Unbelievable what people think wining the war is, and why Microsoft came to dominance. The worst products are always the best sellers. The Ford fiesta was once the best selling cars in North America. Was it the BEST car in NA? NO NO NO NO!!!! So why was it the best selling car? Because it was the cheapest piece of junk out there, so lots of people bought it. BMW does not want to make crap cars like the ford fiesta so it has a very small market share as a result. Apple was never interested in making cheap crap computers, they want to make the BEST computers and that means making your own software and hardware. Would BMW be better if they didn't make their own engines and keep tight quality control on their cars? No, BMWs are better cars because BMW has tight control over what they make. I can't stand it when people equate apples tight control to being a socialist way and the PC is the free democratic way. In any other industry keeping tight control over your product is considered a good thing! Apple has a comparable market share in computers to BMWs market share in the auto industry, it would be a real shame if BMW suddenly started making ford fiestas in order to grab a 90% market share like Microsoft has because the quality of the BMW car would go down.
But none of this has anything to do with android. It hopefully will be a great system and have lots of success. Android does not have to loose for Apple to succeed. There is plenty of room for apple, RIM and android to do very well and to all thrive much as do all the car makers in the world. The monopoly of MS in the computer OS is really an anomaly in the business world, very few industries have a monopoly like that and the smart phone industry has lots of players, no need to think any single one will "Win the war".
Here is what i believe, it is based on nothing more than my opinion.
The iphone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st gui based mac's
The Iphone is tightly controlled by Apple
So were the 1st gui mac's
The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... Mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on it's head.
Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did loose the PC war you know.
You kidding right?
Why people always think that Apple wants to be dominant in Computer Industry? There's no war between mac and pc. Apple is just a great business machine that makes money of great products.
Macs have never failed. Apple failed few times. iPhone will not fail because iPod never failed. Who you think will create a phone that is 100% open and 100% customizable with cheap price and no string attached? Google? I don't think so. This phone exist in a world where companies dont work for profit.
Second, you can tell someone who's just trying to just get attention by picking a fight on a thread by the fact that they respond to each reply immediately... zero posts between replys. Indicates an interest in pushing buttons, not discourse.
Finally, anyone who can't see the difference between trajectory (Apple up, MS down) and monopoly driven market share is pretty clueless.
People today largely don't understand the context of the Apple versus PC competition. Apple was a small company with a small budget that was struggling against an entrenched market already using PCs. Moreover, those PCs were associated with IBM, which at the time could do no wrong. It isn't like Apple and IBM started off at the same time, and Apple ended up on the bottom. Finally, Apple might have not won that battle, but unlike most other competitors long gone, APple is still around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
This whole thesis is completely wrong simply based on the fact that the Macintosh is still tightly controlled by Apple. The Macintosh is currently growing faster than the entire Windows market.
The original Macs did not fail. How exactly are you gauging success or failure? Apple as a company lost direction because of poor management, not because of its business model.
Apple did not really start the mobile phone as a "mini computer". They simply have done it better.
This is the conventional wisdom, but personally I don't think that's why Windows became ubiquitous over MacOS. DOS/Windows was cheaper...
Windows being cheaper was not the factor at all. Apple created it's own market from scratch whereas MS piggybacked itself onto IBM's existing enterprise market. A huge market! IBM hired MS to develop for them and virtually handed them that market. MS did nothing but ride the wave then steal ideas from Apple. That is THE reason and only reason why MS is where it is today.
So Google creates a "PC" like OS for cell phones. So what? Where's that single mass market to place that OS into? IBM controlled the entire enterprise market hence MS succeeded in plating it's OS with one stroke. Who controls the cell phone market? No one. Too many players here. It's an entirely different situation.
Compared to ? Nothing- it doesn't matter. Nobody talks about it anymore . It has no buzz. It's relegated to the back of the store. I could go on and on. It's a joke.
Wow. A "joke"? Did you have any clue what you were buying when you whipped out your credit card?
It's a stellar product that is just before its time. I have every new rental sitting on mine for the entire family to enjoy at their leisure. No returning discs in a hurry - no missing a movie because you were too busy the week it came out.
Oh, and no more burning home movie DVDs. I haven't had to buy a single DVD-RW in I don't know how long.
Oh, yeah...forgot to mention the music streaming to the main entertainment room.
Poor management bred a poor business model. I am not sure why you think their business model from 1985-1995 was good.
There were certainly many faults during that time, but I'm guessing TenoBell is referring Apple's unwavering integrated SW/HW model and lack of desire to produce profit-less, budget PCs.
Oh and by the way. Still today microsoft computers with "vista" still outsells apple 30 to 1
Outsell is one thing, but out perform is another. AAPL is performing so the company has to be selling more hardware than MS ran computers because their stocks are not.
