It's funny how it took Windows 7 less than a month to take over Snow Leopard
Why is it ?funny?? MS has a higher OS marketshre and Vista wasn?t popular, yet even Vista outsold SL by a large margin. It would be ?funny? if they didn?t, instead it?s just expected.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wakashizuma
If anything, it is embarrassing that Microsoft defeated Apple in their own game!
We?ve talked about this before, MS and Apple aren?t playing the same game in the PC market. MS sells a PC OS whilst Apple sells PC. The difference between Apple and other PC HW vendors is that Apple?s strategy is to sell it by also integrating the OS and other software to it. This is not the same stay as MS. Now, Apple if were to license their OS to any and every PC vendor and they still had 4% OS marketshare then you?d have a point. Until then, you don?t have a leg to stand on.
So let me get this. You're saying Apple is doing well in the market. Is anyone in this topic saying otherwise? Nobody is saying they are doing bad financially. Microsoft is not bad financially either. They have both probven to be successful companies in their markets. Hell even Google is recession proof considering their market value and how much control they have over web and search. These three are the big guys of the today's tech
We are talking about marketshare and OS. Microsoft owns the PC market and there is no other way around no matter how many ads gets produced. Microsoft has a tendency stick to their fights and finally prevail. They took on Sony (who made the most successful console of all time) and in this generation they are ahead of Sony.
And let me tell you this. Apple is doing great now but it doesnt mean it will continue forever. They fell once and they can possibly fall again. Sony used to be the commander of the tech industry and today they are a shadow of what used to be the top premium company in the market. Michael Dell had his famous "I'd sell the company and give the money back to the shareholders" moment and look where his company is today compared to Apple. It's easy to climb up but it is way more difficult to maintain that position. Many companies have failed when they reached the absolute top. Microsoft got lucky and learned their lesson few years ago with vista and now they know they should take nothing for granted and hence they are doing much better (and yes, they should thank Apple for that)
Why is it ?funny?? MS has a higher OS marketshre and Vista wasn?t popular, yet even Vista outsold SL by a large margin. It would be ?funny? if they didn?t, instead it?s just expected.
We?ve talked about this before, MS and Apple aren?t playing the same game in the PC market. MS sells a PC OS whilst Apple sells PC. The difference between Apple and other PC HW vendors is that Apple?s strategy is to sell it by also integrating the OS and other software to it. This is not the same stay as MS. Now, Apple if were to license their OS to any and every PC vendor and they still had 4% OS marketshare then you?d have a point. Until then, you don?t have a leg to stand on.
LOL, apparently it's news that Windows is outselling OS X.
1) Apple does not license OS X out to every POS vendor and their dog (thankfully.)
2) Not everyone can afford entry into the Mac ecosystem (such is the reality of the Premium segment of retail.)
This is how Apple wants it. And it's proven to be ridiculously successul. It's a shame that everyone tries to emulate Apple in this regard, but only Apple can pull it off.
One would think the above two points would be common knowledge by now. Oh well.
Why is it ?funny?? MS has a higher OS marketshre and Vista wasn?t popular, yet even Vista outsold SL by a large margin. It would be ?funny? if they didn?t, instead it?s just expected.
We?ve talked about this before, MS and Apple aren?t playing the same game in the PC market. MS sells a PC OS whilst Apple sells PC. The difference between Apple and other PC HW vendors is that Apple?s strategy is to sell it by also integrating the OS and other software to it. This is not the same stay as MS. Now, Apple if were to license their OS to any and every PC vendor and they still had 4% OS marketshare then you?d have a point. Until then, you don?t have a leg to stand on.
