or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › The next ten years of Mac OS X
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The next ten years of Mac OS X

post #1 of 68
Thread Starter 
Apple celebrated three ten year anniversaries in 2011, making 2012 its first full year in its second decade of Mac OS X development, iPod devices and iTunes, and its retail operations, even as the company takes on new business categories ranging from iAd to iCloud to Siri. Here, in part one, is a look at where the company is headed for its next decade of Mac OS X.

The next ten years of Mac OS X: core OS and web technologies

Steve Jobs launched the initial 10.0 version of Mac OS X in March 2001, describing it as a platform Apple would use over the next fifteen years, or roughly the same period of time the "classic Mac OS" had been used to power the Macintosh at the time. When he said that, Jobs also likely had in mind that NeXT, which built the operating system that Mac OS X was built on, was itself 15 years old in 2001 (having existed since his departure from Apple in 1986).

Ten years ago, Apple was leveraging the proven technology and enabling potential of NeXTSTEP's Unix core, software largely being pushed forward by Linux and the FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD open source projects, to deliver Mac OS X as an viable operating system that could compete against Microsoft's Windows NT-based offerings. Over the past decade, however, Apple has become the primary vendor of Unix workstations and has arguably taken over in leading mainstream Unix development.



Apple now owns and administrates CUPS, the open Common Unix Printing System used by Linux and Unix distributions, and has taken the lead in replacing the aging GNU C Compiler (originally released by Richard Stallman in 1987 as the core of a free development toolchain for Unix) with its own, next generation LLVM/Clang/LLDB development tools. Because Macs and iOS devices share the same Xcode development tools incorporating these technologies, Apple now has enormous leverage in deploying technologies that can and will gain broad adoption, something it struggled to do just a decade ago.

A parallel example of this is that Apple has taken over the role of leading development of the open source web browser with WebKit, a move that has pushed the commercial web from supporting proprietary plugins such as Adobe Flash and Microsoft Silverlight to backing the open HTML5 specification, with Apple openly (and freely) sharing its own Canvas 2D HTML5 drawing technology and other community co-developments and advancements related to CSS and JavaScript.

While leading and advancing open development of core OS technologies, tools and platforms, Apple has also achieved a driving position behind open standards. In media, this has shifted the world from incompatible competition between QuickTime's Sorenson codecs, Microsoft's Windows Media, Real Networks and Flash/On2 TrueMotion and replaced it (in just the last few years) with open competition based on MPEG AAC/H.264.



Apple has also bridged incompatible efforts by ATI and NVidia to drive open standards for graphics development and general purpose computing that can take full advantage of advanced graphics processors from any vendor, backing the existing OpenGL and OpenGL ES and developing OpenCL itself as an open specification for spinning off computationally complex tasks to any and all available processor cores. Apple has also supported the Khronos Group's COLLADA 3D format in its new Scene Kit, which appears to have the potential for meshing with sophisticated new mapping appellations Apple has hinted at for iOS (and which have spurred the company to acquire three maps-related companies over the past few years).

While the user interface of Mac OS X Lion (and its iOS sibling) continues to drift toward simplicity, its underpinnings are becoming increasingly sophisticated, with support for new code parallelism, managed by Grand Central Dispatch, to take advantage of multiple cores and new types of processor cores, as well as newer storage technologies (such as SSD) which require new ways of working with data to fully optimize their advantages. At the same time, Apple has finally gotten to the point where it can put down a series of outdated APIs (notably Carbon, the procedural development tools inherited from the classic Mac OS) and focus exclusively on modern 64-bit Cocoa, just as iOS devices have.

Mac OS X and iOS have shared technologies back and forth in each major release. In the near future, Mac OS X is likely to absorb recent iOS 5 feature including expanded Twitter integration; new support for configurable, app and system originating notifications (including getting iMessage from and sharing proprietary IM iChat features to iOS); iOS-exclusive App Store features including in-app purchases and Game Center support; system wide support for AirPlay video distribution (rather than just from iTunes); assistance features powered by Siri and expanded support for iCloud documents (including support in new iWork apps) and data management (such as the reappearance of Settings and Keychain sync between Macs, lost in the transition from MobileMe to iCloud).

On page 2 of 2: He with the gold makes the rules, Simplicity shift

He with the gold makes the rules

Over the next decade, Apple will continue to lead the development of web standards and incrementally share and incorporate core OS technologies with the greater Unix community, very likely on a faster pace than it has previously, simply because it now has a very different position in the technology world that it had ten or even five years ago. Apple will continue to gain stature in pushing the direction of operating system and software development technology, in large part because it is now building the most hardware and earning the most profits.

