or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple upgraded by Needham on "switcher" outlook
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple upgraded by Needham on "switcher" outlook

post #1 of 48
Thread Starter 
Analysts for Needham & Co. upgraded shares of Apple Computer, Inc. to Buy from Hold after a new study showed the company's Boot Camp software has the potential to nearly triple its US PC market share.

In a recent survey commissioned by the firm, 8 percent of Windows users in the U.S home market said they would switch to a Mac if it could also run Windows. Such a shift in consumer preference would effectively increase Apple's share of the US and European home markets to 12.2 percent, the firm said.

"An increase of this magnitude would almost triple Apples share in the home market and increase it 75 percent worldwide," said analyst Charles Wolf. "Although a seemingly small percentage, it nonetheless dwarfs Apples current share of the home market."

Earlier this year, Apple announced plans to include a piece of software with the next version of its Mac OS X operating system that would allow Intel Macs to also run operating systems from rival Microsoft Corp. The software is currently code-named "Boot Camp" and available as a public beta.

Needham's survey also indicated that the Macs ability to run Windows could give the so-called "halo effect" a terrific boost -- over 20 percent of Windows users who own iPods indicated they would make the switch.

"The good news from Apple's perspective is the iPod's penetration rate among Windows users in our survey was only 13.6 percent despite worldwide iPod sales of over 50 million since the product was introduced in October 2001," Wolf added. "Our long-term forecast has the penetration rate of all music players (including the iPod) reaching 50 percent in the US in the 2010 to 2012 time period."

Still, the analyst warns that the Mac market share gains predicted by the survey will not occur in a vacuum. "It will fall on Apples shoulders to translate them into reality," Wold said. "We believe the Apple Stores could play a pivotal role in this effort. Hoards of Windows users visit the Apple Stores -- at least half of all visitors, according to some estimates."

Needham has a $90 price target on shares of Apple.
post #2 of 48
The next logical step may be for Apple to offer Mac OS X and Windows on a Mac--perhaps Windows as a BtO option? That would facilitate user switching. The real question is, would it be too much of a shock for the core market (e.g. us) to take?

While I feel certain that something of that nature is in the cards somewhere, I'm unsure of when... I would sort of hate for Apple to license XP from Microsoft, because it just sucks... Vista may be better, but what do you guys think?
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
post #3 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Dirk
Vista may be better, but what do you guys think?

Better than what?
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #4 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by Ireland
Better than what?

Better than XP, as an OS, and therefore it wouldn't be as much the sellout that offering XP on computers would be.

I don't know--maybe that's just bullshit. Windows is Windows, and I'm sceptical that it'll get much better. So, in conclusion: Apple could just go ahead and offer XP as BTO alongside OS X standard?
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
post #5 of 48
I'm itching to see what Leopard has in store when it comes to Windows support. Apple has been touting that Boot Camp will be a feature that's included in Leopard. Could it be that Apple is just using Boot Camp to test the waters and generate interest and buzz.

I say there's a good chance that we see Virtualization in 10.5.

Overall, I've stated that I expect Apple will have 8% marketshare by the end of the Leopard OS X 10.5 lifecycle:

In April 2006:
------------
Macs - Boot Camp - Market Share - Switchers

I've also taken the postion in various articles that Apple's market share is about to dramtically increase. It looks as though the analysts are starting to take note and agree with my views:

In March 2006:
-------------
Macs are Faster - Benchmarking - Virtualization Technology - Increased Market Share

In January 2006:
--------------
Apple Intel and Increased Market Share
post #6 of 48
they should ditch the OS X and go with the rest of the world, this way they can actually compete with other big companies like Dell
post #7 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by iPickle06
they should ditch the OS X and go with the rest of the world, this way they can actually compete with other big companies like Dell

Apple is all about innovation, integration, and a great user experience. They are able to do this with a Mac running OS X and the various applications/programs that run on OS X. Apple won't ditch OS X. In fact, Apple is putting forth the argument that OS X is a better operating system.

