It's possible that Apple will gain market share ( I don't know about 50% ). There does seem to be a growing disatisfaction among users for MS's greedy practices.
I see it this way :
Possibility A : Apple slowly gains market share as MS slowly fades into the sunset due to it's abuse of the consumer.
Possibility B :
MS just over runs Apple with increasingly easy to use OSs and public doesn't care ( I don't see this as a real possibility before 10 years have gone by.
Possibility C :
I think this wouldn't surprise me at all. Some company comes out of the blue with something revolutionary ( new OS , hardware or both ) and wipes both of the tired giants off the computing map. The reason I say this could happen is my experience with keyboards ( music synthesizers ). Back in the 70's and 80's all you heard about was Moog, ARP, Oberheim, Sequencial circuits ( the Profit 5 ) and the Yamaha CS 80. These big boys cost in the neiborhood of $ 5,000.00 and up. With all their fancy filters and oscillators ( and sliders and knobs ) they had a really big analog sound. However, one day Yamaha came out with the DX 7 ( all digital and affordable ). There was no contest. These keyboards were easy to use, fully programable, fully polyphonic, and most importantly in the accoustic instrument department they sounded real!
All those other companies dissappeared over night. I'm sure the younger people here may not have even heard of them but, that's what most of the big stars played back then. Nowadays all the keyboards are digital and minimoogs are retro. I think if someone comes up with something that raises the bar in computing enough you might be reading about Apple and Microsoft on some historical web site some day. It would be just another example of how times change and how the mighty have fallen.
By the way if you're interested there is a website called " Synthmuseum " where you can look at these proud, old, dinosaurs. A Polymoog once lusted after by myself was $5,000.00 back then. You can buy one privately now for $600.00 with case and in good condition. Easy come, easy go.
I think in the long run it is possible. The merging and loss of OEM PC makers will bring an even stronger hand of cards to Apple than will regulations against MS.
I think Apple has much over their competitors, but right now it is a bank account issue. MS has around 30 billion in the bank, Apple has 4 - and the majority of PC marketing comes in terms of OEM PC makers showing off Windows or MS talking about themselves. Apple can not compete dollar for dollar.
I work at an IT department that does student tech support. In the course of talking to more than 20 students and faculty that use Wintel laptops This year. [there are actually a lot of iBooks and PowerBooks at the college I speak of] I have found that no one who owns a Wintel laptop that gets more than 2.5 hrs. from a battery.
DVD-ROM on a laptop - very rare, CDRW, very, very rare. Gigabit ethernet? - any ethernet onboard? No, simply haven't seen it. Some have internal modems, some have video out, all have floppy drives, CDROMs, and PCMCIA card slots. Wireless? seldom. Oh and FireWire - haven't seen one yet.
Is Apple competitive with their portable offerings?
Yes, hell yes, big time.
Towers and iMacs competitive? eh, debatable, I think so, are they always the best for the money, eh, more of an opinion question.
But lets just look at PowerBooks. Why would anyone buy a Wintel laptop if it weren't for the need for Windows? Not for the hardware or performance because Apple's offerings are better across almost all areas in hardware.
I mean the largest LCD I can buy on a laptop.
Wireless networking integrated and at a fair price.
5 hr. battery life.
CDRW/DVD ROM drives.
Gigabit ethernet, modem, IRDA, FireWire, USB, modem all standard.
And even price competitive for those features.
That tells me that Apple needs to show the world a couple of things [true or not, no matter if you agree that they are true or not, Apple needs to show these to grow]:
1st - we are the best on the block, no questions asked.
2nd - 75% of people do not need Windows to do their work, they can do it on Mac OS, they can do it fast and they can have all the necessary compatibility.
3rd - Mac OS X is here, its new, its stable, its fast, its versatile, and it is better than anything you have ever heard of before.
4th - If you want cutting edge you want Apple Macintosh, the rest of the PC world is on our coats tails and so far behind that we will have the next big thing before they realize that you bought the last big thing from us.
