Linked by Andrew Youll on Sat 4th Feb 2006 14:31 UTC
Apple Apple has confirmed that it's taken the number one spot in the western European education market. Apple's education market share in western Europe is now 15.2 per cent, relegating Dell, with 14.7 per cent, to second place.
Thread beginning with comment 93099
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: It's not irrelevant
by MysterMask on Mon 6th Feb 2006 08:08 UTC
Member since:

I do not personally feel its good that any vendor who locks hardware and OS together in a closed system should have more than 5% of any public sector market.

Apple does not lock hardware and OS together. They just have another business model (building the whole solution) which is in my eyes better for the customer.
You don't buy a toaster and the toaster OS from two different vendors, do you?

If you accept that non-geeks want to buy a solutions and not just a piece of 'tech', the you accept also that people buy a PC with Windows as "one system" the same way as the buy a Mac with OS X as "one system". Both are closed in that sense.

I sure don't see teachers putting another OS on freshly bought system in their spare time just because they can or because it's "funny".

But even if they do, there's nothing holding you back to put another OS on Apple hardware, whether this fit's in your world view of "openness" or not (BTW: what kind of UNIX can you put on an arbitrary x86 PC - I don't know any.. please tell us). The current record of the number of different OSs on the same hardware was done on a Mac (see

It might be important for an open source activist to have an "open" solution (although x86 is closed as any other solution on the market - there are no open standards), but for a school, I would rather prefer that they buy the solution which they need and is best for them.

Furthermore, open standards will only become important if different OSs with equal market shares exist. So you're beloved x86/Windows monopoly will only promot and prolong the importance of closes Windows file formats (like .doc, .xls, etc.) and the emergence of better solutions (like the INTEL dominance hindered the adoption of 64 bit computing, killed architectures like Alpha, etc.).

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: It's not irrelevant
by alcibiades on Mon 6th Feb 2006 20:50 in reply to "RE: It's not irrelevant"
alcibiades Member since:

"Apple does not lock hardware and OS together. They just have another business model..."

They do. That is just another way of describing it. You cannot run your copy of OSX on any other makers machine, and you cannot run any other OS on your MacIntel. Thats a fact.

Its also a fact that you can get a windows machine from one of a dozen different suppliers, and having got it, you can move your windows installation to another supplier's machine, and you can also install any one of a dozen flavors of linux/BSD on that machine.

I don't have a beloved Windows/x86 monopoly, the typical personal innuendo in these matters. I have a mac and a dual boot x86 on my desk, and an AMD64 Linux install.

And I continue to think that a world in which we have independent vendors of hardware, on which we can run multiple OSs as we choose, is a world which is better for us both as users and as citizens, than one in which there are multiple vendors of closed combinations of hardware+OS.

The question the rest of you have to answer is, why an industry structured in the hardware+OS tied way would be better for us.

It wouldn't be, it would offer less choice, more restrictions and lock-ins, higher prices. Its not that MS is great, it isn't. But having the hardware open is a lot, a lot better than having the current Apple business model take over. And that is why we need to resist any tendency for it to take over in our public institutions.

Again, it has nothing to do with Apple. Or MS. It has to do with which business model is better for us.

Reply Parent Score: 1