or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Another Mac clone maker tries its luck with Apple
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Another Mac clone maker tries its luck with Apple - Page 3

post #81 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwik View Post

I don't think Apple has the right to interfere with other businesses owned by Americans, just for emotional reasons. Apple is the aggressor here. It is they who are depriving other people of their rights, IMO. Anyway, the courts will decide. Would I feel comfortable running a paid copy of Mac OS X as I please, sure I would feel totally comfortable doing that. It's like playing a Sony Pictures DVD on a Panasonic DVD player. If Sony doesn't like it, they always have an open invitation to suck it, forever.

i'm curious what you do for a living.

anybody that is working in a field where the end product can be easily copied (writers, photographers, film makers for example) would understand that your argument is complete nonsense.

according to your analogy panasonic should have the right to release a sony picture on panasonic dvd after having bought a copy of it on betamax.

i'm also curious if you think apple should have the right to interfere with businesses NOT owned by americans. if you do, you might consider pulling your head out of the american media bubble for a second and discover that 'globalization' does not mean what you think it means...
post #82 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

Yes and that's about the usual amount of market research that all you xMac guys do.

it's actually worse that that. the people screaming for the xMac are often the same that state 'i can build my own for x dollars'. well, yes you can for now! but if people like psystar and others keep taking the work of the hackintosh builders and try to make a profit from it, then apple will have no choice but to go after the hackintosh community. so far they haven't.

i for one appreciate the lack of serial numbers and other license verification procedures every time i do an osx installation. i dread the day i have to be on hold to some call centre in bangalore to get an umpteen digit long code to have apple bless my system like the nonsense the poor windows guys have to deal with every now and then.

i have no interest in building or buying a mac clone, and even when they were available i gladly paid more money for the real thing. my mac is a tool to help me do my job and it does it well. i wouldn't want to have obstacles in my way to get a hammer working either, when i want to put a nail in the wall.
post #83 of 201
There are millions upon millions of people who depend on the integrity of IP law in order to make a living. The integrity EULAs as well, happen to be a part of this.

Absolutely, positively, no one selling computers or software in the current market is interested in seeing a hole blown in the principal of the EULA, by way of legal precedent or otherwise.
post #84 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

i'm curious what you do for a living.

anybody that is working in a field where the end product can be easily copied (writers, photographers, film makers for example) would understand that your argument is complete nonsense.

according to your analogy panasonic should have the right to release a sony picture on panasonic dvd after having bought a copy of it on betamax.

i'm also curious if you think apple should have the right to interfere with businesses NOT owned by americans. if you do, you might consider pulling your head out of the american media bubble for a second and discover that 'globalization' does not mean what you think it means...

Actually, I am a student. But sure, if I have for example paid $100 to a photographer for a print of "his" photo, which I already find kind of asinine, I would not concern myself with his opinions on who I should invite to my party, who might by chance view "his" phtograph on my wall. I have some respect for copyright, so far as it goes. But usage restrictions? Honestly? They strike me as mere naggy opinion. At worst, they are an overextention of authorities that aren't even there, trying to swindle our rights away to get additional follow-on profits. An EULA on your newspaper could theoreically require you to become their slave. It's an amusing idea but in the end it has no merit. I think Apple needs to clarify things, because right now their assertions are too broad.
post #85 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwik View Post

Actually, I am a student. But sure, if I have for example paid $100 to a photographer for a print of "his" photo, which I already find kind of asinine, I would not concern myself with his opinions on who I should invite to my party, who might by chance view "his" phtograph on my wall. I have some respect for copyright, so far as it goes. But usage restrictions? Honestly? They strike me as mere naggy opinion. At worst, they are an overextention of authorities that aren't even there, trying to swindle our rights away to get additional follow-on profits. An EULA on your newspaper could theoreically require you to become their slave. It's an amusing idea but in the end it has no merit. I think Apple needs to clarify things, because right now their assertions are too broad.