5th - Spread the Apple Macintosh brand to those who are confused as to what Macintosh is and if Apple is still a company.
What does all this take? Money, advertising money, money that Apple can't toss out the door at the masses the way I am saying they need to. If I had it up to me and Apple could afford it I would say that a 4 billion dollar advertising campaign would provide market penetration that would lead people to think Apple is THE choice in a computer.
So when will this happen? When they get more money. sigh.
gumby5647, marketshare is defined like currency. The value is in its freshness. Installed base is the number you refer to, and though it's nice to know that Macs last a long time, it's also sobering that most of these computer do not help Apple's bottom line. They do not create OS X sales or other software sales.
Marketshare in the industry refers to quarterly or yearly performance.
God bless my Macintosh, but I am afraid I am going to have to take the pessimistic path here.
I really think that not much is going to change in the future. I say this becuase I believe both MS and Apple are going down dark stormy paths.
The Microsoft Concentration Camps are currently housing millions of helpless, clueless, innocent users that are soon to be marched into the fiery hell stoves of .NET. Meanwhille, Steve Jobs has been running around, keynote to keynote, touting such things as 5 flavoured iMacs, FlowerPower iMacs, pathetic Pro Desktop Machines, inexcusable excuses for a in-between option, (be gentle) inane attempts at a superior GUI with the brillance being disguised in an elusive CLI, and the amazing possibilities of a Macintosh: iTunes, iMovie & (heres the best part!) CroMag Rally & Nanosaur!
I believe that Apple will make no dent whatsoever in rescuing the clueless herds with their new "insanely great" marketing scheme. This will happen all whille Apples only stronghold, Graphics Design, slowly and quietly moves to Windows. Then, Apple will wither away into nothing, as Bill plants a flag on the White House.
However, I dont believe this is how things can be. I think one of the most strategic and effective things Apple can do right now, from any perspective, is buy Adobe out, and within 5 minutes, pull Windows Photoshop off the shelf. This is the key . . . no, its the fingerprint, needed to stabelize its current market share. This step is paramount in the survival of Apple.
After this step, however, comes the solutions that will augment the share. Firstly, they need to create a Pro Solution that fulfills its genre, and, a expadable iMac. Second, they need to launch a advirtising campaign 5 fold better than the current. Thirdly, and, in my opinion, most importantly, the need to revamp and expand its product spectrum. Now, before you all get scared and run before I bring back dark memories of the 1993 scheme, I mean Apple needs to stop screaming "we fulfill the Graphics niche only!" and have the spectrum divided into Consumer Solutions, Pro Solutions, Buisness Solutions, School Solutions, Server/Network Solutions, and Digital Lifestyle Solutions.
I really believe that a frontier still exists in non-technology orientated buisness. I believe if Apple releases a revolutionary solution for this, especially in retail, properly market it, and give it 5 years for perception of Apple and its place in everyday life to skyrocket, then Apple will find itself basking in the luxuries of 15-20% market share.
And, if, God Willing, this happens, Apple can release a Intel Mac OS, and the world will finally discover the Microsoft Conspiracy to enslave everyone and bake anyone that is submersive to .NET and Bill. Then, Apple can finally have half the market.
Who wants that to happen, tho? I know I dont.
Mac OS X
(To anyone still reading this post: Yeah I know . . I need to get my @$$ into Photoshop and create a sig for this SN - Mac OS X. I have two other forum SNs with sigs, but not this one!)
<strong>God bless my Macintosh, but I am afraid I am going to have to take the pessimistic path here.
I really think that not much is going to change in the future. I say this becuase I believe both MS and Apple are going down dark stormy paths.
The Microsoft Concentration Camps are currently housing millions of helpless, clueless, innocent users that are soon to be marched into the fiery hell stoves of .NET. Meanwhille, Steve Jobs has been running around, keynote to keynote, touting such things as 5 flavoured iMacs, FlowerPower iMacs, pathetic Pro Desktop Machines, inexcusable excuses for a in-between option, (be gentle) inane attempts at a superior GUI with the brillance being disguised in an elusive CLI, and the amazing possibilities of a Macintosh: iTunes, iMovie & (heres the best part!) CroMag Rally & Nanosaur!