Just check out the Apple "Get A Mac" secction on the Apple web site.
post #8 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by iPickle06
they should ditch the OS X and go with the rest of the world, this way they can actually compete with other big companies like Dell

That made my day. I've been waiting for a good laugh. Thanks!
post #9 of 48
The real move is to offer Mac OS X for any PC box out there. That way Mac OS X will increase market share to 30% in a few years.
post #10 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by iPickle06
they should ditch the OS X and go with the rest of the world, this way they can actually compete with other big companies like Dell

iPickle06- change your name to iIdiot06. Immediately. Unless you are kidding. In that case, it was kinda funny.
post #11 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by iPickle06
they should ditch the OS X and go with the rest of the world, this way they can actually compete with other big companies like Dell

To echo some of the other replies to this post: Apple doesn't care to beat the mainstream. Apple's aim is to offer a superior product to those willing to pay for it. I spend my days at an office working with XP, and it is a relief to have a computer at home that runs OS X. Apple is working a niche market in computing. They offer what companies like Dell simply can't, and I think they've done a fantastic job of it so far.

Market share isn't the only way of determing a company's success. Nintendo is more profitable than Sony's video games department, and they only have a tiny fraction of the market share. Just some food for thought.
post #12 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Dirk
The real question is, would it be too much of a shock for the core market (e.g. us) to take?

I would sort of hate for Apple to license XP from Microsoft, because it just sucks...

Surely the point is it don't matter what you (core martket) think about Apple licensing Windows or not. What you going to do? Not buy Apple product?.
post #13 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Dirk
I would sort of hate for Apple to license XP from Microsoft, because it just sucks...

What would suck even more would be to have to go out and buy Windows directly from Microsoft and pay more than what it would have cost to buy it bundled with my next Mac. I hate to sound like a Microsoft advocate, but that would make a difference to a lot of potential switchers.
post #14 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Dirk
Better than XP, as an OS, and therefore it wouldn't be as much the sellout that offering XP on computers would be.

I don't know--maybe that's just bullshit. Windows is Windows, and I'm sceptical that it'll get much better. So, in conclusion: Apple could just go ahead and offer XP as BTO alongside OS X standard?

I can't see them doing that. If they did, it would fuel much speculation of the long term fate of OS X, and I can't see them abandoning that for Windows.
post #15 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by iPickle06
they should ditch the OS X and go with the rest of the world, this way they can actually compete with other big companies like Dell

That would be a terrible idea.

If Apple simply became another licensee of Windows, then there would be little reason to buy a Mac.

Yes, they sure are pretty. Yes, models like the iMac have their appeal. But Apple would then have to compete with Dell, Hp, Lenovo, and Gateway on more levels. Those additional levels would be the budget lines. What could Apple do to distinguish themselves from the crowd with a $399 machine with monitor, and printer, in that case? What about the $499 laptops?

No, I don't think that Apple is about to do that.

And, if they didn't, they would then be just another boutique manufacturer such as Voodoo, and look at their sales numbers.
post #16 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by OfficerDigby
Surely the point is it don't matter what you (core martket) think about Apple licensing Windows or not. What you going to do? Not buy Apple product?.

That's exactly what would happen. Most of us do buy Mac's for the OS. Even though Apple is a hardware company by sales numbers, it's the OS that has most customers buying that hardware. Without the OS, most of those reasons go up in smoke.
post #17 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
That's exactly what would happen. Most of us do buy Mac's for the OS. Even though Apple is a hardware company by sales numbers, it's the OS that has most customers buying that hardware. Without the OS, most of those reasons go up in smoke.

I think he meant offering Win XP on a Mac as a build to order option in addition to MacOS X for those users who would prefer to have windows preinstalled in a dual-boot configuration.

I doubt that Mac users would get angry about that option as I believe that Apple has offered windows preinstalled about 10 years ago on their models which had the hardware pc card installed (I believe it was a pentium 1 with it's own ram, etc).
post #18 of 48
Call me crazy but I would love to see makes come with Windows and virtualization software. Make it a BTO option. I would opt for xp until vista gets sorted out. I know many wonder about the fate of OSX if Apple starts distributing windows on macs, but many of us are dual users and that's just the reality. Being able to do it all on one machine is very attractive.
post #19 of 48
How many years have analysts been saying there's going to be a huge surge in switchers, but it never seems to materialize.
post #20 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by MacCentric
I think he meant offering Win XP on a Mac as a build to order option in addition to MacOS X for those users who would prefer to have windows preinstalled in a dual-boot configuration.

I doubt that Mac users would get angry about that option as I believe that Apple has offered windows preinstalled about 10 years ago on their models which had the hardware pc card installed (I believe it was a pentium 1 with it's own ram, etc).