Apple could easily just stop selling their OS as a boxed copy and only offer it as a downloadable upgrade.
post #86 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwik View Post

Actually, I am a student. But sure, if I have for example paid $100 to a photographer for a print of "his" photo, which I already find kind of asinine, I would not concern myself with his opinions on who I should invite to my party, who might by chance view "his" phtograph on my wall. I have some respect for copyright, so far as it goes. But usage restrictions? Honestly? They strike me as mere naggy opinion. At worst, they are an overextention of authorities that aren't even there, trying to swindle our rights away to get additional follow-on profits. An EULA on your newspaper could theoreically require you to become their slave. It's an amusing idea but in the end it has no merit. I think Apple needs to clarify things, because right now their assertions are too broad.

if you think that paying a photographer money even for one of his prints, you clearly have no respect for paying a fair price for his skills, his time, his equipment costs, etc. do you think that having paid for his print you should be able to publish it in a book that you get paid for?

i suppose you would have zero issues if we all copy your work in the future then? lets see some of it! maybe we can make a buck from it. you won't mind if you don't get paid for your efforts, do you?

what do you study?
post #87 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benthic View Post

I'm a recently returned user to the Mac-fold. I built myself a "hackintosh" on some Shuttle hardware (small form factor) and LOVED it. Plenty of power, expandability, etc for my needs but in a nice small box. It was working beautifully until 10.5.7 killed it and rather than try to fix it I went out and bought a refurb 2008 Mac Pro.

Let me be clear about one thing: I did NOT want a Mac Pro sized box. I WANTED a headless but powerful machine, which is not offered by Apple except in the Mac Pro. If Apple had offered a box that's half the size of a Mac Pro (Shuttle sized) I'd have happily bought one brand new and never attempted the hackintosh project. Why did I want a small, powerful, headless machine? Because I have two 24" monitors from a 3rd party that I wanted to continue to use and I didn't want to have this monstrous Mac Pro on my desk. But if I wanted the Apple experience they forced me to buy something that was more than I wanted. People resent that sort of thing and many do not do what I did: suck it up and suffer the size and cost of the big box.

There is definitely a market out there for a mid-sized headless Mac - I know because I was one of them.

So because you could not get your own way, you cheated, in fact you broke the law.

Your story sounds lame anyway . Too small too big too fast too many buttons . Or did you save a ton of money by stealing software. and hackintosh is a very low life word . Right up there with hacker .

I wonder why did the MINI not work for you ? It can run two large screens ? No ?
Anyway good luck
Good bye
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #88 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

Isn't this a bit over the top. After all were talking about computers there not exactly complex. There all made from standard parts and it's not like apple even put there machines together.

And how is it going to lead them to have to support products they didn't sell? If anyone took one of these to apple to fix they just wouldn't do anything, same as when you take an apple product that's out of warrenty. If it's an os problem then they were paid and it's still there fault.

I can't really see a problem here it gives consumers more choice and freedom. After all if you sell some software in a box people should be allowed to use it how they want. A pencil company couldn't specify people only use there pencils with there paper because they see other paper as inferior.

You fundamentally misunderstand the situation at hand. A pencil and paper do not work together in the same manner as a computer and its operating system. The paper is not an instruction atmosphere for the pencil. The paper is simply something the pencil can write things on (it would be much more comparable to a file format).

Now, to answer your other query, were Apple to in any way, shape, or form, allow OS X on other hardware, it would be bound, by US and international law, to support the software on those platforms whether it desired to or not.

Here's what you don't get: Apple's existence gives consumers more choice and freedom. They are not bound to purchase computers with Microsoft Windows or any of the various Linux distros, but can also purchase an Apple if they so choose. Apple only produces OS X in order to entice people to buy its hardware instead of the offerings of vendors such as Dell, HP, & the like. Like those vendors, Apple is a registered hardware company. Microsoft is a registered software company and their business models strongly reflect this fact.

This is why OS X upgrades cost $129 and the equivalent Windows Vista product would be nearly twice that (Ultimate). This is also why Apple makes very little money on the App Store while making millions from sales of the iPhone. Apple isn't trying to limit customer choice, their simply is not such thing as an OS X market the way there is for Windows because OS X was created singularly to sell Apple hardware. Apple isn't trying to limit consumer choice, it's trying to create a mutual relationship wherein you as the customer receive a superior computing experience and service and it receives your money and, hopefully, your loyalty in future purchases.

One thing though, about what you said: the owner of an IP has every right to dictate its usage. This is why the Beatles do not yet allow their songs to be sold through the iTunes music store. Can they technically specify how you use that in your home? Not exactly, but their are some instances in which they can (though they are quite rare). However, the moment you resell it IP in an unauthorized manner, they have every right to sue you and unless the judge is daft, you will lose.