Apple invented the personal computer market. It was their game. Apple's approach to the PC market has always been hardware locked to software (except the brief period of mac clones). They have advertised this approach as the best one for personal computers (I assume you watch the Mac vs. PC ads). Yet consumers have consistently said no to this approach and they have chosen Microsoft's way of doing things. Nobody forced Apple from beginning to not do what Microsoft did. They could have yet they chose not to because they knew better. Turned out they didn't; Microsoft won and Apple lost in a market that they created themselves
It was their game. Apple's approach to the PC market has always been hardware locked to software
You freely admit that Apple’s business model is and has been the synergy of the HW and SW in a complete model that they create. You understand that Apple is directly competing with MS because Apple doesn’t license their OS to any PC vendor. You have acknowledged that Apple is more or less competing with the HW vendors plus whatever OS they use, be it Windows or Linux, so your comparison should be with other PC HW vendors.
HP has a 25% unit marketshare. Yet your previous argument is that Apple doesn’t have a majority unit marketshare on the OS. For Apple to do get 51% of the OS marketshare with their CHOSEN business model (note how that is different than a business model one is forced into) they’d have to get 51% of the PC marketshare. more than twice as much as HP has now selling $400 computers. Do you not see how HP couldn’t possibly do that and how it how be even more impossible for Apple to do that when it doesn’t sell any cheap plastic machines with Pentium or Centrino CPUs?
If you don’t then you don’t understand business at all. You are either very young, have a diet consisting mostly of lead paint and/or are TeckStud. I’m joking on the last two points, of course.
One?s playing Chess the other is playing Checkers, but because they use the same board they are playing the same game and checkers is better because you can get more Kings.
(still working on the analogy, but I know it?s in there somewhere)
so let me get this. You're saying apple is doing well in the market. Is anyone in this topic saying otherwise?
no. But it's an important point, germaine to the discussion.
nobody is saying they are doing bad financially. Microsoft is not bad financially either.
um . . . One is doing incredibly, unbelievably well (even analysts hardly understand it. The other has been in a steady downward slide for years.
they have both probven to be successful companies in their markets.
they have, yes.
hell even google is recession proof considering their market value and how much control they have over web and search.
google isn't in the hardware business, nor are they in the os business (excepting android.)
these three are the big guys of the today's tech
can't argue with that.
we are talking about marketshare and os. Microsoft owns the pc market and there is no other way around no matter how many ads gets produced.
so? What exactly does ms' marketshare mean in relation to apple? How is that signficant? Apple has completely bypassed ms' marketshare pressure and is in a completely different league, dictating the trends. Ms chose to license their os to everyone and their dog. Apple did not. Apple rules its segment of the market. Ms and the generic box-makers are sccrambling for the bottom end. Ms' marketing campaign against apple failed miserably.
Yes, ms has the biggest share. Like any second-rate budget brand. When you lose the premium end, you've lost the kind of consumer that helps build the desirability of your brand name. Just ask the laptop hunter talent; they all wanted macs, but not every one could afford them, for whatever reason. The message was pretty clear. Apple doesn't do low end, and you have to pay to play. Very typical for a premium manufactuer.
microsoft has a tendency stick to their fights and finally prevail.
i'm not sure what this means. "prevail" in terms of what? And ms is notorious for sticking to wrong-headed ideas and underperfoming products. Ms is wasteful, and their finances show this in abundance. Hence, their lousy financial performance for the last few years, especially for the last 2-3 quarters. How long are consumers supposed to wait for ms to "prevail", while the smaller, leaner, meaner competition keeps releasing game-changing products, year after year? It's easy to label "failure" (i.e., winmo) as some sort of hidden, "long-term" strategy to success. Yes, ms meant to do that!! Right. I'm sure that's what ballmer's thinking during those embarrasing press conferences in rooms full of macs as he fumbles his way through yet another apple-obsessed speech. Ballmer knows people with $$ aren't buying his products he's peddling, which means? I think we all know what that means.
they took on sony (who made the most successful console of all time) and in this generation they are ahead of sony.
yes, they make a great console. Can't deny that. Unfortunately, their long-term xbox strategy doesn't seem to translate well anywhere else in the microsoft organization. They made the most successful "smartphone", nd in this generation over decade of work has been wiped out in two years by a competitor new to the game. And the bleeding continues.
