, are probably bleeding from the asshole.
you guys are great! i bet apple is reading this now and planning furure company moves around it!
also, the sun rises in the west……….
one button mice? oh no! spoken like the clueless that have never used a Mac! you want three? take the old mouse and plug it in! look ma, all three buttons work, they give extra context menus and options. wow. or use one button (easier on a laptop) and press ctrl or cmd. look, same function! the wonders of tech….
and Macs are so slow! i mean my brothers top of the line 3.something intel can rip in a CD to MP3 in only 2 minutes MORE than my slow G3 ibook. very sad what apple has done to themselves. and it is a good thing too. my brothers x86 needs all that speed while he reinstalls XP. every few months like clockwork.
don’t worry, if you want a ‘nix on your desktop you can just run linux. in about 15 more years (current improvment rate) linux will be as easy to use as OS X. but never easier. what i learned in 5 years of linux use is that no matter how fast or how well linux desktops copy apple and microsoft, it is still a copy. and what is there you want to copy from MS? so just go to the source. get the GUI from the people every imitates. and if you make something original? it won’t matter, cause everyone else has it 2 days latter and nobody paid you for it. i was a loyal mandrake user. and one of 7 people who paid for it. a million users, less than 1% paid for it. how much longer will they last?
you know what apple needs to do in order to get 5-10% share? what they are doing. making a great OS, with unix power but apple ease of use, and creating great software to go with it. then create beautiful powerful laptops to run it on, while waiting for IBM to make the next chip generation for them.
in 2 years when apple is using the next low end of IBMs power chips and intel still can’t do more than lengthen their pipeline and hope nobody notices that a 45ghtz chip does less than their pent II 450, except run _real_ hot, and apple still has the easiest to use unix and microsoft still has poor security and the dreaded registry, you will all still be here posting “just make OS (whatever) for x86 so i can pirate it cause i am too damn cheap to pay for good software!”
“there will always be skeptics
there will always be disbelievers
and there will always be Apple to prove them wrong.”
Open to Clones? Release for x86? Is this freakin 1986, people? OEMs are getting killed. Gateway hardly deserves to be in business, HP is cruising along with its deathmarch, MS is even getting into hardware (sound like somebody?) who is going to want to license the OS? Motorola? They can’t handle their own chip or cellphone business! Not. UMax? Not! PowerComputing is Apple. HP, Dell, and Gateway can only survive kissing MS’s ass. IBM? They are in a strong but risky position of alienating MS and their own OS products by pushing Linux. Please, next time someone mentions this idiotic theory–please explain to me who wants to license it. Oh, please.
The simple fact is: Fred speaks very clearly and modestly. If he is saying these are goals–he is also saying they have the plan in place that they think will accomplish these goals and are executing.
The stores are doing much of the work of these goals–they already began to grow market share in December. Let’s wait and see if that was an anomoly. (And, Rajan, please don’t dismiss that growth as happening in the holiday season–that’s the most retarded thing I’ve ever heard you say… and I’ve heard you say some pretty retarded things–do you need a hint? Apple wasn’t the only computer company allowed to sell hardware during December.)
You are kinda right that Macs are (relatively) dirt cheap as well – only, you missed a very valid piont that has been made earlier on: MAAANY PC-buyers spend a lot more or equal money on their PC compared to a Mac. So, this is not a question of not having the money for many people, this is a willful decission against Mac as far as you want to take the affordability into account. I don’t want to even start arguing whether this is a good thing (TM) or not – that’s simply the way it is – so Apple had better think about it ASAP.
apple snobbery and arrogance is so built into the core of apple culture that i think apple is going to have a tough time. it is no wonder apple share is dropping so fast.
mac heads don’t get it because most of them are so far above the economic norm, they’ve lost sight of the mainstream. they don’t understand how people feel when they have to pay top dollar for a machine… and it comes with a one button mouse… although *unofficially* os x works with current multi-button mice. the typical rich mac-head doesn’t understand this is an insult to someone who is paying real money for the machine to make them go and purchase another mouse just to get the ease of use that has existed on windows for EIGHT YEARS and on the PC for just about TWENTY YEARS.
how about having to pay $19 (Apple Store price) for a DVI adapter? most people don’t think they should pay the cost of Apple using a proprietary connector and trying to make them have to purchase an apple monitor which other than the ultra-premium top model, don’t offer a good value to the customer. this adapter probably costs apple less than $1. why is this not included with the apple computers that don’t have a monitor built in?
and these are just tiny examples of how apple’s anti-customer attitude and culture is so incredibly pervasive that they don’t even see it anymore. needless to say, it is not good for marketshare.
in the non-apple computing world:
64 bit windows on cheap amd 64 bit desktop hardware is shipping this fall.