The company is on course to pass HP in personal computer shipments next year, but it also now has a smartphone and personal music player business that leads Nokia, Samsung or Sony, forcing market research groups to divide Apple's sales into segments so they can be compared in unflattering ways against dissimilar sales of products (the entire mobile market), groups of manufacturers sharing a common element (such as the Android "platform") or mass shipments of products that are not profitable nor sustainable (HP's abandoned TouchPad or Amazon's loss leader Kindle Fire).

Beyond unit sales, Apple also earns far more in revenues and profits than any of the various hardware makers it competes with in device sales. Additionally, Apple is one of the few companies that develops its own software platforms, giving it a unique ability to chart its own future and differentiate its products. The failure of HP's Palm webOS, Nokia's Symbian and RIM's Blackberry are only making Apple more unique in that regard. Conversely, the overall failure of Windows Phone 7 and the fractionalization issues (and pure lack of profit) affecting Android licensees are highlighting the advantages of owning one's own platform (the very reason Nokia, HP and RIM distanced themselves from adopting Android last year).



The future of Mac OS X and its mobile iOS sibling will harness new directions in technology: principally, computers that no longer rely on just faster GHz clocks but can take full advantage of multiple cores and multiple types of cores. Apple's advantage in mobile devices is already evident in the fact that, for example, Android devices like the latest Galaxy Nexus require 1.2 GHz, dual core processors with multiple CPU cores and twice the RAM to match the smooth graphics interface performance of the nearly three year old iPhone 3GS. Windows devices similarly require hotter chips and more RAM just to approximate the functionality of the far less expensive hardware of the iPad, a reality that has forced Microsoft to begin porting portions of its platform to run on more efficient ARM chips.

Simplicity shift

Apple will also continue its efforts to simplify away complexities in the computing world such as the conventional file system, replacing it with cloud-coordinated, secured documents that update intelligently across devices without requiring manual intervention by users. The App Store, iCloud, Internet Recovery, and iTunes Match have already revolutionized how software and content is distributed and stored, increasing erasing the necessity of physical media, which will in turn allow computing devices to become increasingly mobile.



And while Apple revolutionized the computing user interface over the last decade with multitouch gestures, winning an ideological battle against devices driven by primarily by physical keyboards and buttons, Apple's Siri promises to lead a new charge in pushing voice as a natural user interface, something that's even more intuitive than mousing or tapping, and for many people, more accessible.

Although Apple began the last decade by branching out into general purpose devices with the then new iPod (something that subsequently quickly overtook the Mac in sales volumes), it closed the decade with the vast majority of its unit sales (including half of its iPods) being driven by iOS, the mobile edition of Mac OS X.

Going forward, Apple is expected to venture into new markets with its operating system and development tools, increasing its presence in the living room on HTDVs and likely pushing further into the casual gaming market the iPod touch reinvented.

This year also marks the first year of the second decade of iTunes and the iPod, the future of which will be outlined in part two.

The next ten years of Mac OS X
The next ten years of iPod and iTunes
The next ten years of Apple Retail
post #2 of 68
<Steve Jobs launched the initial 10.0 version of Mac OS X in March 2010>

I think you mean "March 2001".
post #3 of 68
"Steve Jobs launched the initial 10.0 version of Mac OS X in March 2010." Maybe 2001?
post #4 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

...being driven by iOS, the mobile edition of Mac OS X.

Pardon?
post #5 of 68
We have five years of OS X left at best.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #6 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

We have five years of OS X left at best.

This is rather exciting. I think Mac OS 10.7 is a very polished and defined operating system. Every year it seems like the OS gets even sleeker than the prior year. I wonder if Apple will redefine the OS with Mac OS 11 or continue on with the Mac OS 10 numbering system.
post #7 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feynman View Post

This is rather exciting. I think Mac OS 10.7 is a very polished and defined operating system. Every year it seems like the OS gets even sleeker than the prior year. I wonder if Apple will redefine the OS with Mac OS 11 or continue on with the Mac OS 10 numbering system.