Also, Apple's virus to computer ratio looks a lot better than MS's Vista's.
There were certainly many faults during that time, but I'm guessing TenoBell is referring Apple's unwavering model of integrated SW/HW model and not producing profit-less, budget PCs.
Second, you can tell someone who's just trying to just get attention by picking a fight on a thread by the fact that they respond to each reply immediately... zero posts between replys. Indicates an interest in pushing buttons, not discourse.
Finally, anyone who can't see the difference between trajectory (Apple up, MS down) and monopoly driven market share is pretty clueless.
The ability to install the windows OS on and hardware made for competition.
Competition breeds price drops.
Competition also breeds also new developments.
This all still fits my point...
Apple=Socialist Computing
Windows=Free market computing
Again the iphone business model looks the same to me.
Good grief, Okeefe...you funny, dude!
"Competition" - you say? This from the company that got sued over its monopolistic practices? And which just managed to duck out from most of the penalties from it when it realized the importance of Washington connections and got favorable Justice Dept and judicial treatment?
Explain the "new developments" part to me, I'm not seeing it. I see it in Apple's product line, I'm not seeing it much from Dell, HP, Lenovo, or <cough> MSFT.
The part that really got me was the silly Apple=Socialist computing, Windows=Free Market pairing.
I refer to the well documented monopolistic practices of MSFT, and would include its repeated attempts to extend that monopoly thru its WMA DRM, DirectX and other initiatives.
If anything had the look and feel of "socialist computing" (whatever that is...) it would be the schlock that passes for software emanating out of Redmond: clunky, slow, ugly, buggy crap that's always 3-5 years behind the curve. It's going the way of the American auto industry -- poorly designed, cheaply made, and not worth paying for.
That last part isn't anti-American (proud to be one, just wished Detroit could give us something to be proud about is all) -- just stating the obvious.
What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???
6.1%
They lost the PC war, get over it. I don't want to derail this in to a apple/windows conversation. My point is there business plan looks strikingly familiar to the old PC business plan. I also thing the company that takes the lead in the cell phone OS market will be the next "windows" (business wise that is)
First of all, if you define it as a war then you also see it as the war is ongoing because OS X, Unix and Linux are being installed every day. But is it really a war as you'd like to define it as a 1:1 ratio of an OS to OS unit sales comparison? For instance, Windows running on vending machines and point-of-sale systems really be counted along with consumer PC users? I don't think so, but it's only you and others like you who are concerned with the number of OS units sales among all systems, not Apple otherwise they would sold their OS to the masses long ago.
You also don't look at the fact that OS X is sold only on Macs per Apple's choice, not to their chagrin, so your war variables are false from that standpoint too. By your argument, PCs with modern components have lost the PC war because PCs with outdated components selling for $400 heavily outsell more expensive PCs. That is just ludicrous.
In closing, Apple has an 8.5% marketshare in the US. It's ranked third, which is very impressive when you consider the average selling price and the minimum selling price of both their desktops and notebooks compared to the top two. If unit sales, not profit, are what matter to you I respectively recommend that you never start your own company.
What's funny is that you obviously didn't "hear" most of the tech press complaining about Vista for the best part of 2 years.
By the way ... three years ago Microsoft computers with XP were outselling Apple Macs by 50 to 1. So what is your point exactly?
my dad has a mac PowerBook and he has a custom built pc and he never complains about vista. My girlfriend and her mother both have dells with vista they don't complain and my lady is a graphic designer for epitaph records. I would like a MacBook and a nice dell notebook I would love to have both. Way I have noticed is mac users are the biggest bitchers I have ever met lol. My iPhone is less then satisfactory I hope MacBooks aren't the same. The most funny thing about all of this is the war between the two companies I don't hear this much complaining from people About other competing markets. A lot of this is based on opinion, experience, and what is available to you. So everyone just... Please.... Relax! Enjoy the product you have and shut up. That goes for me too!
To be clarified a failure it has to be judged by some type of metric. Apple holds the largest marketshare of downloadable content, video and audio.
Your personal use of the AppleTV is not a valid metric for how well it is doing in the wider market.
I was asked if I owned one and was merely responding to a question and your personal feelings of denial in its failure is also not a valid metric measurement. That metric you quote is for iTunes not Apple TV. More people download and rent for iPods than AppleTv. Your comparison is baseless.
Comments
But none of this has anything to do with android. It hopefully will be a great system and have lots of success. Android does not have to loose for Apple to succeed. There is plenty of room for apple, RIM and android to do very well and to all thrive much as do all the car makers in the world. The monopoly of MS in the computer OS is really an anomaly in the business world, very few industries have a monopoly like that and the smart phone industry has lots of players, no need to think any single one will "Win the war".