I believe that Apple will make no dent whatsoever in rescuing the clueless herds with their new "insanely great" marketing scheme. This will happen all whille Apples only stronghold, Graphics Design, slowly and quietly moves to Windows. Then, Apple will wither away into nothing, as Bill plants a flag on the White House.
However, I dont believe this is how things can be. I think one of the most strategic and effective things Apple can do right now, from any perspective, is buy Adobe out, and within 5 minutes, pull Windows Photoshop off the shelf. This is the key . . . no, its the fingerprint, needed to stabelize its current market share. This step is paramount in the survival of Apple.
After this step, however, comes the solutions that will augment the share. Firstly, they need to create a Pro Solution that fulfills its genre, and, a expadable iMac. Second, they need to launch a advirtising campaign 5 fold better than the current. Thirdly, and, in my opinion, most importantly, the need to revamp and expand its product spectrum. Now, before you all get scared and run before I bring back dark memories of the 1993 scheme, I mean Apple needs to stop screaming "we fulfill the Graphics niche only!" and have the spectrum divided into Consumer Solutions, Pro Solutions, Buisness Solutions, School Solutions, Server/Network Solutions, and Digital Lifestyle Solutions.
I really believe that a frontier still exists in non-technology orientated buisness. I believe if Apple releases a revolutionary solution for this, especially in retail, properly market it, and give it 5 years for perception of Apple and its place in everyday life to skyrocket, then Apple will find itself basking in the luxuries of 15-20% market share.
And, if, God Willing, this happens, Apple can release a Intel Mac OS, and the world will finally discover the Microsoft Conspiracy to enslave everyone and bake anyone that is submersive to .NET and Bill. Then, Apple can finally have half the market.
Who wants that to happen, tho? I know I dont.
Mac OS X
(To anyone still reading this post: Yeah I know . . I need to get my @$$ into Photoshop and create a sig for this SN - Mac OS X. I have two other forum SNs with sigs, but not this one!) </strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree with some things you are saying:
1) Apple should try and buy Adobe. I agree. I don't know the financials on this one...but assuming it is possible...I agree. That would kick ass....
2) The PM's are underpowered
3) The iMac Flower Power thing was wierd in the least. But, they were cool in person.
4) They need better advertising. Much better. every product should be marketed like the iPod has been....and with even more exposure.
But, I disagree (said with Al Gore inflection) with some things also:
1) PM's are not "pathetic". They are underpowered and Apple knows this. The bus needs to be changed as well. They're not pathetic though.
2) The iMac IS EXPANADBLE! Average Consumers once a-freakin-gain, do not need PCI slots and additional drive bays. I am just now, after two years on the Mac, starting to think that SOMEDAY I might need those things. With the iMac, one can expand the RAM and the HD. Most consumers won't even do these things. Anything else can be done with external devices. There is ZERO reason why people need a more expandable iMac. If you need that stuff, you should be looking at low end tower. Yes, it cost more, but the iMac was created for people that wanted a computer that works, works well, and doesn't give them any shit. It also needs to be cost effective, have great Apple design and runs the Mac OS. It does all this, and it's now time for a redesign, which it is getting in two weeks.
3) I'm sure Apple has played around with OSX for x86. But I think they won't do it. They won't do it because it would be "hardware business suicide" for them if it was a succesful effort. As great as Apple design is and all, I don't know that I would pay $4500 for a top of the line G4 with a display when I could run the Mac OS on a top of the line PC system for 2500...or less! Or, if the iniative was a failure, it would cost a fortune in lost capital and even more in bad PR. It would be a no-win situation. UNLESS, Apple WANTS to get out of the hardware business....now that could happen I suppose.