Oops, you're right. I hit the wrong post to quote.

Sorry, Digby, though I still don't think Apple will ever offer Windows as an installed OS.

I meant to quote iPickle06

Quote:
they should ditch the OS X and go with the rest of the world, this way they can actually compete with other big companies like Dell.
post #21 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by backtomac
Call me crazy but I would love to see makes come with Windows and virtualization software. Make it a BTO option. I would opt for xp until vista gets sorted out. I know many wonder about the fate of OSX if Apple starts distributing windows on macs, but many of us are dual users and that's just the reality. Being able to do it all on one machine is very attractive.

EXACTLY.
post #22 of 48
I think we can be pretty certain that when Stevie says boot camp will be "included" in Leopard, it's not going to be in the form that the beta is in. Would Apple release a "feature" that has already been available for months as a selling point to an operating system?? No, I think something like virtualization is much more likely or some other cool use of the boot camp technology. I'm sure we'll all be surprised come November.

As for iPickles trolling, let me sum up what everyone has said so far: WTF???
post #23 of 48
The trippling of market share predicted here will simply not happen if people have to go out, buy Windoze, and install it on their own. There will be some switchers, sure, but if Apple wants to achieve a market share of 12 percent (or even 10 percent), they HAVE to do the following things:

1) Offer Windows pre-installed as a BTO option (in addition to OS X, never as a replacement).

2) Have a few display Macs in their retail stores that are running Windows. (Hopefully near the back .

AFA virtualization goes, the thing to keep in mind is this: From our perspective (ie Mac enthusiasts), the ideal situation would be the ability to run Windows applications from inside Leopard. Best of both worlds: OS X, but you can run that one app you absoutely need, without even worrying about the Windows GUI mishagoss. BUT, from the point of view of the average switcher, that is not what they (think they) want. They want to be able to run Windows--exactly like it runs on a Dell--and they won't switch until they can. The hope, of course, is that once they've got the box home, they'll boot in OS X and be won over, but if it happens, it'll happen in that order: buy first, be won over to OS X second.

If the Leopard version of virtualization is closer to the seamless appearance of Windows running on your screen, it'll work to lure folks over. If the screen still looks Mac-ish when VirtualBootPCWindowsCamp is running, that'll be an obstacle to growing market share.
post #24 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by Feste
The trippling of market share predicted here will simply not happen if people have to go out, buy Windoze, and install it on their own. There will be some switchers, sure, but if Apple wants to achieve a market share of 12 percent (or even 10 percent), they HAVE to do the following things:

1) Offer Windows pre-installed as a BTO option (in addition to OS X, never as a replacement).

2) Have a few display Macs in their retail stores that are running Windows. (Hopefully near the back .

AFA virtualization goes, the thing to keep in mind is this: From our perspective (ie Mac enthusiasts), the ideal situation would be the ability to run Windows applications from inside Leopard. Best of both worlds: OS X, but you can run that one app you absoutely need, without even worrying about the Windows GUI mishagoss. BUT, from the point of view of the average switcher, that is not what they (think they) want. They want to be able to run Windows--exactly like it runs on a Dell--and they won't switch until they can. The hope, of course, is that once they've got the box home, they'll boot in OS X and be won over, but if it happens, it'll happen in that order: buy first, be won over to OS X second.

If the Leopard version of virtualization is closer to the seamless appearance of Windows running on your screen, it'll work to lure folks over. If the screen still looks Mac-ish when VirtualBootPCWindowsCamp is running, that'll be an obstacle to growing market share.

I don't think that it's right to say that they "have to" have Windows as a BTO. It could do more harm than good. It would be more important to get OS X out there.

The rest of the argument, yes.
post #25 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by OfficerDigby
Surely the point is it don't matter what you (core martket) think about Apple licensing Windows or not. What you going to do? Not buy Apple product?.

That's true--but that doesn't mean there aren't alternatives like Linux out there that Mac users could turn to if sufficiently disturbed by the change. I guess I'm thinking along the lines of the "woe is me" posting that was prevalent for quite a while after the Intel switch was announced, along with several mentions of Linux as a viable option.

In any case, it's never good to bite the hand that feeds you.
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
post #26 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
It could do more harm than good.

My point in asking the question exactly.