Unless there is a major reworking of the underlying architecture of the OS, I don't see a true Mac OS 11 in the near future. The idea of Mac OS X, much like its little brother iOS, is that it is basically the same platform from one version to the next, with added features and refinement as time moves on. Mac OS 11, IMO, would be a complete rethinking of how computer operating systems actually operate, and thus would validate Apple's decision to name it as such.
post #8 of 68
As a current user of Windows, and in the spirit of being objective, I believe both Apple platforms and Microsoft platforms both deserve success.

Currently Mac OSX has tiny market share for PC's, where Microsoft have most of the market share. Whereas with mobile Apple have a high market share, and Microsoft have a tiny market share with Windows Phone 7.5. In both cases just because a company has tiny market share doesn't make the product bad, in fact the competing product is often as good.

I believe Microsoft deserve more success with Windows Phone 7.5, because it really is a great product. On the other hand Apple also deserve more market share with Mac OSX, again because its a great product. I'd love to see a little more balance between the user's of the companies platforms, but that's for marketing, the press, and consumers to decide...
post #9 of 68
What a feat. 1500 words about nothing!
post #10 of 68
I don't see any reason why a Mac OS 11 will come about - other than a marketing term. Apple can incrementally improve OSX with any features, including fusing in iOS type features, adding additional chip support, while striving to improve the core. To rebuild a full operating system from scratch seems insane these days, it would just take too long, cost too much, and create compatibility issues. Microsoft for example seem to be sticking to Windows NT, with no other alternative I can see (3.1 to 4.0, 2000, XP, Vista, 7, 8)

The version numbers of Apple's operating systems is a little confusing, because Mac OS 1 to 9, where not individual platforms, they were mostly incremental updates (Classic Mac OSX). So because consumers have stuck with OSX for so long, they have to assume there is a Mac OS11 right?

I think there will be, but it will be a marketing term for this is a big release of Mac OSX. Not a complete rebuild or significant change to underlying systems, like OSX was.
post #11 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

We have five years of OS X left at best.

I think that statement is as well supported as the article's conclusion that OS-X is headed towards ever increasing "simplicity."

Which is to say, I don't think you have any real support or evidence for that at all.
post #12 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden99 View Post

... Currently Mac OSX has tiny market share for PC's ...

You're living in the past.

For the last three years at least, one out of every four consumer computer purchases has been a Mac. The market share figures don't show this as they are skewed by large corporate purchases, but even if you ignore the sales and focus on overall market share alone it's not "tiny" and hasn't been for a while now.
post #13 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloodshotrollin'red View Post

Pardon?

iOS is OS X lite. a lot of the security appliances will detect it as such. it's not some magical written from scratch OS
post #14 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shogun View Post

What a feat. 1500 words about nothing!

"Sour Grapes!" says the Fox.
post #15 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

You're living in the past.

For the last three years at least, one out of every four consumer computer purchases has been a Mac. The market share figures don't show this as they are skewed by large corporate purchases, but even if you ignore the sales and focus on overall market share alone it's not "tiny" and hasn't been for a while now.

Well I’m not sure what word to use instead of tiny, the statistics aren't there to give me a clear picture, but I know for a fact that Microsoft have sold over 500 million copies of Windows 7 since release. 400 million Windows based PC's are predicted to ship this year. Why is large corporate purchases a bad thing, obviosuly these companies trust in Microsoft's quality products. Many of these so called corporate purchases, could be for small to meduim size business', which isn't a bad area to have a foothold in.

I could also argue their isn't solid evidence of Windows Phone 7.5 sales, but I won’t, because I was making an overall statement, which is more or less true - you can pick at the specifics if you must.
post #16 of 68
I'm really surprised to not see more articles/discussions like this after the launch of 10.7.

To put it in the most simplified terms, if you're naming your OS releases after big cats, shouldn't Lion logically be the "last" release of it's kind, as the "King of the beasts?".

This is an enormously simple observation to put forward as evidence; but really... what do you call the next release after Lion? Do you switch animals? Or is this the end of the line for OSX as we get ready for OS11.

I'd say that if we don't get some kind of tease of 10.8 at either WWDC or a special event by the end of the year, that to me would be a sign that something more significant is in the works.
post #17 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feynman View Post

This is rather exciting. I think Mac OS 10.7 is a very polished and defined operating system. Every year it seems like the OS gets even sleeker than the prior year. I wonder if Apple will redefine the OS with Mac OS 11 or continue on with the Mac OS 10 numbering system.

I don't see them going to OS 11 until there is some underlying problem with OS 10 that stops them developing it further. Classic Mac OS needed replacing because tacking on what had become expected features as hardware got more powerful (i.e. pre-emptive multi-tasking) was proving next to impossible.