4) [quote] really believe that a frontier still exists in non-technology orientated buisness. I believe if Apple releases a revolutionary solution for this, especially in retail, properly market it, and give it 5 years for perception of Apple and its place in everyday life to skyrocket, then Apple will find itself basking in the luxuries of 15-20% market share. <hr></blockquote>
I'm not really sure what you mean here. Do you mean Apple should release a non-computer product? What, like a salad shooter? Wait, that still has technology in it. Perhaps a Apple-branded furniture? Yeah. See there is one problem with that....they are A COMPUTER COMPANY/DIGITAL LIFESTYLE COMPANY. Getting market share by releasing non-computer like products is like GM getting market share by releasing, well, a salad shooter. WTF?
Apple needs to update its products and advertise more. It needs more frequent product updates and needs to be a bit more competitive with its specs for the price it charges. A little price dipping wouldn't hurt either.
You, with all due repsect, are proceding from a false assumption....that being Apple is truly hell-bent on getting market share. Although they might want to increase it....what they really want is to be a luxury brand, like Mercedes or Lexus (Mercedes has about a 5% share). What they really want is to be really freakin' profitable. Just because Jobs is a screaming liberal, which he is, doesn't mean he LIKES MONEY any less!
I any case, I think their share is going to go up anyway because of the retail stores, which look like they are going to be massively succesful, and the fact the biege box makers are tanking right now. There isn't much of a future for those companies....pretty soon we'll be left with Dell and HP-Compaq. Gateway is going down...we know that, so where does that leave Apple? In the right place , I think.
<strong>2) The iMac IS EXPANADBLE! Average Consumers once a-freakin-gain, do not need PCI slots and additional drive bays. I am just now, after two years on the Mac, starting to think that SOMEDAY I might need those things. With the iMac, one can expand the RAM and the HD. Most consumers won't even do these things. Anything else can be done with external devices. There is ZERO reason why people need a more expandable iMac. If you need that stuff, you should be looking at low end tower. Yes, it cost more, but the iMac was created for people that wanted a computer that works, works well, and doesn't give them any shit. It also needs to be cost effective, have great Apple design and runt he Mac OS. It does all this, and it's now time for a redesign, which it is getting in two weeks. </strong><hr></blockquote>
::cough:: Graphics card ::cough::
If the iMac is going to be taken seriously as a home (and therefore game) machine going foward, it will need an upgradable video card.
If the iMac is going to be taken seriously as a home (and therefore game) machine going foward, it will need an upgradable video card.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well perhaps....I could understand that. But you are assuming that your average consumer actually knows what a video card is. They don't, believe me....I KNOW they don't!
My own father, who ironically enough used to be a computer operator many years ago...had this conversation with me.
Me: So, you got a new PC. What graphics card does it have in it?
Dad: It has 3-D graphics!!!
Me: Wow.
Yeah...wow. Apple doesn't WANT consumers to be able to upgrade their machines...so they can sell them NEW machines in 2-3 years. And, BTW. that conversation with my father was with a man who has used Apple, Wintel and others. He has had computers since 1983 or before. Do you honestly think that Grandma Moses who is using her first computer knows WTF a VIDEO CARD is???
BWWHAHAHAHAHA.
It is not always a good idea to upgrade anyway. The other parts of the machine get obsolete just as fast...bus, motherboard architecture, etc. I may eventually CONSIDER a G4 upgrade for my Pismo...but that would depend on pricing. If it was, say, $599...I would laugh my ass off and go buy a Tibook. It just isn't a smart idea.
<strong>does Apple have what it takes to turn the tide and win back market share.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not 50% worth, and frankly we don't WANT them to be able to reach that goal. Do you have any idea how many people that number (50%) represents?? Do you know how huge a company Apple would have to become in order to serve them in even a half-assed way? Do you realize that by definition a company that big will be less nimble and less able to meet market demands for creative, elegantly designed products?
To attain so much market share, Apple would have to become a lot more like Microsoft or AOL, than the company we are currently used to. People don't get that no matter what Windows does, Apple *already has* more than enough of a critical mass of users...users that can sustain it indefinitely, and which can motivate 3rd party developers to make products for us. Hence everything we already have available to us, despite all the bad times and doomsday predictions we've been through.