and let me tell you this. Apple is doing great now but it doesnt mean it will continue forever.
obviously. Same can be said for every other company out there. Enter gm.
they fell once and they can possibly fall again.
ok. It's certanly *possible*, like anything else.
sony used to be the commander of the tech industry and today they are a shadow of what used to be the top premium company in the market. Michael dell had his famous "i'd sell the company and give the money back to the shareholders" moment and look where his company is today compared to apple.
i agree.
it's easy to climb up but it is way more difficult to maintain that position.
true. That's true for any company.
many companies have failed when they reached the absolute top.
in a manner of speaking, yes.
microsoft got lucky and learned their lesson few years ago with vista and now they know they should take nothing for granted and hence they are doing much better (and yes, they should thank apple for that)
once again, i agree. The lesson-learned remains to be seen (give win 7 a few months to perform out in the wild), but so far it's looking good.
apple invented the personal computer market. It was their game.
sure.
apple's approach to the pc market has always been hardware locked to software (except the brief period of mac clones).
yes, exactly.
they have advertised this approach as the best one for personal computers (i assume you watch the mac vs. Pc ads).
they sure have.
yet consumers have consistently said no to this approach and they have chosen microsoft's way of doing things.
they actually haven't. Ignorance, inertia, universal licensing and cheap go a long way. In fact, it's characteristic of a typical budget-brand.
Consumers keep handing apple record quarter after record quarter. In recession. Apple is selling *more* macs. With cheaper, allegedly "higher value" options available. Yet people are lining up in order to contribute to record mac sales. The only one in the industry. Did i mention this happened in a recession?
nobody forced apple from beginning to not do what microsoft did. '
if i'm reading that correctly,the answer woud be yes. Apple's strategy is and was, deliberate and self-imposed.
they could have yet they chose not to because they knew better.
i assume that's laudatory of apple's strategy, so i'll go with yes. Apple knew better.
turned out they didn't;
except they did. Witness 2006-present.
microsoft won
won what? The bottom-end dregs? King of the bargain bin? Sure. Awesome to be associated with what people "settle for" when they aren't able to get the what thet really want. Unless ms was lying in its laptop hunter ads. Ms' profit keep dropping. Apple's keep rising. I'm not sure what ms is "winning" here.
and apple lost in a market that they created themselves
in exchange for ruling the premium segment of the market, commanding a ridiculous amount of mindshare, with i believe more cash on hand than ms now (what, 33 billion?), and charging basically whatever they please because they know everyone's falling all over each other to buy into the mac ecosystem.
Typical Apple hipster fanboy who dislikes when people critize Apple. If you criticize Apple, then you must shut up because mighty Apple is above everything. Instead of wearing of those tight shirts on your fat belly try to be a realist; not everyone bends over to Apple!
Man, we're really getting a lot of these angry types who didn't get enough love from their parents, lately.
Macs use the exact same compotents as the PCs out there hence why they can proclaim that they can run Windows too! They use the exact same processor, chipset, memory, graphics chip and so on! There isn't anything Ferrari like in a mac as much as you guys love the cars argument! If macs used a different hardware, then maybe you could make the argument (although we know how the whole PowerPC is better than Intel turned out!)
Red Bull used the same engine as Renault in F1 this past season, manufactured by Renault, in fact, yet the Red Bull was one of the best cars on the grid and Renault one of the worst. The Mac is clearly the Red Bull car here.
Many companies have failed when they reached the absolute top. Microsoft got lucky and learned their lesson few years ago with vista and now they know they should take nothing for granted and hence they are doing much better (and yes, they should thank Apple for that)
Actually, Microsoft didn't learn anything. Their fall is coming soon. Google has their number and it won't be that long now. And they don't even know what to do about it.