I don't see any major features that other OS's have that Mac OS X can't do at the moment, so there is not the same need at the moment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

You're living in the past.

For the last three years at least, one out of every four consumer computer purchases has been a Mac. The market share figures don't show this as they are skewed by large corporate purchases, but even if you ignore the sales and focus on overall market share alone it's not "tiny" and hasn't been for a while now.

I think you're possibly mistaking the USA with the World. One of of every four consumer computer purchases in the world is almost certainly not an Apple, plus the Corporate world accounts for huge numbers of PC purchases, which Windows still dominates.

I'd love it if Apple really were 25% of computer sales, but it's just not the case.
post #18 of 68
What about sabretooth? The best logical follow up, and the coolest looking cat of all
post #19 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden99 View Post

Well Im not sure what word to use instead of tiny, the statistics aren't there to give me a clear picture, but I know for a fact that Microsoft have sold over 500 million copies of Windows 7 since release. 400 million Windows based PC's are predicted to ship this year. Why is large corporate purchases a bad thing, obviosuly these companies trust in Microsoft's quality products. Many of these so called corporate purchases, could be for small to meduim size business', which isn't a bad area to have a foothold in.

I could also argue their isn't solid evidence of Windows Phone 7.5 sales, but I wont, because I was making an overall statement, which is more or less true - you can pick at the specifics if you must.

The difference between Macs and WP7 is that while both have minority market share, the Macintosh platform is big enough and in the right places to support nearly 5 million +$1000, highly profitable computer unit sales per quarter for Apple. The Mac platform is also important enough to have substantial backing from nearly all major desktop OS developers. It also has an installed base of 60 million users.

That's all very small compared to Windows PC makers in total (+1 billion installed base), but Macs are far more profitable that PC sales, so much so that Apple now makes more money than HP and Dell and Microsoft and is worth more, despite selling a fraction of their partial component units of the PC.

Now look at WP7. You can say its a nice product, but that doesn't matter if it's not actually selling units. Microsoft's mobile market share was once nearly 15% or so. WM6 is still around 2-5% (and declining rapidly) while WP7 has barely achieved a 1% blip of smartphone sales, not enough to generate substantial profits for MS or its licensees. It's also not progressing as quickly as iOS (or even Android) and lacks the "mind share" of either, making it very unlikely that things are going to flip around and suddenly become a viable platform. It's far more likely to fade away like the Zune.

Additionally, this is a story about Apple's next decade of Mac/iOS software. You think WP7 will be around in any form in three years? That's debatable. Apple is clearly set to own tablets, ultra books and PCs costing more than $900 for several years.

So yeah, that's a pretty vast difference in the status quo and future prospects for the Mac OS and WP7. No amount of comparing unrelated percentages refutes that reality.
post #20 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden99 View Post

What about sabretooth? The best logical follow up, and the coolest looking cat of all

Sabertooth is also extinct, because it wasn't fit to survive...

Mac Pro, 8 Core, 32 GB RAM, nVidia GTX 285 1 GB, 2 TB storage, 240 GB OWC Mercury Extreme SSD, 30'' Cinema Display, 27'' iMac, 24'' iMac, 17'' MBP, 13'' MBP, 32 GB iPhone 4, 64 GB iPad 3

Reply

Mac Pro, 8 Core, 32 GB RAM, nVidia GTX 285 1 GB, 2 TB storage, 240 GB OWC Mercury Extreme SSD, 30'' Cinema Display, 27'' iMac, 24'' iMac, 17'' MBP, 13'' MBP, 32 GB iPhone 4, 64 GB iPad 3

Reply
post #21 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by 11thIndian View Post

I'm really surprised to not see more articles/discussions like this after the launch of 10.7.

To put it in the most simplified terms, if you're naming your OS releases after big cats, shouldn't Lion logically be the "last" release of it's kind, as the "King of the beasts?".

This is an enormously simple observation to put forward as evidence; but really... what do you call the next release after Lion? Do you switch animals? Or is this the end of the line for OSX as we get ready for OS11.

I'd say that if we don't get some kind of tease of 10.8 at either WWDC or a special event by the end of the year, that to me would be a sign that something more significant is in the works.

That's rather silly, You could have said after Cheetah, there was no room for anything faster.

The "code name" of the OS doesn't matter at all, nor does the version number. They're both arbitrary marketing names. The only thing Apple needs to concern itself with is making sure that its developing a product the mass market will buy.