64 bit linux on amd 64 bit server hardware is shipping at the end of april.
there’s an amazing level of activity and innovation happening on windows and linux.
with the advent of 64 bit mainsteam computing, it will increase even more.
if apple doesn’t get it through their brains that they cannot remain a snobby company selling to snobby people if they want to grow marketshare, that is their loss.
the vast majority of people in the world who are buying computers don’t have an iLife, don’t record DVD’s, don’t spend their time in iTunes, making iMovies, etc.
the vast majority of people don’t want to spend twice as much to get a shiny white plastic case and ages old hardware inside (ATA/66 controller?!?! $0.02 sound chip, etc). instead of paying a rapacious premium for the computer, the normal computer buyer wants to get a monitor, a printer, and some software too. the software they like, not the software apple makes them use.
when it comes to the vaunted apple operating system, the truth is that OS X is not easy to use. it is *hyped* as easy to use, but apple has no usability studies to back this up.
the dock has to be the most dysfunctional piece of desktop software i have seen in a long time. it is so funny that on the wide but short apple monitors, the doc was designed to only work well when it is horizontal. on monitors that have a shortage of vertical pixels, it is simply moronic.
anyhow, time will tell. apple is supposed to introduce their 64 bit computers later this year. blabbing about the great apple soap opera is pointless when apple hasn’t done anything interesting in computing in a long time. let’s see if they can pull a rabbit out of the hat in the summer.
Penny wise, pound foolish. I like this phrase, it has alot to do with many pc arguements.
Try saving money buying cheap PCs, which cant be upgraded, have buggy drivers, are underpowered, and break easily. I did that, I’ll never do it again. My time is worth a lot to me, spending 2-3 hours fixing my PC when it should have worked in the first place is worth more (in $$$$) than the cheap price I paid for it.
Then I got high quality PCs from a local computer shop (which meant if theres a problem and I dont have time, lugging the thing down the corner was cheaper, faster, and easier than shipping it back to dell). The shopkeeper and I put together a cheap, good quality, upgradable solution quickly, and had the PCs done in a few days.
I had no hardware issues with these PCs, only software ones Having to get outlooks latest virus off my tiny home network was a pain. I was spending time looking for alternatives for my hardware, there were none.
Finally my personal needs were met by the iBook. I had everything I would need, with less vulnerabilities (lets be honest, whens the last time your business emails infected a mac?). My PC now, after running well for 2 years is having all sorts of software issues, I cant bring myself to reinstall win2k and all my software again. It takes so long, and my PC will let me do the few things I need to on it when I use my ibook chiefly.
I dont see Macs as having a premium, but more of a “Well charge more now isntead of you replacing parts or spending hours reinstalling stuff or trying to find spyware, or removing sircam fromm your mac network.” Its pretty justified in my mind now. When *nix for x86 gets apps I need for what I do, Ill install it on my PCs, but till then Ill just buy macs.
I actually found the dock worked well on the left side, it just looks pretty on the bottom. Also when you turn off magnification and other things, it actually works really well.
Beats the hell out a taskbar/icons on desktop to me.
>> By the way, I’m a MSCE and Linux+ certified.
Delightful. That means, precisely, nothing.
In fact, I’m less inclined to listen to your opinion based on these facts.
Cheers,
prat
The shopkeeper and I put together a cheap, good quality, upgradable solution quickly, and had the PCs done in a few days.
I had no hardware issues with these PCs
So, even a person who is really into Macs admits that if you buy a quality PC, you have little to know hardware problems in most cases, and still pay much less than you would for a Mac.
I dont see Macs as having a premium, but more of a “Well charge more now isntead of you replacing parts or spending hours reinstalling stuff or trying to find spyware, or removing sircam fromm your mac network.”
Ok, that’s great and all, but for those of us who know better than to use virus-prone email programs or run apps loaded with spyware (and therefore have little to know software issues either), how then would we benefit from using a Mac? We would be paying $1,000+ more, and for what? It’s still the ‘luxury car’ of computers that esentially does the same thing as mine.
One last thing – I don’t like the dock either. But hen again, that’s purely a personal preference.
One last last thing – we’ve established that OSX works with 3 mouse buttons. Will it work with optical mice that have 5 buttons? And if it does, can you customize those buttons to do what you want them to?
I can’t even read your biased, wrong crap till the end, because it is so obviously flawed.
“and Macs are so slow! i mean my brothers top of the line 3.something intel can rip in a CD to MP3 in only 2 minutes MORE than my slow G3 ibook.”