Here is what i believe, it is based on nothing more than my opinion.
The iphone is a revolutionary new product.
So were the 1st gui based mac's
The Iphone is tightly controlled by Apple
So were the 1st gui mac's
The Iphone will fail the same way the original mac's did because of the tight hardware/software control. People will stop looking at their cell phones as "phones" and see them for what they are... Mini computers. Once people get a feel for a 'mini computer cell phone' that they can customize any way they like only having to pay for the data/voice plan. This market will be flipped on it's head.
Apple is once again starting this tech revolution, but there game plan looks to be the same to me. They did loose the PC war you know.
You kidding right?
Why people always think that Apple wants to be dominant in Computer Industry? There's no war between mac and pc. Apple is just a great business machine that makes money of great products.
Macs have never failed. Apple failed few times. iPhone will not fail because iPod never failed. Who you think will create a phone that is 100% open and 100% customizable with cheap price and no string attached? Google? I don't think so. This phone exist in a world where companies dont work for profit.
I think your being short sighted..
.
First, its "I think you're...", not 'your'.
Second, you can tell someone who's just trying to just get attention by picking a fight on a thread by the fact that they respond to each reply immediately... zero posts between replys. Indicates an interest in pushing buttons, not discourse.
Finally, anyone who can't see the difference between trajectory (Apple up, MS down) and monopoly driven market share is pretty clueless.
http://www.yamipod.com/main/modules/home/
Yea... that looks like allot of fun.
So which is it?
1) iTunes sucks and we're all being tortured by 'having' to use it, or
2) iTunes makes alternatives look like crap (i.e. is better.)
This whole thesis is completely wrong simply based on the fact that the Macintosh is still tightly controlled by Apple. The Macintosh is currently growing faster than the entire Windows market.
The original Macs did not fail. How exactly are you gauging success or failure? Apple as a company lost direction because of poor management, not because of its business model.
Apple did not really start the mobile phone as a "mini computer". They simply have done it better.
What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???
6.1%
They lost the PC war, get over it.
Who said the "PC war" is over? In the scheme of things, it's just started.
This is the conventional wisdom, but personally I don't think that's why Windows became ubiquitous over MacOS. DOS/Windows was cheaper...
Windows being cheaper was not the factor at all. Apple created it's own market from scratch whereas MS piggybacked itself onto IBM's existing enterprise market. A huge market! IBM hired MS to develop for them and virtually handed them that market. MS did nothing but ride the wave then steal ideas from Apple. That is THE reason and only reason why MS is where it is today.
So Google creates a "PC" like OS for cell phones. So what? Where's that single mass market to place that OS into? IBM controlled the entire enterprise market hence MS succeeded in plating it's OS with one stroke. Who controls the cell phone market? No one. Too many players here. It's an entirely different situation.
Apple as a company lost direction because of poor management, not because of its business model.
Poor management bred a poor business model. I am not sure why you think their business model from 1985-1995 was good.
Compared to ? Nothing- it doesn't matter. Nobody talks about it anymore . It has no buzz. It's relegated to the back of the store. I could go on and on. It's a joke.
Wow. A "joke"? Did you have any clue what you were buying when you whipped out your credit card?
It's a stellar product that is just before its time. I have every new rental sitting on mine for the entire family to enjoy at their leisure. No returning discs in a hurry - no missing a movie because you were too busy the week it came out.
Oh, and no more burning home movie DVDs. I haven't had to buy a single DVD-RW in I don't know how long.
Oh, yeah...forgot to mention the music streaming to the main entertainment room.
Not bad for a "joke".
Poor management bred a poor business model. I am not sure why you think their business model from 1985-1995 was good.
There were certainly many faults during that time, but I'm guessing TenoBell is referring Apple's unwavering integrated SW/HW model and lack of desire to produce profit-less, budget PCs.
Oh and by the way. Still today microsoft computers with "vista" still outsells apple 30 to 1
Outsell is one thing, but out perform is another. AAPL is performing so the company has to be selling more hardware than MS ran computers because their stocks are not.
Also, Apple's virus to computer ratio looks a lot better than MS's Vista's.
There were certainly many faults during that time, but I'm guessing TenoBell is referring Apple's unwavering model of integrated SW/HW model and not producing profit-less, budget PCs.
Yes that is exactly what I was talking about.
Oh and by the way. Still today microsoft computers with "vista" still outsells apple 30 to 1.
XP still outsells Vista.
To be clarified a failure it has to be judged by some type of metric. Apple holds the largest marketshare of downloadable content, video and audio.