I wouldn't mind Apple getting hold of say another 5% of the market -- perhaps get a better grip on the collegiate educational market and a real strangle-hold on the graphics and creative design markets (like 3D and audio, not just 2D and publishing)...but beyond that, I couldn't care less if Microsoft always has better than 80% of the market. They can have em.
It's totally irrelevant to my way of thinking...even more so now that OS X is quickly maturing into an elegant and ultra-stable product that developers are only too happy to build products for. And the more products like the iPod and Ti Powerbook that come out, the more our "critical mass" will continue to expand, enough so that every year we will hopefully get two or three new developers on board to port some product to the Mac OS that we previously didn't have access to.
Not really. Microsoft has a great deal of control over the situation, and that condition was created back in the late 80's and early 90's...and once it started it was pretty much all over. Once all those businesses and corporate types made such huge investments in MS technology, the game was over pretty much because by default they would have to look to MS for improved wares thereafter.
Really I think people put way too much stock into the market share thing. Microsoft, unless broken up (seems highly unlikely at this point) will always have a large majority of the market. But even if they leave say 15-20% out there, that number represents an enormous number of users...more than enough to sustain Apple, UNIX types and a few others.
As long as Apple keeps making higher quality (even if marginally "slower") hardware, and a kick butt OS like OS X, the user base will continue to grow - perhaps by a couple million users a year. And the developers will continue to provide us with good wares and more of them.
We're in good shape as far as I'm concerned.
As far as Steve-o and all his hyperbole, it's all just for show. Anything he says in public like that, take it for what it is...something to draw attention to Apple products and paint MS as the bad guy (even while praising them for products like Office). It's just Steve running his mouth.
As long as Apple keeps making higher quality (even if marginally "slower") hardware, and a kick butt OS like OS X, the user base will continue to grow - perhaps by a couple million users a year. And the developers will continue to provide us with good wares and more of them.
We're in good shape as far as I'm concerned.
I agree, i think people on these boards completely miss the point of the clock speed issue. Does it really matter that much? We are barely slower than most wintel computers. I am using a 450 Mhz G4 Cube and I have to tell you, this thing screams. It would be great if Apple did catch up on the Mhz side of things because it would be one less thing you would have to convince a PC buyer on. It doesnt rrally matter that much in the long run.
We are on good hands because Apple has been doing amazing things since 1997 and they are not stoping. Even if we do not see a G5 in MWSF we will see it this year. We will get a new iMac, a new iBook sometime this year. We might get more digital devices. Software is only getting better too.
And whatever happens to Motorola, happens. Our future is not inextricably tied to theirs.
We can get similar products from IBM at a minimum (perhaps branching out to other companies like AMD, or building their own chips later on)...IBM is a company that I think we can all agree is very healthy financially (and internally, unlike MOT) and creates high quality products whether you're talking processors, hard drives or voice recognition software.
All Apple has to do is keep on innovating and improving OS X, and the rest will more than likely take care of itself. There will be highs and lows along the way, but rest assured a couple years from now, and a couple years after that...we'll all still be here (using our Macs).
I think Apple would be thrilled to have a solid 6% consumer market share.
That would be a full 20% - 25% increase in business for Apple. That's roughly 3 million new Mac users. It would be nothing short of amazing. No joke, Apple will become a case-study for business students around the world.
The machine is a file server for a graphics network with 35 G4's.
Compare that machine to the top of the line G4! Compare it to the G4 servers and it's enbarassing for Apple!
At this point, I would rather see OSX for Intel than being stuck on the PPC. If this happened, you would see nearly 50% market share saturation in a few years with OSX.
I think they already have close to 10%...I recall back in the days when the iMac was still a new concept (and selling in massive voume), there were some discussions that put Apple's consumer marketshare somewhere around 8 or 9% at that time. One can presumably make the logical jump that they have at least that much right now, if not a half percent or so more...but like I said earlier...in the end it doesn't make much difference.