Apple invented the personal computer market. It was their game. Apple's approach to the PC market has always been hardware locked to software (except the brief period of mac clones). They have advertised this approach as the best one for personal computers (I assume you watch the Mac vs. PC ads). Yet consumers have consistently said no to this approach and they have chosen Microsoft's way of doing things. Nobody forced Apple from beginning to not do what Microsoft did. They could have yet they chose not to because they knew better. Turned out they didn't; Microsoft won and Apple lost in a market that they created themselves
Revisionist history. Microsoft didn't take over the PC market, IBM did, Microsoft just got lucky and came along for the ride.
LOL, apparently it's news that Windows is outselling OS X.
1) Apple does not license OS X out to every POS vendor and their dog (thankfully.)
2) Not everyone can afford entry into the Mac ecosystem (such is the reality of the Premium segment of retail.)
This is how Apple wants it. And it's proven to be ridiculously successul. It's a shame that everyone tries to emulate Apple in this regard, but only Apple can pull it off.
One would think the above two points would be common knowledge by now. Oh well.
Anyone can afford an entry level Mac the mac mini is 599.00 and the macbook is 999.00. Hardly out of the reach of anyone if they really wanted to get a mac. Not to mention refurbs and student discounts.
Apple had to pretty much give away SL to sell it.
Also Microsoft isnt in the hardware business so they could care less if their OS goes on a 300.00 netbook or a 5k gaming system. They have no reason to care about the hardware end.
It's funny, but, when you say it like that, it makes Windows 7 seem like some sort of virus. Maybe Boot Camp isn't such a good idea.
Whats really funny is when Apple makes a product like the iPhone that is acutally popular it gets hacked pretty much daily. They can't keep people from jailbreaking the phone and can't even keep the Pre from syncing with itunes.
OSX is farily safe from viruses because hackers don't bother trying to hack something that only has a single digit market share, why bother. Safari is a joke when it comes to being secure and so is the iPhone.
Also Microsoft isnt in the hardware business so they could care less if their OS goes on a 300.00 netbook or a 5k gaming system. They have no reason to care about the hardware end.
Whats really funny is when Apple makes a product like the iPhone that is acutally popular it gets hacked pretty much daily. They can't keep people from jailbreaking the phone and can't even keep the Pre from syncing with itunes.
OSX is farily safe from viruses because hackers don't bother trying to hack something that only has a single digit market share, why bother. Safari is a joke when it comes to being secure and so is the iPhone.
Mac OS X is vulnerable. At this years Pwn 2 Own contest the Mac was hacked in 2 minutes!
By the way you forgot to comment on why the iPhone is so easy to hack if Apple makes such secure software. You know seeing Windows is the only one with virus problems.
Comments
It's funny how it took Windows 7 less than a month to take over Snow Leopard
Why is it ?funny?? MS has a higher OS marketshre and Vista wasn?t popular, yet even Vista outsold SL by a large margin. It would be ?funny? if they didn?t, instead it?s just expected.
If anything, it is embarrassing that Microsoft defeated Apple in their own game!
We?ve talked about this before, MS and Apple aren?t playing the same game in the PC market. MS sells a PC OS whilst Apple sells PC. The difference between Apple and other PC HW vendors is that Apple?s strategy is to sell it by also integrating the OS and other software to it. This is not the same stay as MS. Now, Apple if were to license their OS to any and every PC vendor and they still had 4% OS marketshare then you?d have a point. Until then, you don?t have a leg to stand on.
Yes, Apple conceded the bulk of the dekstop market to Microsoft.
Their results:
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/01/21results.html
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ence_call.html
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/10/19results.html
http://themacfeed.com/?p=3920
http://www.thedomains.com/2009/10/19...revenue-up-25/
Record quarter after record quarter, going back to 2006, with growth outpacing the rest of the industry year over year.
Recession-proof.