This is where I had to stop reading, unfortunately. Why don’t you tell your brother to buy a _decent_ CDROM that can actually _read_ CDs..? – You can rip a CD to mp3 about 2 minutes faster..? Well I got news for you: I can rip a CD on Celeron 800 in just a bit more than 2 minutes… uh..?! – Yes – Kenwood TrueX 72. So, this has nothing to do with your pathetically outdated Moto CPU, get over it.
“mac heads don’t get it because most of them are so far above the economic norm, they’ve lost sight of the mainstream.”
Uh, no. There are many, many Mac users who are just as economically restricted as the average PC user. They just know how to budget and plan their purchases.
Not all Mac fans/users are zealots. Many can clearly see the problems with the platform and air their complaints. Many don’t need to get embroiled in these arguments, do not need to be zealots, don’t even follow the news that closely.
Many Mac users are average, simple users, without insane economic means, but you are being just as much a snob to presume that anyone who uses a Mac most have money to burn and is an artsy snob.
Think again.
One last last thing – we’ve established that OSX works with 3 mouse buttons. Will it work with optical mice that have 5 buttons? And if it does, can you customize those buttons to do what you want them to?
Yes, I’m currently using a Microsoft Wireless optical mouse with 3 buttons, but I also have a Microsoft corded mouse with 5 buttons, and all those buttons are programmable. Microsoft makes a driver for OSX that lets me configure the mouse, as do the other major mouse makers. There’s also a shareware app called USB Overdrive that will help you configure other mice that may not ship with an OSX app to configure them. I think that several if not all of the manufacturer’s config apps are actually based on USB Overdrive.
I’m relatively happy with my Windows 2000 desktop that I have. While I would prefer to have a Mac on my desktop, I want some decent power at an extremely low price. My motherboard and processor upgrade from my old PIII 500 to my AMD 1700+ was about $150. I don’t expect Apple to compete with that. To get the flexability I want I would have to skip their entry level offerings (iMac) and go to the much more expensive G4 line…
Now as far as laptops go, I want a new laptop, I have the money for a laptop, I need a new laptop (mine is a Gateway 133 with no battery, broken networking card, broken clasps, etc..), but right now its just more important to me to have that grand (base iBook + some more memory) in the bank. Who knows how long I/my wife will have our job and that’s just the pain in the ass of being a grownup. But at $999 base price for the iBook is undoubtedly the greatest bargain that Apple has ever offered for a piece of hardware. The power to price ratio is incredible. Considering once upon a time Apple was offering $9,000+ machines and hell a Dual G4 will still run you $4k stacked.
Yo, Darius, genius-in-training:
You responded to Evan with this particularly illuminating statement:
” paying $1,000+ more, and for what? It’s still the ‘luxury car’ of computers that esentially does the same thing as mine”
He bought an IBOOK, you damn moron!!! They start at 999.00. Of course you’ll say “I wasn’t talking about the iBook”, but just like most uniformed PC Trolls of your ilk, your elevator doesn’t go to the top floor, and you responded to Evan without READING HIS FREAKIN’ POST!!
And comparing the forced registration of a product for which you paid money (essentially rendering your rights to it’s use entirely in MS’s hands) to someone paying a premium for a product they choose to purchase is the height of poor logic, faulty reasoning, poor analogy skills, and really, really bad breath.
And hey, on that subject, have you actually read your Windows EULA lately? Here’s a snippet for you, something for you to read as you bend over:
“You agree that in order to protect the integrity of content and software protected by digital rights management (‘Secure Content’), Microsoft may provide security related updates to the OS Components that will be automatically downloaded onto your computer. These security related updates may disable your ability to copy and/or play Secure Content and use other software on your computer. If we provide such a security update, we will use reasonable efforts to post notices on a web site explaining the update.”
For you to even, possibly, in any way whatsoever, try and justify this, or weasel your way out of it, only furthers the clear case for your total and complete imbecility (lol…not a word, but what the hell!!).
And here’s another little gem from our resident rocket scientist:
“Ok, that’s great and all, but for those of us who know better than to use virus-prone email programs or run apps loaded with spyware (and therefore have little to know software issues either), how then would we benefit from using a Mac?”
So, using your logic, those of “us” who don’t know better than to use virus-prone email programs or run apps loaded with spyware are going to be hosed. And before you launch into a tirade about how anyone who doesn’t know better deserves what they get, my 83 year old Grandmother doesn’t know better, shouldn’t have to know better, and when her Windows box goes to hell on her, I’ll just tell her,”you should have known better”. Beautiful!!