The point is, Apple today has approximately 30 million users worldwide, and that number continues to grow each year. Apple doesn't need anything more than that to remain financially viable and an industry innovator for many years to come...
...and with that I bid all you worry-warts a Merry Christmas. Everything will be better than OK in the end, so relax and enjoy your Macs!
About comparing PC to Mac price points. A friend of mine bought an AMD computer on line ( back in 2000 ) 700Mhz 20 gig HD 128 RAM from a company called Trademark for $2100.00. Well this might of sounded like a good deal until I found out it had no ethernet card. It also has a case that has the old " tray " method that's slides out to replace RAM. It makes me wonder what else is missing. You have to look at these deals very carefully because in a lot of cases it seems like there is always something missing.
PS. It also took him about 7 weeks to get it.
Also it came with a wimpy graphics card ( a Dimond stealth ) which he had to replace with a G Force Ultra 2.
Apple will never get 50% marketshare if they demand total control over your hardware and OS. At lest with Windows, the end user can choose what hardware they are buying, instead of having Cupertino dictate it to them.
[quote]If the kids are using Apples at school, they will know that they are not just for graphics etc. <hr></blockquote>
Apple's were the computer of choice in many, mnay, many schools in the '80s.
The machine is a file server for a graphics network with 35 G4's.
Compare that machine to the top of the line G4! Compare it to the G4 servers and it's enbarassing for Apple!
At this point, I would rather see OSX for Intel than being stuck on the PPC. If this happened, you would see nearly 50% market share saturation in a few years with OSX.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmmmm I couldn't get a similar config for less than 4000...care to explain how you got it so cheap?
Comments
I see it this way :
Possibility A : Apple slowly gains market share as MS slowly fades into the sunset due to it's abuse of the consumer.
Possibility B :
MS just over runs Apple with increasingly easy to use OSs and public doesn't care ( I don't see this as a real possibility before 10 years have gone by.
Possibility C :
I think this wouldn't surprise me at all. Some company comes out of the blue with something revolutionary ( new OS , hardware or both ) and wipes both of the tired giants off the computing map. The reason I say this could happen is my experience with keyboards ( music synthesizers ). Back in the 70's and 80's all you heard about was Moog, ARP, Oberheim, Sequencial circuits ( the Profit 5 ) and the Yamaha CS 80. These big boys cost in the neiborhood of $ 5,000.00 and up. With all their fancy filters and oscillators ( and sliders and knobs ) they had a really big analog sound. However, one day Yamaha came out with the DX 7 ( all digital and affordable ). There was no contest. These keyboards were easy to use, fully programable, fully polyphonic, and most importantly in the accoustic instrument department they sounded real!
All those other companies dissappeared over night. I'm sure the younger people here may not have even heard of them but, that's what most of the big stars played back then. Nowadays all the keyboards are digital and minimoogs are retro. I think if someone comes up with something that raises the bar in computing enough you might be reading about Apple and Microsoft on some historical web site some day. It would be just another example of how times change and how the mighty have fallen.
By the way if you're interested there is a website called " Synthmuseum " where you can look at these proud, old, dinosaurs. A Polymoog once lusted after by myself was $5,000.00 back then. You can buy one privately now for $600.00 with case and in good condition. Easy come, easy go.
[ 12-22-2001: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
I think Apple has much over their competitors, but right now it is a bank account issue. MS has around 30 billion in the bank, Apple has 4 - and the majority of PC marketing comes in terms of OEM PC makers showing off Windows or MS talking about themselves. Apple can not compete dollar for dollar.
I work at an IT department that does student tech support. In the course of talking to more than 20 students and faculty that use Wintel laptops This year. [there are actually a lot of iBooks and PowerBooks at the college I speak of] I have found that no one who owns a Wintel laptop that gets more than 2.5 hrs. from a battery.