Their market:
http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/ar...NPD/1248313624
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._by_apple.html
http://techblips.dailyradar.com/stor...-electronista/
The reaction:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10019711-37.html
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...g-industry.ars
http://digg.com/apple/Apple_leads_20...faction_survey
http://www.macnn.com/articles/05/08/....no..1.on.csi/
http://theappleblog.com/2009/05/06/a...he-experience/
http://blackfriarsinc.com/blog/2007/...s-customerbase
http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...stomer_sa.html
http://www.cultofmac.com/apple-posts...ion-index/2553
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/we...omments/22467/
http://bindapple.com/apple-satisfaction-2009-report/
http://www.macnn.com/news/25971
http://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/14/...action-survey/
http://www.ipodobserver.com/ipo/arti...ff_The_Charts/
http://www.theiphoneblog.com/2009/08...-satisfaction/
http://www.mactivist.com/2009/06/iph...kings-in-japan
http://www.9to5mac.com/jobs-satisfation-rate-high
http://www.jdpower.com/Business/rati...tphone-ratings
http://www.v3.co.uk/v3/news/2248040/...ps-top-billing
http://www.eweek.com/prestitial.php?...453807%2F&ref=
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2352796,00.asp
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2006/08/5002.ars
http://www.osnews.com/story/15553
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1689554/posts
http://forums.macrumors.com/archive/.../t-224872.html
The cash:
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic...vs._microsoft/
Yeah. Really embarrassing . . .
So let me get this. You're saying Apple is doing well in the market. Is anyone in this topic saying otherwise? Nobody is saying they are doing bad financially. Microsoft is not bad financially either. They have both probven to be successful companies in their markets. Hell even Google is recession proof considering their market value and how much control they have over web and search. These three are the big guys of the today's tech
We are talking about marketshare and OS. Microsoft owns the PC market and there is no other way around no matter how many ads gets produced. Microsoft has a tendency stick to their fights and finally prevail. They took on Sony (who made the most successful console of all time) and in this generation they are ahead of Sony.
And let me tell you this. Apple is doing great now but it doesnt mean it will continue forever. They fell once and they can possibly fall again. Sony used to be the commander of the tech industry and today they are a shadow of what used to be the top premium company in the market. Michael Dell had his famous "I'd sell the company and give the money back to the shareholders" moment and look where his company is today compared to Apple. It's easy to climb up but it is way more difficult to maintain that position. Many companies have failed when they reached the absolute top. Microsoft got lucky and learned their lesson few years ago with vista and now they know they should take nothing for granted and hence they are doing much better (and yes, they should thank Apple for that)
Why is it ?funny?? MS has a higher OS marketshre and Vista wasn?t popular, yet even Vista outsold SL by a large margin. It would be ?funny? if they didn?t, instead it?s just expected.
We?ve talked about this before, MS and Apple aren?t playing the same game in the PC market. MS sells a PC OS whilst Apple sells PC. The difference between Apple and other PC HW vendors is that Apple?s strategy is to sell it by also integrating the OS and other software to it. This is not the same stay as MS. Now, Apple if were to license their OS to any and every PC vendor and they still had 4% OS marketshare then you?d have a point. Until then, you don?t have a leg to stand on.
LOL, apparently it's news that Windows is outselling OS X.
1) Apple does not license OS X out to every POS vendor and their dog (thankfully.)
2) Not everyone can afford entry into the Mac ecosystem (such is the reality of the Premium segment of retail.)
This is how Apple wants it. And it's proven to be ridiculously successul. It's a shame that everyone tries to emulate Apple in this regard, but only Apple can pull it off.
One would think the above two points would be common knowledge by now. Oh well.
Why is it ?funny?? MS has a higher OS marketshre and Vista wasn?t popular, yet even Vista outsold SL by a large margin. It would be ?funny? if they didn?t, instead it?s just expected.