So, according to you, for her and MANY OTHERS LIKE HER, she would definitely benefit from using a Mac.
One more thing before I leave you to your complete lack of cognitive reasoning and logical dissonance.
Comparing real-use issues of OS X to ANY Linux distro only digs you farther into your imbecilical hole. If you truly believe this, then either
a). You’re a complete imbecile (seems the most likely)
b). You have never spent significant time with either a Linux distro or OS X (also likely, but in combo with a).
c. Your blind acceptance of Windows, and the inability to understand why anyone would possibly choose any other OS. (Once again, this would have to be combined with a.) You’re a complete imbecile).
Darius = Several fries short of a Happy Meal
I think one button mouse decision was right at the time, but later on it didn’t make much sense. Defending one button mouse today is a stupid thing, since people know more about computers. Also if 2 button mouse is more complex, why the hell do we have keyboard with more keys on it. That should be more confusing for a user who is confused with 2 buttons.
Car analogy is quite stupid. When you pay Apple lots of money, in return you don’t get a Mercedes compared to a PC. PCs are faster. Their future is bright, their OS is better and they are cheaper. What Apple has is style. Apple products are produced in similar Southeast Asia companies. They are not manufactored with superior technology. For many things the hardware is almost the same, except CPU and memory where PCs are better. For OS, Windows XP is much better and complete. Especially when Mac OS X is annouced, later on everybody realized that it is not a complete product. Apple had to release OS X.1 later on. Apple really ripped off their customers well. I mean it was a very very good move for the company. Freud may explain why there are people who likes to be ripped off, and still praise the guy who ripps them off. My explanation is that, those guys want to believe that they have a better computer. They also have to defend that, otherwise they will be complete idiots.
Apple offered their own people to Quark, saying they would foot the bill in order to port QuarkXPress to OS X. Quark refused.
Apple is not guilty if Quark managed to be dumber than rocks. Quark deserves every lost market share.
Okay, this has gone way off topic. The subject of this article is Apple and their market share and financial prospects.
The vast majority of people who use Macs are not snobs or zealots. As we all know, people tend to stick with what they were first introduced to. So, many Mac users buy Macs because they used them in school or perhaps at work (like a graphics house) and want the same thing at home as they do at work.
In the past, there were reasons to argue about Mac. vs. PC. It was the Mac OS against DOS and early versions of Windows. That was fun arguing about that stuff. Now, that stuff is gone. There is nothing to argue about in that regard.
Because of incredible stupidity on the part of Apple management, Apple started on a downhill slide, almost to the point of tanking completely. Steve Jobs came back and whipped things into shape and brought out the iMac, which generated interest in Macs and Apple again. So, the company became and is again on fairly solid footing.
This stability was pretty shortlived, due mostly to Motorola and their problems. As a result, Jobs had to start relying on style more and substance less. And that has evolved into Apple’s situation today.
The big thing Apple has going for it is OS X. Those of you who poo-poo it have either not used it at all or have just fiddled with it at a store. The Jaguar update was a huge upgrade. Also, Apple has its other software going for it – the iApps, high end video applications, Keynote and it appears a ton of other software is coming out.
So, they have some good stuff going. But, there are two problems. The processors are too slow and Macs – at least entry level Macs – cost too much.
It is hoped that the processor situation will finally be resolved later this year. We’ll have to wait and see exactly what they’ll do.
The high price of even entry level Macs must be reversed, both for consumers and in education, to try and get some of that market back. Apple has to bite the bullet on this if they want to have a prayer of reaching 5% market share. They simply have to.
And that’s really it. There is no need to call each other names and get nasty. The fact is that a family or a person is more likely to buy a Dell for $799, no matter how cool Macs look. The same with school districts. All the old arguments for why the Mac is superior are gone now. Continued innovation, more great software and biting the bullet on the low end is what Apple needs to do.
God, I LOVE this site!
hehe …
He bought an IBOOK, you damn moron!!! They start at 999.00. Of course you’ll say “I wasn’t talking about the iBook”
I wasn’t talking about him, I was talking about me. For me to get a Mac with similar specs as the PC I just bought, it would cost me upwards of $3,000. Sure you could get an entry level Mac with 128MB RAM and a 20GB hard drive for about that much, but what kind of longivity does that have compared to a fully-loaded PC (which I got for just a little more than his iBook).
And comparing the forced registration of a product for which you paid money ..
Why do you pre-suppose that my own personal advocacy of a PC means that I am a big fan of Windows XP? Hell, Windows XP isn’t even necessary to run Windows apps.
And hey, on that subject, have you actually read your Windows EULA lately?