There are all sorts of incremental improvements Apple can make to OS X every year or year & a half. It's pretty stupendous for one to suggest that technology has reached a peak just because one is too unfamiliar with what's on the horizon to understand what might be next.
post #22 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

The difference between Macs and WP7 is that while both have minority market share, the Macintosh platform is big enough and in the right places to support nearly 5 million +$1000, highly profitable computer unit sales per quarter for Apple. The Mac platform is also important enough to have substantial backing from nearly all major desktop OS developers. It also has an installed base of 60 million users.

That's all very small compared to Windows PC makers in total (+1 billion installed base), but Macs are far more profitable that PC sales, so much so that Apple now makes more money than HP and Dell and Microsoft and is worth more, despite selling a fraction of their partial component units of the PC.

Now look at WP7. You can say its a nice product, but that doesn't matter if it's not actually selling units. Microsoft's mobile market share was once nearly 15% or so. WM6 is still around 2-5% (and declining rapidly) while WP7 has barely achieved a 1% blip of smartphone sales, not enough to generate substantial profits for MS or its licensees. It's also not progressing as quickly as iOS (or even Android) and lacks the "mind share" of either, making it very unlikely that things are going to flip around and suddenly become a viable platform. It's far more likely to fade away like the Zune.

Additionally, this is a story about Apple's next decade of Mac/iOS software. You think WP7 will be around in any form in three years? That's debatable. Apple is clearly set to own tablets, ultra books and PCs costing more than $900 for several years.

So yeah, that's a pretty vast difference in the status quo and future prospects for the Mac OS and WP7. No amount of comparing unrelated percentages refutes that reality.

As Im not a shareholder, like most consumers, I'll judge the difference on profit alone, not share price, with Apple making US$ 25.922 billion, and Microsoft making US$ 23.15 billion in 2011 (Wikipedia), not such a vast difference after all.

Windows Phone 7.5 is a new platform, but I highly doubt it is only one percent of the market, I'm sure I have seen higher statistics than that, assuming they are even accurate. I expect an improvement in market share this year, especially near the end of the year (with Apollo and superphones, and tango and low-end phones). I don't see Microsoft leaving the sector, it's to important. The Zune was a closed harwarde solution, that wouldn't allow Microsoft to build a true open platform, following their Windows business model. There is a growing 'mind share' of people who have positive experiences with WP7.5, and enjoy the fresh interface.

"Apple is clearly set to own tablets, ultra books and PCs costing more than $900 for several years."
Yeah probably true, no matter how good Windows 8 is. But the overall statement I initially stick to. I believe Mac OSX, and Windows Phone 7.5 deserve more market share, but that's not for me to decide.
I believe the market for PC's that cost more than US $900 is larger than you think...A lot of gamers, enthusiats and business people still buy mid to high end systems
post #23 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario View Post

Sabertooth is also extinct, because it wasn't fit to survive...

Haha yeah true, unless we bring them back
Though they still wouldn't be fit to survive in today's world.
Probably not the best product name
post #24 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by hittrj01 View Post

Unless there is a major reworking of the underlying architecture of the OS, I don't see a true Mac OS 11 in the near future. The idea of Mac OS X, much like its little brother iOS, is that it is basically the same platform from one version to the next, with added features and refinement as time moves on. Mac OS 11, IMO, would be a complete rethinking of how computer operating systems actually operate, and thus would validate Apple's decision to name it as such.

I agree. I think Apple will continue using OS X 10.8, .9 etc...for a little while longer unless like stated above they completely rework the OS and UI etc. I'm quite happy with it. Haven't updated to Lion yet, as there are no huge features that I really need. SL is treating me fine. Ill wait and see what 10.8 brings though. Or if get a new Mac before then and Lion is installed, then that's cool too.
post #25 of 68
I offer this alternate view:

Read it and see what you think. Then watch what happens with Apple's IOS, OS X, iPad and iPod.

--Ben
post #26 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by fyngyrz View Post

I offer this alternate view:

Read it and see what you think. Then watch what happens with Apple's IOS, OS X, iPad and iPod.