We?ve talked about this before, MS and Apple aren?t playing the same game in the PC market. MS sells a PC OS whilst Apple sells PC. The difference between Apple and other PC HW vendors is that Apple?s strategy is to sell it by also integrating the OS and other software to it. This is not the same stay as MS. Now, Apple if were to license their OS to any and every PC vendor and they still had 4% OS marketshare then you?d have a point. Until then, you don?t have a leg to stand on.
Apple invented the personal computer market. It was their game. Apple's approach to the PC market has always been hardware locked to software (except the brief period of mac clones). They have advertised this approach as the best one for personal computers (I assume you watch the Mac vs. PC ads). Yet consumers have consistently said no to this approach and they have chosen Microsoft's way of doing things. Nobody forced Apple from beginning to not do what Microsoft did. They could have yet they chose not to because they knew better. Turned out they didn't; Microsoft won and Apple lost in a market that they created themselves
If anything, it is embarrassing that Microsoft defeated Apple in their own game!
Which game is that?
It was their game. Apple's approach to the PC market has always been hardware locked to software
You freely admit that Apple’s business model is and has been the synergy of the HW and SW in a complete model that they create. You understand that Apple is directly competing with MS because Apple doesn’t license their OS to any PC vendor. You have acknowledged that Apple is more or less competing with the HW vendors plus whatever OS they use, be it Windows or Linux, so your comparison should be with other PC HW vendors.
HP has a 25% unit marketshare. Yet your previous argument is that Apple doesn’t have a majority unit marketshare on the OS. For Apple to do get 51% of the OS marketshare with their CHOSEN business model (note how that is different than a business model one is forced into) they’d have to get 51% of the PC marketshare. more than twice as much as HP has now selling $400 computers. Do you not see how HP couldn’t possibly do that and how it how be even more impossible for Apple to do that when it doesn’t sell any cheap plastic machines with Pentium or Centrino CPUs?
If you don’t then you don’t understand business at all. You are either very young, have a diet consisting mostly of lead paint and/or are TeckStud. I’m joking on the last two points, of course.
Which game is that?
One?s playing Chess the other is playing Checkers, but because they use the same board they are playing the same game and checkers is better because you can get more Kings.
(still working on the analogy, but I know it?s in there somewhere)
so let me get this. You're saying apple is doing well in the market. Is anyone in this topic saying otherwise?
no. But it's an important point, germaine to the discussion.
nobody is saying they are doing bad financially. Microsoft is not bad financially either.
um . . . One is doing incredibly, unbelievably well (even analysts hardly understand it. The other has been in a steady downward slide for years.
they have both probven to be successful companies in their markets.
they have, yes.
hell even google is recession proof considering their market value and how much control they have over web and search.
google isn't in the hardware business, nor are they in the os business (excepting android.)
these three are the big guys of the today's tech
can't argue with that.
we are talking about marketshare and os. Microsoft owns the pc market and there is no other way around no matter how many ads gets produced.
so? What exactly does ms' marketshare mean in relation to apple? How is that signficant? Apple has completely bypassed ms' marketshare pressure and is in a completely different league, dictating the trends. Ms chose to license their os to everyone and their dog. Apple did not. Apple rules its segment of the market. Ms and the generic box-makers are sccrambling for the bottom end. Ms' marketing campaign against apple failed miserably.
Yes, ms has the biggest share. Like any second-rate budget brand. When you lose the premium end, you've lost the kind of consumer that helps build the desirability of your brand name. Just ask the laptop hunter talent; they all wanted macs, but not every one could afford them, for whatever reason. The message was pretty clear. Apple doesn't do low end, and you have to pay to play. Very typical for a premium manufactuer.
microsoft has a tendency stick to their fights and finally prevail.