Of course, it always comes down to politics, doesn’t it? That and “Hey, the aqua interface just looks so snazzy!!”
And comparing the forced registration of a product for which you paid money (essentially rendering your rights to it’s use entirely in MS’s hands) to someone paying a premium for a product they choose to purchase is the height of poor logic
Not like anybody’s pointing a gun to people’s heads and forcing them to buy a computer loaded with WindowsXP. Just because you can’t order one from Dell.com without Windows doesn’t mean it can’t be done. Even still, how many Macs can you buy without OSX and/or OS9 installed?
For you to even, possibly, in any way whatsoever, try and justify this, or weasel your way out of it
Dude, I’m not trying to justify shit except for my own
personal preferences. So, according to you, for her and MANY OTHERS LIKE HER, she would definitely benefit from using a Mac.
Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying. Unlike you, I don’t blindly support the platform in which I choose. I’m simply saying that a) For those of us who can and do avoid the nasty side of Windows viruses/spyware, Macs have little-to-no value over what we already use and b) Most of us don’t appreciate little Mac-loving bitches like you insulting us everytime we turn around. And if somebody wants to do the ‘forced’ product activation and sell their soul to ‘Father William’, that is really none of your fucking business.
And yes, I am very aware of the EULA. You don’t think I’ve ever taken that into consideration? Do you think this is news me? That’s like telling a smoker that cigarettes cause lung cancer
my 83 year old Grandmother doesn’t know better, shouldn’t have to know better, and when her Windows box goes to hell on her, I’ll just tell her,”you should have known better”. Beautiful!!
Actually, I’m not like the Linux zealots, so I would never say that.
If someone were to get a new PC, I could give them a listthat was about 10 things long that are DOs/DONTs (akin to “don’t take candy from strangers”) and as long as they follow this list, they’d most likely never again have to worry about viruses, worms, spyware, etc.
BTW: Did I meantion that I run no anti-virus software 24/7 and have yet to be infected by anything? Could this mean that either I am extremely lucky, or simply that I don’t double click on email attachments that promise me nude pics of Anna Kournikova? A little common sense goes a long way.
Some posters here also seem to be confused about what constitutes “luxury”, arguing that Apple products are no different from Windoze, just more expensive.
Darius the genius asked “So, my question is, as far as Macs are concerned, where does the ‘luxury’ part come in?”, claiming it’s all bunk.
Here’s two examples (and there are many, many more) of “luxury” that you can get with Apple that more than qualifies.
– The G4 iMac and it’s swiveling arm. If you haven’t used it, you can’t comment. The ability to move the digital monitor any direction, up or down, tilt, sideways, effortlessly, is simply luxurious. It is not only an engineering marvel, but it’s one of those things that you wonder that someone hadn’t thought of it before.
– Quiet G4 iMacs. Silence is a luxury, and iMacs don’t make a sound. Not to mention a base to it that is the most space-efficient design made.
– The 17inch Powerbook. Stunning, and absolutely, one hundred percent LUXURY!!!! The frosting on the cake? An optical fiber backlit keyboard, controlled by a built-in light sensor.
Butter!!!!
(And, ok, it was more than two things)
I’ll leave most of your drivel alone, and just comment on this:
“Unlike you, I don’t blindly support the platform in which I choose.”
Actually, irregardless of my caustic tone and my entirely over-the-top, un-called for, and below-the-belt insults, I don’t “blindly support the platform”.
In fact, due to circumstances beyond my control, I actually use Windows XP far more than OS X, and I would consider myself a power user of both platforms.
So I am actually in a very good position to judge both of them on their merits, and I make enough money to purchase whatever home system(s) I choose.
And without a second thought, I choose Mac OS X, not because I’m brainwashed, or uninformed, or blindly in love with Apple, but because in just about every respect I find Mac’s to be superior, more intuitive, the OS gets out of my way, and most of all, OS X is just plain more fun to use.
So Darius, are you going to tell me, without lying your ass off, that you use OS X on a regular basis? Or have you just “fiddled around” with it?
Because people I know who have been Windows users all their lives, (including my wife, and one of my best friends), once they had spent some time with OS X, flat-out “switched”.
Whatever difference there was in price between platforms, they felt it was entirely, without a doubt, worth it.
But hey, maybe you really do use OS X daily, and still prefer Windows, it’s not beyond the realm of possibilities, but most of the wankers who post here spouting off about how Mac’s are too expensive, blah, blah, blah, haven’t used OS X for squat, and have absolutely no objectivity, just prejudice.
And hey, nothing personal, I’m just pretty much an ass sometimes!!