That is the free market: you create a product, you assign your terms, and people are then free to buy or deny purchase of those items and watch your company flourish or flounder as a result. I hate to sound so quaint, but the manner in which you and the European Union define competition is basically communist (and we all know how that worked out).
post #89 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwik View Post

Actually, I am a student. But sure, if I have for example paid $100 to a photographer for a print of "his" photo, which I already find kind of asinine, I would not concern myself with his opinions on who I should invite to my party, who might by chance view "his" phtograph on my wall. I have some respect for copyright, so far as it goes. But usage restrictions? Honestly? They strike me as mere naggy opinion. At worst, they are an overextention of authorities that aren't even there, trying to swindle our rights away to get additional follow-on profits. An EULA on your newspaper could theoreically require you to become their slave. It's an amusing idea but in the end it has no merit. I think Apple needs to clarify things, because right now their assertions are too broad.

If the newspaper were to force such restrictions on its customer base, then they would all have the option to stop purchasing the paper and it would fail as a result.

And the painter did not trademark and apply for any other protections on his photo, he sold it to you outright. This means the photo is effectively your IP now and if you wanted to copyright and dictate its usage, you would have the right to do so. Were you an artist, were someone to open an exhibit of all of your life's works covered in human fecal matter and call it art, you, as the IP holder, could and likely would ask that the exhibit be shut down since it was displaying your work in a manner you found offensive.

No one is trying to keep tabs on you for profit, they're trying to keep you from abusing and profiting from their work. If you can't understand that simple concept, you really should just join the anarchist movement because that's basically where your ideas lead.
post #90 of 201
Clone makers certainly are showing a lot of interest in Macs lately. Don't think it's going to work out all that well for the cloners though....
post #91 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

i want a pony!

I didnt want to join this thread as I feel Ive paid my dues defending free market rights and the socialistish gimme-gimmes here never seem to understand anyway, but I had to comment just to say that I spit hot coffee out my nose (which is painful) and onto my Saturday night, fancy club clothes. Now I have to change my attire, but it was worth it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by :-| View Post

Apple could easily just stop selling their OS as a boxed copy and only offer it as a downloadable upgrade.

They could, but we are talking about 3GB for the full install of Snow Leopard at this point. They could require you to have a DVD or a flash drive to put it on for the install, or they could repartition the drive like you can do with Disk Utility or Boot Camp, before it copies the files to that drive before it completes the OS upgrade. But that causes some other problems due to the image size and the inability to partition a drive if certain files are unmovable or if you dont have enough space. Its also time consuming and excludes people with slow connections and non-unlimited accounts.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #92 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwik View Post

Actually, I am a student. But sure, if I have for example paid $100 to a photographer for a print of "his" photo, which I already find kind of asinine, I would not concern myself with his opinions on who I should invite to my party, who might by chance view "his" phtograph on my wall. I have some respect for copyright, so far as it goes. But usage restrictions? Honestly? They strike me as mere naggy opinion. At worst, they are an overextention of authorities that aren't even there, trying to swindle our rights away to get additional follow-on profits. An EULA on your newspaper could theoreically require you to become their slave. It's an amusing idea but in the end it has no merit. I think Apple needs to clarify things, because right now their assertions are too broad.

Your photographer example is a good one.

If you pay a professional photographer for a portrait, you can not legally make copies - unless you specifically purchase the right to do so. Most portraits have the photographer's name in the corner and if you take it somewhere to make a copy, they will politely decline.

You do NOT automatically get the copyright to do whatever you want with a photograph any more than you automatically get the right to do whatever you want with your Mac OS X license.

Apple HAS clarified things. Their EULA is quite clear. Why do they need to clarify anything? You can install OS X onto any Apple-branded computer. What part of that don't you understand?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #93 of 201
Rights? Do you believe as an American you have a right to OSX on the hardware of your choice, and that said right is protected by law? Or further that enforcement of a license is executed "just for emotional reasons"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwik View Post

I don't think Apple has the right to interfere with other businesses owned by Americans, just for emotional reasons. Apple is the aggressor here. It is they who are depriving other people of their rights, IMO. Anyway, the courts will decide. Would I feel comfortable running a paid copy of Mac OS X as I please, sure I would feel totally comfortable doing that. It's like playing a Sony Pictures DVD on a Panasonic DVD player. If Sony doesn't like it, they always have an open invitation to suck it, forever.
post #94 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by elliots11 View Post

Oh, and eventually charge less and/or offer a mid range, easily user upgradable tower so that people get more value for their money (or at least feel that they do). That might just kill the whole cloning market without the need for a chip.