DVD-ROM on a laptop - very rare, CDRW, very, very rare. Gigabit ethernet? - any ethernet onboard? No, simply haven't seen it. Some have internal modems, some have video out, all have floppy drives, CDROMs, and PCMCIA card slots. Wireless? seldom. Oh and FireWire - haven't seen one yet.
Is Apple competitive with their portable offerings?
Yes, hell yes, big time.
Towers and iMacs competitive? eh, debatable, I think so, are they always the best for the money, eh, more of an opinion question.
But lets just look at PowerBooks. Why would anyone buy a Wintel laptop if it weren't for the need for Windows? Not for the hardware or performance because Apple's offerings are better across almost all areas in hardware.
I mean the largest LCD I can buy on a laptop.
Wireless networking integrated and at a fair price.
5 hr. battery life.
CDRW/DVD ROM drives.
Gigabit ethernet, modem, IRDA, FireWire, USB, modem all standard.
And even price competitive for those features.
That tells me that Apple needs to show the world a couple of things [true or not, no matter if you agree that they are true or not, Apple needs to show these to grow]:
1st - we are the best on the block, no questions asked.
2nd - 75% of people do not need Windows to do their work, they can do it on Mac OS, they can do it fast and they can have all the necessary compatibility.
3rd - Mac OS X is here, its new, its stable, its fast, its versatile, and it is better than anything you have ever heard of before.
4th - If you want cutting edge you want Apple Macintosh, the rest of the PC world is on our coats tails and so far behind that we will have the next big thing before they realize that you bought the last big thing from us.
5th - Spread the Apple Macintosh brand to those who are confused as to what Macintosh is and if Apple is still a company.
What does all this take? Money, advertising money, money that Apple can't toss out the door at the masses the way I am saying they need to. If I had it up to me and Apple could afford it I would say that a 4 billion dollar advertising campaign would provide market penetration that would lead people to think Apple is THE choice in a computer.
So when will this happen? When they get more money. sigh.
Marketshare in the industry refers to quarterly or yearly performance.
.
.
.
.
.
OSX for Intel :eek:
I really think that not much is going to change in the future. I say this becuase I believe both MS and Apple are going down dark stormy paths.
The Microsoft Concentration Camps are currently housing millions of helpless, clueless, innocent users that are soon to be marched into the fiery hell stoves of .NET. Meanwhille, Steve Jobs has been running around, keynote to keynote, touting such things as 5 flavoured iMacs, FlowerPower iMacs, pathetic Pro Desktop Machines, inexcusable excuses for a in-between option, (be gentle) inane attempts at a superior GUI with the brillance being disguised in an elusive CLI, and the amazing possibilities of a Macintosh: iTunes, iMovie & (heres the best part!) CroMag Rally & Nanosaur!
I believe that Apple will make no dent whatsoever in rescuing the clueless herds with their new "insanely great" marketing scheme. This will happen all whille Apples only stronghold, Graphics Design, slowly and quietly moves to Windows. Then, Apple will wither away into nothing, as Bill plants a flag on the White House.
However, I dont believe this is how things can be. I think one of the most strategic and effective things Apple can do right now, from any perspective, is buy Adobe out, and within 5 minutes, pull Windows Photoshop off the shelf. This is the key . . . no, its the fingerprint, needed to stabelize its current market share. This step is paramount in the survival of Apple.
After this step, however, comes the solutions that will augment the share. Firstly, they need to create a Pro Solution that fulfills its genre, and, a expadable iMac. Second, they need to launch a advirtising campaign 5 fold better than the current. Thirdly, and, in my opinion, most importantly, the need to revamp and expand its product spectrum. Now, before you all get scared and run before I bring back dark memories of the 1993 scheme, I mean Apple needs to stop screaming "we fulfill the Graphics niche only!" and have the spectrum divided into Consumer Solutions, Pro Solutions, Buisness Solutions, School Solutions, Server/Network Solutions, and Digital Lifestyle Solutions.
I really believe that a frontier still exists in non-technology orientated buisness. I believe if Apple releases a revolutionary solution for this, especially in retail, properly market it, and give it 5 years for perception of Apple and its place in everyday life to skyrocket, then Apple will find itself basking in the luxuries of 15-20% market share.