By the way, I'm surprised you guys haven't come up with the fact that iPickle06 is clearly John Dvorak.
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
post #27 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by meelash
I think we can be pretty certain that when Stevie says boot camp will be "included" in Leopard, it's not going to be in the form that the beta is in. Would Apple release a "feature" that has already been available for months as a selling point to an operating system?? No, I think something like virtualization is much more likely or some other cool use of the boot camp technology. I'm sure we'll all be surprised come November.

Not necessarily. For example, iChat AV was released in beta before 10.3, and then was released in final form as part of 10.3.

I think Bootcamp will be essentially the same in 10.5 as it is now, with some improvements of course.
post #28 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by Feste
AFA virtualization goes, the thing to keep in mind is this: From our perspective (ie Mac enthusiasts), the ideal situation would be the ability to run Windows applications from inside Leopard. Best of both worlds: OS X, but you can run that one app you absoutely need, without even worrying about the Windows GUI mishagoss. BUT, from the point of view of the average switcher, that is not what they (think they) want. They want to be able to run Windows--exactly like it runs on a Dell--and they won't switch until they can.

I don't know about that. If someone is that adamant about running windows that way thay probably aren't looking at macs anyway. IMO the 'potential switcher' is someone uses windows at work or for a specific app who is pretty tech savy and would like to try a mac but needs the ability to run windows occasionaly. VT is perfect for those individuals.
post #29 of 48
Both ways are necessary.

BootCamp is necessary to obtain the full power of the cpu's and graphics cards. Virtualization is necessary for ease of use and moving, and working with, files across two programs on each OS.

Neither one alone is ideal.
post #30 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell

I think Bootcamp will be essentially the same in 10.5 as it is now, with some improvements of course.

Like drivers for iSight.

I don't think a BTO option is necessary. AS long as they know its possible to install windows, they're fine with it. Most of these people are switchers who already have XP, they just need to request the install cd from whoever they bought the computer from for like 10 bucks.

I have a friend for instance who I'm trying hard to convince to buy a MacBook, it even comes with a free 2GB nano for crying out loud! (She's a student) But she's still not convinced though. She knows how to use Windows and she doesn't want to mess with OSX, I think she's just plain lazy. People have so many stupid misconceptions about macs (they're expensive, they're for "fun" not important things, no software options for them, etc.) It drives me nuts!

Basically the point is that if you sold HER a mac with windows already installed on it, she would always boot up in that and never use OS X, and that's bad for Apple. But if you make it a little harder to get windows on there, she'll be forced to enjoy OSX first and be sold on it (or not, she's pretty adamant in her ignorant opinions about OS X)


BTW - Why does boot campt default to Windows when restarting? It drives me nuts! I want to hold the option key ONLY when I want to start up in Windows. As it is, I have to hold it every time I restart and then select OS X, otherwise I get that horrible windows black screen with the ugly text and the pixely logo.
post #31 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Both ways are necessary.

BootCamp is necessary to obtain the full power of the cpu's and graphics cards. Virtualization is necessary for ease of use and moving, and working with, files across two programs on each OS.

Neither one alone is ideal.

If you're not a gamer I don't see the advantage. I guess if you prefer to do PS in windows.
post #32 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by DeaPeaJay
Like drivers for iSight.

I don't think a BTO option is necessary. AS long as they know its possible to install windows, they're fine with it. Most of these people are switchers who already have XP, they just need to request the install cd from whoever they bought the computer from for like 10 bucks.

I have a friend for instance who I'm trying hard to convince to buy a MacBook, it even comes with a free 2GB nano for crying out loud! (She's a student) But she's still not convinced though. She knows how to use Windows and she doesn't want to mess with OSX, I think she's just plain lazy. People have so many stupid misconceptions about macs (they're expensive, they're for "fun" not important things, no software options for them, etc.) It drives me nuts!

Basically the point is that if you sold HER a mac with windows already installed on it, she would always boot up in that and never use OS X, and that's bad for Apple. But if you make it a little harder to get windows on there, she'll be forced to enjoy OSX first and be sold on it (or not, she's pretty adamant in her ignorant opinions about OS X)


BTW - Why does boot campt default to Windows when restarting? It drives me nuts! I want to hold the option key ONLY when I want to start up in Windows. As it is, I have to hold it every time I restart and then select OS X, otherwise I get that horrible windows black screen with the ugly text and the pixely logo.