I have to agree with this. Here's a comparison between German cloner PearC and Apple's Belgian store to show what I mean.

A top of the range iMac costs €2099 and you get:
• Intel Core 2 Duo 3.06GHz
• 4 GB DDR2 RAM
• 1TB HD
• 8x Superdrive
• NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 512 MB
• 802.11n WiFi and Bluetooth
• USB2, Firewire 800
• 24" monitor

A top of the range PearC costs €2119 (that's just €20 more) and you get:
• Intel Core i7 2.66GHz (quad core)
• 12GB DDR3 RAM
• 300GB 10000rpm HD + a 2nd 1.5TB 7200rpm HD
• 22x DVD-RW drive
• MSI GeForce N250GTS 1024MB
• 802.11n WiFi and Bluetooth
• 2x Firewire 400
• 2x Firewire 800
• Integrated card reader

Ok, you don't get a monitor but I bought a 26" Fujitsu Siemens monitor for less than €300 six months ago. It's probably cheaper now.

That's a huge difference in performance for roughly the same money. I can see why the cloners are doing what they do (even though it's illegal). There's definitely a market for it.
post #95 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraklinc View Post

These idiots never learn. Why not just sale hardware and then let customers install OS X, Vista, XP or what ever the heck they wanna do?

...because most of the idiots who buy clones aren't intelligent enough to install it themselves.
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #96 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by applebook View Post

...because most of the idiots who buy clones aren't intelligent enough to install it themselves.

It takes great intelligence?
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #97 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by maddoguk View Post

A great answer - make your mum proud?

I am a Mac user but I have long fallen out of love with Apple.

Troll
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #98 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwik View Post

Actually, I am a student. But sure, if I have for example paid $100 to a photographer for a print of "his" photo, which I already find kind of asinine, I would not concern myself with his opinions on who I should invite to my party, who might by chance view "his" phtograph on my wall. I have some respect for copyright, so far as it goes. But usage restrictions? Honestly? They strike me as mere naggy opinion. At worst, they are an overextention of authorities that aren't even there, trying to swindle our rights away to get additional follow-on profits. An EULA on your newspaper could theoreically require you to become their slave. It's an amusing idea but in the end it has no merit. I think Apple needs to clarify things, because right now their assertions are too broad.

Apple isn't suing individual users. Pystar and these companies are PROFITING off copyrighted material. This is what you fail to grasp.
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #99 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

EFI has to "check in" occasionally with Apple servers to verify OS X before it loads. So begins another DRM/cracker war, making it difficult to use OS X for commercial hackintoshes. (or slow them up by having to provide so many cracked updates)

Can you verify this? I googled a bit and can't find anything suggesting this is true. I'd like a citation.
post #100 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by daniel84 View Post

I have to agree with this. Here's a comparison between German cloner PearC and Apple's Belgian store to show what I mean.

A top of the range iMac costs 2099 and you get:
Intel Core 2 Duo 3.06GHz
4 GB DDR2 RAM
1TB HD
8x Superdrive
NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 512 MB
802.11n WiFi and Bluetooth
USB2, Firewire 800
24" monitor

A top of the range PearC costs 2119 (that's just 20 more) and you get:
Intel Core i7 2.66GHz (quad core)
12GB DDR3 RAM
300GB 10000rpm HD + a 2nd 1.5TB 7200rpm HD
22x DVD-RW drive
MSI GeForce N250GTS 1024MB
802.11n WiFi and Bluetooth
2x Firewire 400
2x Firewire 800
Integrated card reader

Ok, you don't get a monitor but I bought a 26" Fujitsu Siemens monitor for less than 300 six months ago. It's probably cheaper now.

That's a huge difference in performance for roughly the same money. I can see why the cloners are doing what they do (even though it's illegal). There's definitely a market for it.