The things that kills the idea of me buying a Mac, and for most people I know, is the price/performance point.
I work in the music/audio industry. A lot of people I know use both PC’s and Mac’s and I hear complaint after complaint about the price/performance of Mac’s vs PC’s.
Here in New Zealand dual 1.42 GHz processor Power Mac *without* a monitor cost around 6,000 NZD.
A comparable PC, with two(2) of AMD’s fastest MP chips, the MP2600, is around $4,200 NZD.
The PC will run rings around the PowerMac all day long, running nearly twice the number of plugins etc.
I do love Apple’s artistic flair and design. SO much so that I modded my XP install to mimic OS X, but at the end of the day when time is money, I’ll take the PC.
But come on, it’s not nearly as stupid as this analogy:
“Also if 2 button mouse is more complex, why the hell do we have keyboard with more keys on it. That should be more confusing for a user who is confused with 2 buttons.”
Come on, Serge. DOn’t act as if you are raising us up from ignorance and then attempt to pass that load of crap on us.
Actually, irregardless of my caustic tone and my entirely over-the-top, un-called for, and below-the-belt insults, I don’t “blindly support the platform”.
Well, I’ve been faulted for saying this before, but…
Irregardless is hardly a word, and definitely not proper English.
he G4 iMac and it’s swiveling arm … It is not only an engineering marvel
While I will agree that it’s pretty cool (maybe even a luxury item), I think saying it’s an ‘engineering marvel’ is stretching it a bit.
Even if it is indeed a luxury item, how much flexability do you sacrifice by getting one of these things? For example, I have bad eyes, so can I get one with a 19 inch monitor? What about a dual 1.4ghz G4 version? Is it possible to add on another hard drive when purchased, or later after it is purchased? Of course, you could argue that the iLamps aren’t purely ‘desktops’ per say and so therefore it doesn’t matter if they are expandable in these ways, but they still resemble much more desktops than laptops (where things like 19 inch monitors wouldn’t be feasable).
So Darius, are you going to tell me, without lying your ass off, that you use OS X on a regular basis? Or have you just “fiddled around” with it?
Honestly, I have just fiddled around with it. But then again, how much can you actually test drive a demo at CompUSA or Frys? If I could pay like $50 and rent one for a couple of weeks, I probably would, but I can’t. And I’m not about to pay the asking price for one of these machines to see if my opinion of them changes. Afterall, if you take a car for a test drive, do you end up buying it if you don’t really like the way it handles, in hopes that it will get better later on, just because your best friend likes it?
Actually, irregardless of my caustic tone and my entirely over-the-top, un-called for, and below-the-belt insults, I don’t “blindly support the platform”.
Ok, so why don’t you take back the ‘cheap whores’ comment then ?
The corrected version:
“Regardless of my caustic tone, entirely over-the-top, crass and below-the-belt insults, I don’t “blindly support the platform”.
🙂
Quality.
There will always be differentiation on the market.
Macs will always be more expensive. If they continue to be better PERSONAL computers. and they are. I am a EE , founded a ISP in Europe and our tech team used Newtons 2100 to program our access servers, all around the country.
We never used windows anywhere except when we needed to “see” what our coustomers werw talking about. We designed everything on Macs from the web site to the billing software. It worked.
Price is not an issue. Educated Consumption is.
Apple should have 1 Powerbook, 1 Desktop machine. Running OS X.
The rest is crap . You cannot compare Ibooks feature by feature with PCs laptops. They are much better and they sell less.
So stop moaning . If you think Macs are expensive work harder and they you can spring the $$$ for it.
I have used, and sworn at, Windows since version 3.1. I spent the second half of 2002 changing from Windows 98 to 2000. Part of it was easy, a desktop failed, and was replaced with a laptop (a Sony) with 2000 already installed. Another 98 running laptop failed and was replaced by a Fujitsu P2000 series running Windows 2000.
That left the actual converting to two machines. Having tried to change over back in the year 2000, I can say that driver support was much improved in 2002. Still, I needed to replace two cards.
Windows 2000 looks a lot like Windows 98, but runs a lot smoother. It doesn’t flake out like Windows 98 sometimes does. I have had one crash on four machines in the last eight months. Even on a low end machine, like my Transmeta based Fujitsu, the OS gives the impression of nimbleness, something Linux never did. Linux also lacked the stability of Windows 2000. I understand OS/X is much more stable now than when it was first released. That’s good, but I’ll bet overall stability doesn’t exceed that of Windows 2000.