i'm not sure what this means. "prevail" in terms of what? And ms is notorious for sticking to wrong-headed ideas and underperfoming products. Ms is wasteful, and their finances show this in abundance. Hence, their lousy financial performance for the last few years, especially for the last 2-3 quarters. How long are consumers supposed to wait for ms to "prevail", while the smaller, leaner, meaner competition keeps releasing game-changing products, year after year? It's easy to label "failure" (i.e., winmo) as some sort of hidden, "long-term" strategy to success. Yes, ms meant to do that!! Right. I'm sure that's what ballmer's thinking during those embarrasing press conferences in rooms full of macs as he fumbles his way through yet another apple-obsessed speech. Ballmer knows people with $$ aren't buying his products he's peddling, which means? I think we all know what that means.
they took on sony (who made the most successful console of all time) and in this generation they are ahead of sony.
yes, they make a great console. Can't deny that. Unfortunately, their long-term xbox strategy doesn't seem to translate well anywhere else in the microsoft organization. They made the most successful "smartphone", nd in this generation over decade of work has been wiped out in two years by a competitor new to the game. And the bleeding continues.
and let me tell you this. Apple is doing great now but it doesnt mean it will continue forever.
obviously. Same can be said for every other company out there. Enter gm.
they fell once and they can possibly fall again.
ok. It's certanly *possible*, like anything else.
sony used to be the commander of the tech industry and today they are a shadow of what used to be the top premium company in the market. Michael dell had his famous "i'd sell the company and give the money back to the shareholders" moment and look where his company is today compared to apple.
i agree.
it's easy to climb up but it is way more difficult to maintain that position.
true. That's true for any company.
many companies have failed when they reached the absolute top.
in a manner of speaking, yes.
microsoft got lucky and learned their lesson few years ago with vista and now they know they should take nothing for granted and hence they are doing much better (and yes, they should thank apple for that)
once again, i agree. The lesson-learned remains to be seen (give win 7 a few months to perform out in the wild), but so far it's looking good.
apple invented the personal computer market. It was their game.
sure.
apple's approach to the pc market has always been hardware locked to software (except the brief period of mac clones).
yes, exactly.
they have advertised this approach as the best one for personal computers (i assume you watch the mac vs. Pc ads).
they sure have.
yet consumers have consistently said no to this approach and they have chosen microsoft's way of doing things.
they actually haven't. Ignorance, inertia, universal licensing and cheap go a long way. In fact, it's characteristic of a typical budget-brand.
Consumers keep handing apple record quarter after record quarter. In recession. Apple is selling *more* macs. With cheaper, allegedly "higher value" options available. Yet people are lining up in order to contribute to record mac sales. The only one in the industry. Did i mention this happened in a recession?
nobody forced apple from beginning to not do what microsoft did. '
if i'm reading that correctly,
they could have yet they chose not to because they knew better.
i assume that's laudatory of apple's strategy, so i'll go with yes. Apple knew better.
turned out they didn't;
except they did. Witness 2006-present.
microsoft won
won what? The bottom-end dregs? King of the bargain bin? Sure. Awesome to be associated with what people "settle for" when they aren't able to get the what thet really want. Unless ms was lying in its laptop hunter ads. Ms' profit keep dropping. Apple's keep rising. I'm not sure what ms is "winning" here.
and apple lost in a market that they created themselves
in exchange for ruling the premium segment of the market, commanding a ridiculous amount of mindshare, with i believe more cash on hand than ms now (what, 33 billion?), and charging basically whatever they please because they know everyone's falling all over each other to buy into the mac ecosystem.
Recession-proof.
Yup. Huge loss.
Typical Apple hipster fanboy who dislikes when people critize Apple. If you criticize Apple, then you must shut up because mighty Apple is above everything. Instead of wearing of those tight shirts on your fat belly try to be a realist; not everyone bends over to Apple!
Man, we're really getting a lot of these angry types who didn't get enough love from their parents, lately.
Macs use the exact same compotents as the PCs out there hence why they can proclaim that they can run Windows too! They use the exact same processor, chipset, memory, graphics chip and so on! There isn't anything Ferrari like in a mac as much as you guys love the cars argument! If macs used a different hardware, then maybe you could make the argument (although we know how the whole PowerPC is better than Intel turned out!)