How is the OS FOR Pear working out for you ?
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #101 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by applebook View Post

Apple isn't suing individual users. Pystar and these companies are PROFITING off copyrighted material. This is what you fail to grasp.

Seems he's against copyrighting and the principle of IP in general.
post #102 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by maddoguk View Post

A great answer - make your mum proud?

I am a Mac user but I have long fallen out of love with Apple.

So will you be switching back to Windows/PC?

Why use something you don't enjoy?
post #103 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

So what I'm thinking is this, he allows the cloners a free run for some time, bashes a few to make it look good and then with the next OS X release (Snow Leopard?) he clamps down the OS to EFI.

EFI has to "check in" occasionally with Apple servers to verify OS X before it loads. So begins another DRM/cracker war, making it difficult to use OS X for commercial hackintoshes. (or slow them up by having to provide so many cracked updates)

Far as I know the commodity PC boxes don't have EFI, right?

EFI is actually a much more sophisticated BIOS replacement. Not sure whether it can phone home to Apple.

Did you mean something along these lines:

http://www.red-sweater.com/blog/153/...hones-home-too

OS X connects to Apple servers for a variety of things. Is the next step to assume it's also for verification whether the OS/hardware is legitimate? Possibly.

It's not really a privacy issue, if that's a concern. There are clear regulations regarding how Apple can/cannot proceed in these areas. They've got my credit card number. They know my address. That's normal.

It's no worry for legitimate users. I think the real problem comes if and when you'll require Windows-style activation keys and calling some call centre in order to activate OS X. I doubt that'll happen, though.

If Apple decides to disable hackintosh OS X installs via a kind of "check-in" verification, so be it.
post #104 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Just how powerful and expandable do you want this "small, powerful, headless mid-sized Mac" to be in relation to the Mac Pro?

The closer you get to the Mac Pro with this machine in terms of performance and expandability, the more you'll threaten Mac Pro sales. Unless of course, you don't think the Mac Pro should exist, or you think it should exist in a far more powerful form to more clearly differentiate it from the machine you want, price-wise (thus driving the Mac Pro's price even higher. Ouch!)

In fact, a small-form, reasonably powerful headless Mac . . . is a Macbook Pro, 15-inch or 17-inch. You can attach it to a nice, large display. Not sure about a second display, though. Plus you've got the advantage of portability. It can function either as a desktop or as a notebook. And it certainly isn't as expensive as a Mac Pro.

Apparently, hardly anyone is buying desktops anymore. Across the entire industry, notebook sales are far outpacing desktop sales. Why should Apple introduce another desktop into this market, and to address only a minority of this market to boot? They'll end up losing money on it.

Forecasts I've seen indicate that Laptop sales in 2009 will account for ~ 63%, that leaves 37% of sales of a huge market still in desktops.

In a shrinking market a la desktops, as it stands now(it may change), which design would you market? The tiny fraction of the market that is AIO? Or the much larger market of desktop towers?

Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

Yes and that's about the usual amount of market research that all you xMac guys do.

I notice you haven't provided any market research either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

ugh... here we go again: apple is dooooomed!
....

Unfortunately, some people do extrapolate Apple's apparent lack of interest in market share with eventual doom.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

So because you could not get your own way, you cheated, in fact you broke the law.
...

Exactly what law do you refer to? As far as I can tell, anyone breaking the EULA hasn't broken a law. Breaking an EULA and any liability would be decided in a court of law. Bad move on Apple's part if they start suing end users.
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
post #105 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by maddoguk View Post

An amazing argument.

Even if Apple's share of the "high end market" is 70%+ it is still a fraction of the overall market. Without unbundling it is unlikley to ever be better.

Besides Apple's share of PCs in the US over $1000 they also take 1/3 of EVERY dollar spent of ALL PCs sold in the US. They also make a direct profit on their sales instead of having to bundle crapware to eak out a small profit. I like that OS X comes with absolutely no trialware.

But all that is inconsequential to the original point. Apple's marketshare could be much higher but they have a different business model than MS. Why do you feel tht they should immiyate it when Apple is selling more Macs than ever and making more money than ever with thier Macs? Selling 2 OEM copies if OS X will lessen Apple's profit from one Mac sale despite increasing their marketshare. Marketshare is only meaningful measure within the same business model.