--Ben

Some good stuff in there I would bet that will happen, just makes sense. Multicore, bigger storage, faster ram use for sure, that's where we are headed obviously. The 3D stuff, I'm not so sure about. That still seems a ways out maybe, as I don't see a rationale for it (yet) IMO. But who knows.
post #27 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden99 View Post

Well I’m not sure what word to use instead of tiny, the statistics aren't there to give me a clear picture, but I know for a fact that Microsoft have sold over 500 million copies of Windows 7 since release. 400 million Windows based PC's are predicted to ship this year. Why is large corporate purchases a bad thing, obviosuly these companies trust in Microsoft's quality products.

Not much to do with trust or quality, tho' I'll admit MS has made some strides in both.

However, the big factors are:
-Inertia. We've done it this way, we're doing it this way, we will continue to do it this way.
-Compatibility with company developed in-house apps (which only have to support one platform - and corps lack Apple developers in the first place).
-IT's historically ingrained cultural animosity toward OS X.
-Short-term focus on this quarter's bottom line driving the purchase of $4-600 computers, despite studies showing Apple's lower TCO (total cost of ownership) over a machine's useful lifetime.
-Large corporate sales and support forces.
-And one Apple-like trait: Simplicity in the IT operations if everything is either Win Server or Win. I.e., easier diagnosis, less iterations of updates, fewer versions of apps to write, etc.

And on the consumer side, all the big box and multiplicity of other retail and web outlets. And many watching their own bottom lines and limited incomes looking for laptops under $500 or even $400. For which they may have existing apps as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post

I think you're possibly mistaking the USA with the World. One of of every four consumer computer purchases in the world is almost certainly not an Apple, plus the Corporate world accounts for huge numbers of PC purchases, which Windows still dominates.

I'd love it if Apple really were 25% of computer sales, but it's just not the case.

Remember that the definition of "computers" is currently up for grabs. If I can do productivity, e-mail, chat, photo and movie editing, web-surfing, cloud-sync, etc., etc. on a device, that's certainly "a computer."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

The difference between Macs and WP7 is that while both have minority market share, the Macintosh platform is big enough and in the right places to support nearly 5 million +$1000, highly profitable computer unit sales per quarter for Apple....

..That's all very small compared to Windows PC makers in total (+1 billion installed base), but Macs are far more profitable that PC sales, so much so that Apple now makes more money than HP and Dell and Microsoft and is worth more, despite selling a fraction of their partial component units of the PC.

Now look at WP7. You can say its a nice product, but that doesn't matter if it's not actually selling units. Microsoft's mobile market share was once nearly 15% or so. WM6 is still around 2-5% (and declining rapidly) while WP7 has barely achieved a 1% blip of smartphone sales, not enough to generate substantial profits for MS or its licensees. It's also not progressing as quickly as iOS (or even Android) and lacks the "mind share" of either, making it very unlikely that things are going to flip around and suddenly become a viable platform. It's far more likely to fade away like the Zune.

Additionally, this is a story about Apple's next decade of Mac/iOS software. You think WP7 will be around in any form in three years? That's debatable. Apple is clearly set to own tablets, ultra books and PCs costing more than $900 for several years.

So yeah, that's a pretty vast difference in the status quo and future prospects for the Mac OS and WP7. No amount of comparing unrelated percentages refutes that reality.

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to toss Apple's 90% share of $1000+ computers against MS/Intel/and the bunch's churning out of endless vanilla low-end PC's

Profit market share, momentum, buzz, status and growth combined are at least as important as market unit share, especially at the scale Apple's finally achieved, however, MS is still positioned to be a profitable and relevant company in many areas for a long time to come. If you follow them seriously (which is much less entertaining than following Apple, unless you have an Enterprise and IT jones), the breadth of their products and development efforts is actually impressive.

More important they go back and forth but are showing an overall trend to work nicely with Apple products, and are moving towards supporting and writing apps for iOS. The computing world of the future will still be multi-vendor in key ways.

Nor have they given up entirely on the consumer. Their partnership with Ford on "Sync" is one example - and your iDevice is somewhat supported on Sync. Everyone talks about the "living room being the last frontier," but the car cabin is another important ubiquitous environment for many 10's of millions. And MS has the lead here.

Also, tablet penetration is small in world terms, and Smart Phones are still a maturing market. Once the whole WP 8 ecosystem is out there, I still think there's a chance for MS to grab some consumer phone share from Android and some business tablet and phone market share from Apple, they could yet be a player in parts of the mobile market. Better news yet for Mr. Softie, Ballmer won't be around forever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden99 View Post

What about sabretooth? The best logical follow up, and the coolest looking cat of all

If OS X is getting simpler and more iOS-like, and all the PC's and other devices are getting smaller, Savannah and Abyssinian have a nice ring if we're not done with cats.