One problem with the Windows license is that it ties the OS to one machine, and one machine only. You can't install it on another and expect it to work for any time, unless, of course, you use one of the (illegal) workarounds that have been developed by hackers. No one here would ever do such a thing.
post #33 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by DeaPeaJay

Basically the point is that if you sold HER a mac with windows already installed on it, she would always boot up in that and never use OS X, and that's bad for Apple.


The advantage of VT is that you start in the OSX environment.
post #34 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by backtomac
If you're not a gamer I don't see the advantage. I guess if you prefer to do PS in windows.

Well, gaming is a pretty big proposition in the PC world. CAD, and other 3D programs not available on the Mac would also need the power. As you say, PS would also, at least until the CS3 suite is released. There are probably others as well.
post #35 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Well, gaming is a pretty big proposition in the PC world. CAD, and other 3D programs not available on the Mac would also need the power. As you say, PS would also, at least until the CS3 suite is released. There are probably others as well.

I use PS in OS X, it's not even an option to use it in windows. I don't have a PC license, if I did, I wouldn't have any of the other programs that I use PS WITH!! Not to mention the hassle of having to restart in windows.
post #36 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by DeaPeaJay
I use PS in OS X, it's not even an option to use it in windows. I don't have a PC license, if I did, I wouldn't have any of the other programs that I use PS WITH!! Not to mention the hassle of having to restart in windows.

That's you. You're looking at it from a Mac users viewpoint. According to what you have just said, neither method would be of use to you. So why just respond to me, rather than to the group as a whole?

That isn't to say that others who HAVE a PC version don't have the CS2 suite, and other plug-ins that go with it, possibly Quark as well. Hell, maybe they are still using Ventura!

The problem is that testimonials are from a small select group, and may not reflect the interests of a much larger number of people.

I think that we are talking mostly about PC people moving over to the Mac who DO have programs.

But, remember that I said that we should have both options. I'm not eliminating one or the other. Everyone's needs should be accommodated.
post #37 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
That's you. You're looking at it from a Mac users viewpoint. According to what you have just said, neither method would be of use to you. So why just respond to me, rather than to the group as a whole?

Sorry, bad use of the reply button.



I see your point and agree. Exisiting PC licensers can use OSX till they upgrade, and then they can get the mac version. CS2 to CS3 is a perfect example.

Taking that situation, If you're talking about somebody who is deep into the windows world and has a lot of software, that's the only way Apple's going to pull them over into the Mac World. Say to them, "it's ok, nothing will change but your computer, and you can slowly migrate over to OS X at your own pace."

Also, for somebody that deep into windows, I doubt virtualization is going to be very attractive. Virtualization is good only if its use is limited to particular tasks. Operating completely in it would be a headache, unless someone comes out with a killer virtualization solution (not like parallels). But I don't see how that's possible. Win Apps are extremely unlike OS X apps, you can't get Rosetta type virtualization with windows Apps.
post #38 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by DeaPeaJay

Also, for somebody that deep into windows, I doubt virtualization is going to be very attractive. Virtualization is good only if its use is limited to particular tasks. Operating completely in it would be a headache, unless someone comes out with a killer virtualization solution (not like parallels). But I don't see how that's possible. Win Apps are extremely unlike OS X apps, you can't get Rosetta type virtualization with windows Apps.

My understanding is that virtualization is going to be hardware-based in Merom (and I'm sure Conroe), so that might provide significant improvements. How exactly does the Parallels solution work?
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
"In Xanadu did Kubla Kahn a stately pleasure-dome decree."
Reply
post #39 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by DeaPeaJay
BTW - Why does boot campt default to Windows when restarting? It drives me nuts! I want to hold the option key ONLY when I want to start up in Windows. As it is, I have to hold it every time I restart and then select OS X, otherwise I get that horrible windows black screen with the ugly text and the pixely logo.

Have you set the startup disk from system preferences?
post #40 of 48
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Dirk
My understanding is that virtualization is going to be hardware-based in Merom (and I'm sure Conroe), so that might provide significant improvements. How exactly does the Parallels solution work?

Virtualization, by its very nature, can't ever use all of the computers power. Part of the computer is reserved for each OS. There is no virtualization for graphics cards either. It is done in software, the same way it is done now in VPC, so it is slow, no acceleration.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple upgraded by Needham on "switcher" outlook