Ask yourself: If Apple didn't license their OS to other PC vendors when they had a quarter of their current marketshare and were fumbling as a company, why would they do it now when they are thriving in their Mac line and in their OS X deployments?

In the US, HP has about a 25% marketshare and Dell has about 20%, yet Apple with their measly 10% takes 33% of all sales from all vendors and has a market cap that exceeds both of them combined. You can disagree with their limited, boutique shop-like selection in relation to your specific needs, but you can't disagree with their business model as it is clearly working.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Apple must make me happy, right this minute, or they're making a big mistake.

How's that for market research?

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #106 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickag View Post

Forecasts I've seen indicate that Laptop sales in 2009 will account for ~ 63%, that leaves 37% of sales of a huge market still in desktops.

In a shrinking market a la desktops, as it stands now(it may change), which design would you market? The tiny fraction of the market that is AIO? Or the much larger market of desktop towers

Despite the shrinking number of desktops being sold Apple commands an even larger financial gain from their desktop line than their notebook line in comparison to other vendors. The AIO desktop has been a very successful for Apple for decades.

Quote:
I notice you haven't provided any market research either.

I tried to google it but I dont have time to look this stuff up again. AI has done plenty of articles on it with links to their sources so they can be found through this site. The fact remains that Apples Mac line is very successful, despite not fitting everyones needs.

Quote:
Unfortunately, some people do extrapolate Apple's apparent lack of interest in market share with eventual doom.

That is unfortunate they cant tell the difference between Apple obviously caring about marketshare within their business model and Apple only caring about marketshare within caring about profits or strategy. These people shouldnt run businesses.

Quote:
Exactly what law do you refer to? As far as I can tell, anyone breaking the EULA hasn't broken a law. Breaking an EULA and any liability would be decided in a court of law. Bad move on Apple's part if they start suing end users.

BrucePs reply was to someone who made their own OSx86 Mac. There are only two methods they could have used to build it. They could have used the complex Boot-132 which requires a non-hacked copy of OS X, which can be bought or DLed illegally or they simply torrented the pre-hacked version of OS X with would explain why 10.5.7 FUBARed their system since they probably didnt wait for the hacked version of the point update before installing. The latter option is a copyright violated (hacked) and stolen (illegally downloaded) copy of OS X which are both illegal actions.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #107 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The fact remains that Apples Mac line is very successful, despite not fitting everyones needs.

A point that deserves to be emphasized. Apple competes against Microsoft, but they can't be expected to compete against every Windows PC vendor, from big ones like HP, down to the street-corner screwdriver shop. Anybody who thinks they can or should try to compete against the entire range of PC vendors is being unrealistic. Apple has chosen where they want to be in the computer market, and they've been very successful in this market of late. Apple may not make products that suit everyone's tastes, priorities or budget -- but then, neither does every Windows PC vendor. If Apple doesn't make the perfect product for you, then that's just tough. Don't buy a Mac. Just don't expect them to change their entire business model to suit you. It isn't going to happen anyway.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #108 of 201
I disagree. I believe it is possible for MacOS X to reach 15% market share running on only Apple hardware. I don't think it is possible for them to exceed 20% without clones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maddoguk View Post

Sorry, where are you getting this from? Apple's Stock Market shares may be on the up but only because of the iPhone.

Keep an eye on OS net share http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-m...e.aspx?qprid=9 - OS X has never passed 10% and is on a slow decline, because it is locked into hardware that only seems to be rising in price.

To rise above 10% Apple would really need to unbundle, until then we can continue to look forward to overpriced software and repair/replacement costs while Apple keep rehashing old designs and making us pay more for their decline in quality.
post #109 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffharris View Post

I'm no lawyer, but a monopoly is more than just marketshare, it's a company uses unfair and/or predatory practices to gain and maintain dominance and ABUSES the power of dominance.
Microsoft is an example of ALL of it.

There's a long history (and list) of companies damaged or put out of business by Microsoft's policies.

The 1990's DoJ antitrust case against Microsoft was converted into a slap on the hand by Bush administration cronies.

You're right. You're right,... you aren't a lawyer (obviously.)

A company is considered to have a monopoly when it has control over a market (product or service) due to its dominance (market share) or position (power to restrict access.) A monopoly in itself has nothing to do with unfair or predatory practices.