And then, LoLz, we could go the world of fiction: Grizabella, Sylvester, Garfield......

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #28 of 68
I'm not as concerned with what the OS will be like as I am the type of computers Apple will build that uses it.
post #29 of 68
"Not much to do with trust or quality, tho' I'll admit MS has made some strides in both."
Trust and quality is a personal user's opinon, I have not cosulted a slew of IT managers to query them on the differences, nor have you, but the sale figures are clear.
"Inertia. We've done it this way, we're doing it this way, we will continue to do it this way."
The same could be said of iOS, in the face of strides made with Windows Phone 7.5 - again the sales are the only truth, the rest is speculation.

I believe the market for PC's that cost more than US $900 is larger than you think...A lot of gamers, enthusiats, artists, and business people still buy mid to high end desktop systems for a variety of reasons.
I for one have a high end PC, from a few months ago that was significatly cheaper, but more importantly faster than any available Mac (+$3000 NZ, and yes I looked at all Mac's at the time).
post #30 of 68
Windows 8 rewrites the rule book. Frantic innovation ahead by both companies. Linux, not so much.
post #31 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

For the last three years at least, one out of every four consumer computer purchases has been a Mac.

You could make that subset even smaller and say ten out of every ten Mac computer purchases has been a Mac!.

That sounds even better!
post #32 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden99 View Post

As I’m not a shareholder, like most consumers, I'll judge the difference on profit alone, not share price, with Apple making US$ 25.922 billion, and Microsoft making US$ 23.15 billion in 2011 (Wikipedia), not such a vast difference after all.

Windows Phone 7.5 is a new platform, but I highly doubt it is only one percent of the market, I'm sure I have seen higher statistics than that, assuming they are even accurate. I expect an improvement in market share this year, especially near the end of the year (with Apollo and superphones, and tango and low-end phones). I don't see Microsoft leaving the sector, it's to important. The Zune was a closed harwarde solution, that wouldn't allow Microsoft to build a true open platform, following their Windows business model. There is a growing 'mind share' of people who have positive experiences with WP7.5, and enjoy the fresh interface.

"Apple is clearly set to own tablets, ultra books and PCs costing more than $900 for several years."
Yeah probably true, no matter how good Windows 8 is. But the overall statement I initially stick to. I believe Mac OSX, and Windows Phone 7.5 deserve more market share, but that's not for me to decide.
I believe the market for PC's that cost more than US $900 is larger than you think...A lot of gamers, enthusiats and business people still buy mid to high end systems

The wonderful thing about the Apple money making machine is that last year (to September) it made $25Bn, but next year, it will make about $43Bn (to the analyst consensus (which is almost always absurdly conservative). MS will still make about $25-26Bn.

The >$1000 market is what it is. It includes gamers and trustafarian nerds and all the people who buy expensive machines. And Apple owns that market. Since the corporate PC market collapsed in value (we used to pay $3000 for our T42 Thinkpads, now <$850 for T420s), Apple's share of industry revenue just increases. You can sell 400M PCs but if the margins are 1-5% (1% for Lenovo, 5% for HP), then its not a great business is it? That is why no-one tracks the value of the industry, because it would be pretty sick reading (e.g. netbooks gutted ASPs for zero margin). Hence HP trying to ditch PCs (in the most incompetent way ever). IBM were well shot of them 5 years ago. Tracking unit sales alone is like tracking the increasing weight of an overweight person as some proxy for being healthy.

Apple has picked its price points and competes exceptionally well at each and every one. Where is hasn't gone, it has not found a way to make its desired margins. Without going head to head with MS or Google (on unit volumes), it will this year grow by way more than Google's entire revenue and be about 2x the size of MS by revenue. As far as the business of Apple is concerned, nerd-wars about OS's, devices and specs is just jibber jabber amongst the technoliterate classes - an utter market irrelevance.
post #33 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by xSamplex View Post

Windows 8 rewrites the rule book. Frantic innovation ahead by both companies. Linux, not so much.

Agreed Windows 8 looks like it's going to be great

However focusing only on released products for the moment, what I have a problem with, is the way consumers like to simplify clear market share lead, with the best product.
If the quality of a product was equal to its sales, than Windows 7 would be a many times greater product than Mac OSX, which is clearly not the case. Similarly iOS would be potentially many tens of times better a product than Windows Phone 7.5.