Red Bull used the same engine as Renault in F1 this past season, manufactured by Renault, in fact, yet the Red Bull was one of the best cars on the grid and Renault one of the worst. The Mac is clearly the Red Bull car here.
The whole who stole my idea is getting old and nobody cares about it anymore.
I suppose it does get tiresome to always have to hear that your platform is like the shadows on the cave walls. Well, sorry, but it's not our fault.
Many companies have failed when they reached the absolute top. Microsoft got lucky and learned their lesson few years ago with vista and now they know they should take nothing for granted and hence they are doing much better (and yes, they should thank Apple for that)
Actually, Microsoft didn't learn anything. Their fall is coming soon. Google has their number and it won't be that long now. And they don't even know what to do about it.
Apple invented the personal computer market. It was their game. Apple's approach to the PC market has always been hardware locked to software (except the brief period of mac clones). They have advertised this approach as the best one for personal computers (I assume you watch the Mac vs. PC ads). Yet consumers have consistently said no to this approach and they have chosen Microsoft's way of doing things. Nobody forced Apple from beginning to not do what Microsoft did. They could have yet they chose not to because they knew better. Turned out they didn't; Microsoft won and Apple lost in a market that they created themselves
Revisionist history. Microsoft didn't take over the PC market, IBM did, Microsoft just got lucky and came along for the ride.
It's funny how it took Windows 7 less than a month to take over Snow Leopard
It's funny, but, when you say it like that, it makes Windows 7 seem like some sort of virus. Maybe Boot Camp isn't such a good idea.
LOL, apparently it's news that Windows is outselling OS X.
1) Apple does not license OS X out to every POS vendor and their dog (thankfully.)
2) Not everyone can afford entry into the Mac ecosystem (such is the reality of the Premium segment of retail.)
This is how Apple wants it. And it's proven to be ridiculously successul. It's a shame that everyone tries to emulate Apple in this regard, but only Apple can pull it off.
One would think the above two points would be common knowledge by now. Oh well.
Anyone can afford an entry level Mac the mac mini is 599.00 and the macbook is 999.00. Hardly out of the reach of anyone if they really wanted to get a mac. Not to mention refurbs and student discounts.
Apple had to pretty much give away SL to sell it.
Also Microsoft isnt in the hardware business so they could care less if their OS goes on a 300.00 netbook or a 5k gaming system. They have no reason to care about the hardware end.
It's funny, but, when you say it like that, it makes Windows 7 seem like some sort of virus. Maybe Boot Camp isn't such a good idea.
Whats really funny is when Apple makes a product like the iPhone that is acutally popular it gets hacked pretty much daily. They can't keep people from jailbreaking the phone and can't even keep the Pre from syncing with itunes.
OSX is farily safe from viruses because hackers don't bother trying to hack something that only has a single digit market share, why bother. Safari is a joke when it comes to being secure and so is the iPhone.
Also Microsoft isnt in the hardware business so they could care less if their OS goes on a 300.00 netbook or a 5k gaming system. They have no reason to care about the hardware end.
Well, yes, that's been obvious for some time now.
Whats really funny is when Apple makes a product like the iPhone that is acutally popular it gets hacked pretty much daily. They can't keep people from jailbreaking the phone and can't even keep the Pre from syncing with itunes.
OSX is farily safe from viruses because hackers don't bother trying to hack something that only has a single digit market share, why bother. Safari is a joke when it comes to being secure and so is the iPhone.
Mac OS X is vulnerable. At this years Pwn 2 Own contest the Mac was hacked in 2 minutes!
http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/p...-minutes-flat/
While a Vista machine was the LAST one to get hacked!
Well, yes, that's been obvious for some time now.
By the way you forgot to comment on why the iPhone is so easy to hack if Apple makes such secure software. You know seeing Windows is the only one with virus problems.