It is not illegal to have a monopoly. People come up with unique "goods and services" all the time which give them monopolies in a "new" market which they've often created. There is absolutely nothing illegal about that. It is how they deal with new competition (selling at a lose, for example) and customer access to their product (artificially restricting access to artificially inflate the price) that can be illegal. Having a monopoly is not illegal. However, once it is determined you do have a monopoly on a "good or service", then additional restrictions are set in place in order to protect the customer/market.

I am not a lawyer either... So, I'm talking out of my arse.... which is easily confused with being a lawyer.

The greater the need/demand of the product or service the greater the need to insure that access to the goods or service aren't restricted or constrained due to a monopoly.

If you come up with a unique method of removing corn nuggets from your feces, and your secret method gives you a monopoly on the market... you won't find yourself with any legal worries, UNLESS you use your dominant market share to prevent others from coming up with alternative methods.
post #110 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by IQ78 View Post

Having a monopoly is not illegal. However, once it is determined you do have a monopoly on a good or service, then additional restrictions are set in place in order to protect the customer/market.

It's misleading (at best) to suggest that a dominant company by virtue of market share is automatically declared a monopoly. This is far from the truth. First, the important term of art is market power. A company has to be found to possess market power, not a monopoly. Second, the company has to be found to be abusing their market power to restrain trade. As we saw in the Microsoft antitrust case, it requires years of litigation to establish these facts. Then and only then can restrictions be put into place to curb the abuses. Finally, antitrust laws (in the US at least) aren't designed to protect consumers, they are designed to protect competition.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #111 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickag View Post

Forecasts I've seen indicate that Laptop sales in 2009 will account for ~ 63%, that leaves 37% of sales of a huge market still in desktops.

In a shrinking market a la desktops, as it stands now(it may change), which design would you market? The tiny fraction of the market that is AIO? Or the much larger market of desktop towers?

Exactly! You say 37%. OK let's work with that.

What percentage of those desktops are going to business and the enterprise.? Windows IT guys who don't want the Mac OS sullying their networks. 40%... 50% ? Let's call it 40.
Now we are down to 22% of the market.

You say that AIOs are a tiny fraction of the market. Maybe but all the major PC vendors sell them and Dell now has a two lines of AIO. Dell also sells a model that directly competes with a Mac Mini and lots of PC guys sell hi-end towers and gaming rigs that spar with the Mac Pro.
So let's strike out a further .... say 15%.
Now we are down to 22% of the market.

That 22% comprises of low to midrange upgradeable tower desktops sold to ... consumers.

And what are these consumers buying? Well I don't know for sure but Dell's desktop page might give as a clue. Dell has SEVEN desktop tower models that start at less than $400.00. Even the most ardent xMac fan will understand that Apple is never going to compete with that end of the market. I am going to assume that those type of systems account for approx another 60% (of the remainder). If you disagree with any of my figures ... well insert your own!

Your 37% has now dwindled to around 9%. That's mid-range, mid-priced, upgradable, consumer tower PCs. !!

60 million PCs sold in the US in 2008 (Gartner)
9% =5.4 million
Possible Apple share? Say 9% of 9% ? = 480,000


Not such a huge market now.
post #112 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

How is the OS FOR Pear working out for you ?

I don't have one, I was just giving an example.

The only reason I mentioned the monitor I bought was because it's cheap and bigger than the iMac's 24 incher.

I use it with my MacBook Pro.
post #113 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

60 million PCs sold in the US in 2008 (Gartner)
9% =5.4 million
Possible Apple share? Say 9% of 9% ? = 480,000
Not such a huge market now.

Regardless of Apple’s unit sales, NPD has previously reported that Apple gets 70% of retail sales from all US desktop PC sold in the US*. Since the lower you go in price the lower the profit per sale will be, even if the margin is the same as the higher priced models, which we know doesn’t usually happen due to the budget machine’s razor thin model.

BTW, "Apple sold a total of 818,000 desktops during the quarter, generating $1.05 billion in revenue.” in Q2-2009 as reported on 22-APR-2009.


* (source)
† (source)
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #114 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Regardless of Apples unit sales, NPD has previously reported that Apple gets 70% of retail sales from all US desktop PC sold in the US*.