Your personal use of the AppleTV is not a valid metric for how well it is doing in the wider market.
Heh heh, I think you're wasting your breath (and your bandwidth) trying to explain to this teckstud guy.
First, its "I think you're...", not 'your'.
Second, you can tell someone who's just trying to just get attention by picking a fight on a thread by the fact that they respond to each reply immediately... zero posts between replys. Indicates an interest in pushing buttons, not discourse.
Finally, anyone who can't see the difference between trajectory (Apple up, MS down) and monopoly driven market share is pretty clueless.
Well said. And, 'nuff said.
All you guys are saying "price won the PC war".
Well what caused the price difference?
The ability to install the windows OS on and hardware made for competition.
Competition breeds price drops.
Competition also breeds also new developments.
This all still fits my point...
Apple=Socialist Computing
Windows=Free market computing
Again the iphone business model looks the same to me.
"Competition" - you say? This from the company that got sued over its monopolistic practices? And which just managed to duck out from most of the penalties from it when it realized the importance of Washington connections and got favorable Justice Dept and judicial treatment?
Explain the "new developments" part to me, I'm not seeing it. I see it in Apple's product line, I'm not seeing it much from Dell, HP, Lenovo, or <cough> MSFT.
The part that really got me was the silly Apple=Socialist computing, Windows=Free Market pairing.
I refer to the well documented monopolistic practices of MSFT, and would include its repeated attempts to extend that monopoly thru its WMA DRM, DirectX and other initiatives.
If anything had the look and feel of "socialist computing" (whatever that is...) it would be the schlock that passes for software emanating out of Redmond: clunky, slow, ugly, buggy crap that's always 3-5 years behind the curve. It's going the way of the American auto industry -- poorly designed, cheaply made, and not worth paying for.
That last part isn't anti-American (proud to be one, just wished Detroit could give us something to be proud about is all) -- just stating the obvious.
What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???
6.1%
They lost the PC war, get over it. I don't want to derail this in to a apple/windows conversation. My point is there business plan looks strikingly familiar to the old PC business plan. I also thing the company that takes the lead in the cell phone OS market will be the next "windows" (business wise that is)
First of all, if you define it as a war then you also see it as the war is ongoing because OS X, Unix and Linux are being installed every day. But is it really a war as you'd like to define it as a 1:1 ratio of an OS to OS unit sales comparison? For instance, Windows running on vending machines and point-of-sale systems really be counted along with consumer PC users? I don't think so, but it's only you and others like you who are concerned with the number of OS units sales among all systems, not Apple otherwise they would sold their OS to the masses long ago.
You also don't look at the fact that OS X is sold only on Macs per Apple's choice, not to their chagrin, so your war variables are false from that standpoint too. By your argument, PCs with modern components have lost the PC war because PCs with outdated components selling for $400 heavily outsell more expensive PCs. That is just ludicrous.
In closing, Apple has an 8.5% marketshare in the US. It's ranked third, which is very impressive when you consider the average selling price and the minimum selling price of both their desktops and notebooks compared to the top two. If unit sales, not profit, are what matter to you I respectively recommend that you never start your own company.
What's funny is that you obviously didn't "hear" most of the tech press complaining about Vista for the best part of 2 years.
By the way ... three years ago Microsoft computers with XP were outselling Apple Macs by 50 to 1. So what is your point exactly?
my dad has a mac PowerBook and he has a custom built pc and he never complains about vista. My girlfriend and her mother both have dells with vista they don't complain and my lady is a graphic designer for epitaph records. I would like a MacBook and a nice dell notebook I would love to have both. Way I have noticed is mac users are the biggest bitchers I have ever met lol. My iPhone is less then satisfactory I hope MacBooks aren't the same. The most funny thing about all of this is the war between the two companies I don't hear this much complaining from people About other competing markets. A lot of this is based on opinion, experience, and what is available to you. So everyone just... Please.... Relax! Enjoy the product you have and shut up. That goes for me too!
To be clarified a failure it has to be judged by some type of metric. Apple holds the largest marketshare of downloadable content, video and audio.
Your personal use of the AppleTV is not a valid metric for how well it is doing in the wider market.
I was asked if I owned one and was merely responding to a question and your personal feelings of denial in its failure is also not a valid metric measurement. That metric you quote is for iTunes not Apple TV. More people download and rent for iPods than AppleTv. Your comparison is baseless.
Heh heh, I think you're wasting your breath (and your bandwidth) trying to explain to this teckstud guy.
I am so glad to see you are in such a happy minority that thinks AppleTv is such a success.
You must be holding your breath with your foot in your mouth again- you can take it out now.