Platform advocates can argue about many specifics, that pull there platform ahead for specific features and ideas, but the truth is both platforms exhibit similar quality and level of innovation. Which brings to question why are Windows and iOS disproportionately popular? Actually someone mentioned the word earlier "Inertia"; I believe this phenomenon defines the landscape of technology. Windows is a great product, but does not deserve as much success, but inertia put them in their current position. Similarly Microsoft allowed Apple to create inertia, and didn't respond fast enough, now any forward momentum, has to compete with very strong inertia on Apple's side.
post #34 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

You could make that subset even smaller and say ten out of every ten Mac computer purchases has been a Mac!.

That sounds even better!

Are you implying the consumer market doesn't matter?

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #35 of 68
It used to be exciting when Apple used to focus on, you know. Computing.
post #36 of 68
"Apple will also continue its efforts to simplify away complexities in the computing world such as the conventional file system"

Thank goodness. Hopefully the Finder will be replaced with something more like HoudahSpot, Punakea, etc. Maybe Apple should put out a new app for managing documents on the Mac App Store and as it becomes more refined replace the Finder with the new program.
post #37 of 68
Quote:
The wonderful thing about the Apple money making machine

Yeah I get it, Apple swim around in all their money. It's funny when I see Microsoft bitter fans on this site, still using "$icrosoft" as if it is still relevant and witty.

My relationship with a company is solely based on the quality of their products, as with most consumers. Apple is not better just because they make more money, that's ridiculous. Like saying Microsoft has always been better, when they were making more money than Apple.

I don't see any statistics to back up the low share of $1000 machines (or "gamers and trustafarian nerds" as you like to call them, but I know a lot of people with expensive traditional desktops machines. For instance how would statistic creators know the true system value of every store bought, and custom built PC in New Zealand? They wouldn't...

As for the margins PC makers make, that's got nothing to do with Microsoft. But I believe it's natural for there to be winners, losers, and complainers in this price war, but ultimately the markets not going anywhere. Proprietary Mac's are not going to take over anytime some
post #38 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden99 View Post

As Im not a shareholder, like most consumers, I'll judge the difference on profit alone, not share price, with Apple making US$ 25.922 billion, and Microsoft making US$ 23.15 billion in 2011 (Wikipedia), not such a vast difference after all.

I don't really think it matters in the context of the point you're trying to make (i.e. that both OSX and WPx deserve more sales).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden99 View Post

Windows Phone 7.5 is a new platform, but I highly doubt it is only one percent of the market, I'm sure I have seen higher statistics than that, assuming they are even accurate.

They are low. Maybe not as low as 1%, but it's somewhere around that mark.

If you want to look at the positive side there are three platforms showing growth. iOS, Android and WP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden99 View Post

I expect an improvement in market share this year, especially near the end of the year (with Apollo and superphones, and tango and low-end phones).

This bit... I just don't know.

I think the OEM's have shown very little love for WPx and the hardware is lacking when compared to both Android and Apple. Nokia may be able to turn this around (the Lumia 800 is beautiful).

The OS itself it fantastic. It's superior to iOS in a couple of areas and inferior in others, but it's better than Android, Bada, Symbian and BB OS, period.

So one might think that even though WPx won't really touch iOS, it could potentially take a chunk out of Android sales.. but the problem with that is that the carriers don't like WPx at all.

They love Blackberry (because there are still some businesses that request them) they love iOS (because heaps of people come into stores asking for iPhones) and they love Android (because they can load it up with their crapware) and comparatively WPx doesn't really offer them much.

You add to that the potential reaction from the carriers to what Microsoft may do with Skype (like integrate it into the People/Messaging hub; for those who don't know about WPx that's like the way iMessage works with SMS in iOS) and you can see the real potential for WPx to be pushed out of the market, at least in the US.
post #39 of 68
Quote:
I don't really think it matters in the context of the point you're trying to make (i.e. that both OSX and WPx deserve more sales).

WP7 and MacOSX deserve more market share because they clearly are competitive products, irrespective of the companies total profit.
post #40 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Are you implying the consumer market doesn't matter?

Nope.

I'm implying that if someone wants to make Mac sales sound better by picking a subset of the PC market, then the best subset is pick is the percentage of Mac sales.

I think quoting education marketshare in the US sounds good and quoting the US consumer marketshare sounds better, but quoting Mac market share sounds the best by far.

Nothing looks better than 100%. They could even make a pie chart.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › The next ten years of Mac OS X