I am not sure, but perhaps you missed my point.... which was "Your 37% has now dwindled to around 9%. That's mid-range, mid-priced, upgradable, consumer tower PCs!"

Which is my response to all the geeks (and their mates) that are convinced that the market for an xMac is massive and Apple is making a mistake by not building and selling one.

I believe that this market is:

1. Small
2. Getting smaller
3. Apple are making their decision based on much better data then anybody posting here.
post #115 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

I am not sure, but perhaps you missed my point.... which was "Your 37% has now dwindled to around 9%. That's mid-range, mid-priced, upgradable, consumer tower PCs!"

Which is my response to all the geeks (and their mates) that are convinced that the market for an xMac is massive and Apple is making a mistake by not building and selling one.

I believe that this market is:

1. Small
2. Getting smaller
3. Apple are making their decision based on much better data then anybody posting here.

Yes, I absolutely did missed your point. I must have entered into a Teckstudian vortex for a moment there. hehe
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #116 of 201
something fishy bout these fly-by-night 'lets make mac' hardware look expensive' clone makers...

funny how it neatly ties in with a recent competitors 'value' ad-campaign...
post #117 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickag View Post

Forecasts I've seen indicate that Laptop sales in 2009 will account for ~ 63%, that leaves 37% of sales of a huge market still in desktops.

In a shrinking market a la desktops, as it stands now(it may change), which design would you market? The tiny fraction of the market that is AIO? Or the much larger market of desktop towers?

I notice you haven't provided any market research either.

Unfortunately, some people do extrapolate Apple's apparent lack of interest in market share with eventual doom.

Exactly what law do you refer to? As far as I can tell, anyone breaking the EULA hasn't broken a law. Breaking an EULA and any liability would be decided in a court of law. Bad move on Apple's part if they start suing end users.

Well it looks like he's a pirate . Like the people who steal music or movies. If some one gives a friend 10 songs its ok . But a 2000. dollar machine is something else altogether.

Maybe i am wrong .i still feel he's a thief . And any one else who does this .apple may let it slide but its still wrong . don't beliveve me ask apple your self .


I just know that so many people make a living working for apple and all the suppliers who supply apple etc etc

A hacker is stealing from them . mac osx goes with the mac hardware .
no ifs ands or buts .

peace


9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #118 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Besides Apple's share of PCs in the US over $1000 they also take 1/3 of EVERY dollar spent of ALL PCs sold in the US. They also make a direct profit on their sales instead of having to bundle crap-ware to eek out a small profit. I like that OS X comes with absolutely no trial-ware.

But all that is inconsequential to the original point. Apple's market-share could be much higher but they have a different business model than MS. Why do you feel that they should immiyate it when Apple is selling more Macs than ever and making more money than ever with their Macs? Selling 2 OEM copies if OS X will lessen Apple's profit from one Mac sale despite increasing their market share. Market-share is only meaningful measure within the same business model.

Ask yourself: If Apple didn't license their OS to other PC vendors when they had a quarter of their current market-share and were fumbling as a company, why would they do it now when they are thriving in their Mac line and in their OS X deployments?

In the US, HP has about a 25% marketshare and Dell has about 20%, yet Apple with their measly 10% takes 33% of all sales from all vendors and has a market cap that exceeds both of them combined. You can disagree with their limited, boutique shop-like selection in relation to your specific needs, but you can't disagree with their business model as it is clearly working.




AAHHH-HAAAA
I FOUND 5 SPELLING MISTAKES
i fixed them al but one .
i feel human right now

peace my friend

9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #119 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by daniel84 View Post

I don't have one, I was just giving an example.

The only reason I mentioned the monitor I bought was because it's cheap and bigger than the iMac's 24 incher.

I use it with my MacBook Pro.

MBP rocks

dude
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #120 of 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

AAHHH-HAAAA
I FOUND 5 SPELLING MISTAKES
i fixed them al but one .
i feel human right now

peace my friend

9

I make spelling and other grammatical errors all the time. Especially when using my iPhone to reply, like I am now. The point that was made, by myself and others, is not that your grammar should be perfect, but that you ought not to write in a way that looks like an abstract poem by Denis Leary, requiring NSA cryptographers to decyhper.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Another Mac clone maker tries its luck with Apple