In short, I already am using an OS that “just works” (I made that phrase up). Once the OS does the job, then comes the search for software that will run on it. My son likes games, my daughter has been exploring the power of Word Perfect 10. We browse using Beonex; we read e-mail with Pegasus. I use Cartes du Ciel and The Sky for astronomy. I use Britannica and Encarta for reference. I use more specialized stuff like the Anchor Bible Dictionary. Paint Shop Pro and Vuescan serves my graphics needs (although I suppose I COULD get Photoshop if I had to).
In short, doing work is what counts. For that, there should be software available, it should run reasonably fast, and the whole thing shouldn’t crash. My OS does this. Why should I change? That is what Apple is facing when it tries to capture market share, the “why should I change” crowd. So I pay extra for a snazzy new iMac, does my old software run on it? Emulation, you say, Virtual PC? So my current software will run worse than on what I have now? Oh, there is a version of Microsoft’s Office for the Mac, but I have to pay how much extra for it?
Where is this market share going to come from?
Beleive me darius, if I could have I would not have let outlook be used on my network, but I had to. Hell, honestly I still havent found a better windows email client than outlook. And I really like Mail.app for os X.
Specifically I have issues with the cheap PC arguements, cheap PCs are crap, always will be. (this does not affect mac price arguements) I got a decent 1400mhz athlon system for 900 bucks without a good graphics card (tnt2), and no monitor, the software issues are what made me switch. The damned thing was loud too (though apple has its own problem in this dept.).
I’ve been called a Mac zealot, I dont beleive I am one. I would not reccomend a PC to any home user I know, mainly because I’m the one they call to fix their computer (if you thought outlook was bad you should see the crap average people put on their pcs). Out of the box Apple is perfect for almost everyone I know.
Oh, and my iBook cost a pretty penny (educational discount of a whole… 50 bucks) to be usable (640 ram), and I actually had to send one back and get a new one. But I can honestly say I could not have bought a better laptop at that time. Oh, and I have been ruined by ibm, trackpoints are the best laptop mouse devices in existence to me, and I hate I hate, I hate one button trackpads. I could seriously rag on my iBook, but I still love it more than any PC I’ve used to date.
I wish I could play high res divx films a bit better, but I suppose its not terribly bad to not be browsing websites while watching a tv show, eheh. Im more used to listening to TV shows than watching
Oh OS X IS slow, but when windows gets slow it usually grinds to a halt, OS X just allows you to blink once or twice so you dont miss something. And DEAR GOD GET RID OF THOSE ANNOYING MODAL WINDOWS IN FIRE, I thought I left them on win2k.
My sentence structure needs work, I know. I dont care to spend time writing things correctly when I have homework to do
err… that didnt sound right.
You say windows works for you. OK. but guess what, if you are reading OS News that just about guarantees that you are pretty knowledgeable/comfortable with computers. The extra ease of use of a mac and bundled apps out of the box + fewer glitches with hardware/software integration + one co. to go to for support (for most uses) — while really valuable to people that are NOT knowledgeable/comfortable with computers — is not so much a big deal for you.
Plus, do you like to build your own PC? Lots of PC diehards do. That alone can outweigh the mac advantages for many people (although usually diehard PC people don’t think of it as “outweighing the mac advantage,” they just ignore the mac advantage and play the denial game).
but does the whole world want to build a PC? actually no.
Maybe you don’t care so much about the ability to run Linux or unix apps on the same machine as commercial apps like Office and Photoshop. That’s fine, but some people do. macs are a better choice for them.
So your mistake is a common one – assuming the whole world is exactly like you, with your preferences, your level of knowledge, etc. etc.
“While I will agree that it’s pretty cool (maybe even a luxury item), I think saying it’s an ‘engineering marvel’ is stretching it a bit”
– Perhaps stretching it a bit, although Ives (the designer) said getting the arm to move in all directions and stay in place was actually a much more difficult problem than it might appear….maybe that’s why you haven’t seen any other manufacturer do it.
“Even if it is indeed a luxury item, how much flexability do you sacrifice by getting one of these things? For example, I have bad eyes, so can I get one with a 19 inch monitor? What about a dual 1.4ghz G4 version? Is it possible to add on another hard drive when purchased, or later after it is purchased? Of course, you could argue that the iLamps aren’t purely ‘desktops’ per say and so therefore it doesn’t matter if they are expandable in these ways, but they still resemble much more desktops than laptops (where things like 19 inch monitors wouldn’t be feasable)’
-No you can only get a 17in Widescreen LCD with it, although it has the screen area of a 19in crt. And of course you can add on Firewire Hard Drives to your heart’s content.
But the iMac isn’t meant to be the same as a standard desktop, no more than one of the all-in-one Gateway’s (which, btw, is a poor, hideously ugly imitation of the iMac). If you were to include expansion on the iMac, it would no longer function the same, it would be bulky, noisy, etc., etc.
Form and function have to co-exist together.
In fact, an iMac is closer to a laptop than it is an expandable desktop.
” Honestly, I have just fiddled around with it. But then again, how much can you actually test drive a demo at CompUSA or Frys?”
Kudos to you for admitting that you haven’t spent any time with OS X, but that is exactly my point. How can you possibly argue about the value proposition of Apple and Mac OS X when you have only admittedly “fiddled” with it?
And this is the common thing I see in these debates, most of the people who are using Macs have used or are using Windows extensively, while the Windows users have either “fiddled” with it, or used a Mac years ago.
“Afterall, if you take a car for a test drive, do you end up buying it if you don’t really like the way it handles, in hopes that it will get better later on, just because your best friend likes it?”
-It’s not the same as test-driving a car, operating systems are entirely different things, in both complexity and time required to gain familiarity and competency. For that matter, I’m also guilty of using car metaphors, which actually really suck as an analogy.
” Ok, so why don’t you take back the ‘cheap whores’ comment then ?
”
-Yeah, you’re right, I should have said “uninformed, hypocritical cheap whores” !!
Just kidding.
🙂
How can you possibly argue about the value proposition of Apple and Mac OS X when you have only admittedly “fiddled” with it?
Before buying my new PC, I went to the Apple online store and looked up a Mac equivalent in hardware to my new PC – the Mac would’ve cost me $1,000 more. So $1,000 to run many of the same apps I’m currently running, so that leaves the OS .. and I don’t give a damn how good an OS is, it’s not worth $1,000!!
And I can only wonder about the people who switch from Windows to OSX – if they were able to run Windows problem-free as I do before crossing over. If they couldn’t (and it’s not easy sometimes), then no wonder they got fed up and switched.
Honestly though, for me, Windows gives me zero headaches (of course, that comes with 9 years of experience, but that’s beside the point), and that is really as much as I ask for out of an OS – all of hte eye-candy and (perceived) elegance is superficial. Of course, you might disagree, and that’s ok too
If the computer works, if one is happy with the software, if one knows a particular OS enough to work with it, why switch? That’s the problem Apple has run into. The time for grabbing first time computer users is pretty much over. That means to increase market share, Apple has to grab share from another OS, and Windows is logical choice to grab from.
Unfortunately, what I see in the switch ads and the reality on the ground don’t match. Take the example of a guy with a basic E-Machines running Windows 98. Someone “upgraded him” to Windows 2000, but destroyed his copy of Office 2000 in the process. He didn’t care that Windows 2000 was better, what counted was that he could click in the same places and run Office.
Now try and get this guy to change computers, the OS, and the way the software runs, and convince him that paying $600 extra for the hardware alone, let alone extra for a copy of Office that lacks the “proper” places to click, is worth it to him.
I ask again, where is this market share going to come from?
How can you possibly argue about the value proposition of Apple and Mac OS X when you have only admittedly “fiddled” with it?
This is true but it does bring up an interesting problem. You and I both know that Mac OS X is great in many very subtle ways that many user’s won’t see right away. I think these benefits are worth the extra money spent on hardware (not $1000 in my case – I spent about $2300 for my mac and a comparable PC would’ve run about $1700).
But how is a person in a store who has never used a Mac before supposed to make that judgement? Having someone they trust tell them “it’s just better” and then taking a leap of faith seems to be the only way. There’s really no way to quantify it so they just have to read reviews and listen to what people say.
And of course there is the disadvantage that the “quantified” things *tend* to be in favor of the PC (memory/processor speed being the glaring issues already discussed).
that’s obvious Peter
Maybe the mac market share will come from the $2500 Sony desktop buyer that thought the built in crappy video software actually worked (eg.DVGate), got burned and is ready to shitcan his mistake.
Maybe the person with a little extra coin (mind you, just a little, like $500 or 600) who thinks, gee, why should updating my OS from 98 to 2000 trash an installed application? Or why should reinstalling my OS require me to reinstall all my apps?
We’re not talking about first-time computers users. We’re talking about people that have had a bad experience with windows, and are not limiting themselves to the 599 walmart PC.
Only desktops are more. Time and time again people have compared the apple laptops to the others and they are NOT more money.
Even that new Lindows notebook is 799 plus extra for external optical and you can get an iBook for 999 that has better specs (although it is not as light, it is by no means heavy)
Increasing amounts of the market are going to laptops.
So, I ask you, why do you limit your analysis to desktops, the decreasing segment of the market.?