And, if, God Willing, this happens, Apple can release a Intel Mac OS, and the world will finally discover the Microsoft Conspiracy to enslave everyone and bake anyone that is submersive to .NET and Bill. Then, Apple can finally have half the market.
Who wants that to happen, tho? I know I dont.
Mac OS X
(To anyone still reading this post: Yeah I know . . I need to get my @$$ into Photoshop and create a sig for this SN - Mac OS X. I have two other forum SNs with sigs, but not this one!)
<strong>God bless my Macintosh, but I am afraid I am going to have to take the pessimistic path here.
I really think that not much is going to change in the future. I say this becuase I believe both MS and Apple are going down dark stormy paths.
The Microsoft Concentration Camps are currently housing millions of helpless, clueless, innocent users that are soon to be marched into the fiery hell stoves of .NET. Meanwhille, Steve Jobs has been running around, keynote to keynote, touting such things as 5 flavoured iMacs, FlowerPower iMacs, pathetic Pro Desktop Machines, inexcusable excuses for a in-between option, (be gentle) inane attempts at a superior GUI with the brillance being disguised in an elusive CLI, and the amazing possibilities of a Macintosh: iTunes, iMovie & (heres the best part!) CroMag Rally & Nanosaur!
I believe that Apple will make no dent whatsoever in rescuing the clueless herds with their new "insanely great" marketing scheme. This will happen all whille Apples only stronghold, Graphics Design, slowly and quietly moves to Windows. Then, Apple will wither away into nothing, as Bill plants a flag on the White House.
However, I dont believe this is how things can be. I think one of the most strategic and effective things Apple can do right now, from any perspective, is buy Adobe out, and within 5 minutes, pull Windows Photoshop off the shelf. This is the key . . . no, its the fingerprint, needed to stabelize its current market share. This step is paramount in the survival of Apple.
After this step, however, comes the solutions that will augment the share. Firstly, they need to create a Pro Solution that fulfills its genre, and, a expadable iMac. Second, they need to launch a advirtising campaign 5 fold better than the current. Thirdly, and, in my opinion, most importantly, the need to revamp and expand its product spectrum. Now, before you all get scared and run before I bring back dark memories of the 1993 scheme, I mean Apple needs to stop screaming "we fulfill the Graphics niche only!" and have the spectrum divided into Consumer Solutions, Pro Solutions, Buisness Solutions, School Solutions, Server/Network Solutions, and Digital Lifestyle Solutions.
I really believe that a frontier still exists in non-technology orientated buisness. I believe if Apple releases a revolutionary solution for this, especially in retail, properly market it, and give it 5 years for perception of Apple and its place in everyday life to skyrocket, then Apple will find itself basking in the luxuries of 15-20% market share.
And, if, God Willing, this happens, Apple can release a Intel Mac OS, and the world will finally discover the Microsoft Conspiracy to enslave everyone and bake anyone that is submersive to .NET and Bill. Then, Apple can finally have half the market.
Who wants that to happen, tho? I know I dont.
Mac OS X
(To anyone still reading this post: Yeah I know . . I need to get my @$$ into Photoshop and create a sig for this SN - Mac OS X. I have two other forum SNs with sigs, but not this one!)
I agree with some things you are saying:
1) Apple should try and buy Adobe. I agree. I don't know the financials on this one...but assuming it is possible...I agree. That would kick ass....
2) The PM's are underpowered
3) The iMac Flower Power thing was wierd in the least. But, they were cool in person.
4) They need better advertising. Much better. every product should be marketed like the iPod has been....and with even more exposure.
But, I disagree (said with Al Gore inflection) with some things also:
1) PM's are not "pathetic". They are underpowered and Apple knows this. The bus needs to be changed as well. They're not pathetic though.
2) The iMac IS EXPANADBLE! Average Consumers once a-freakin-gain, do not need PCI slots and additional drive bays. I am just now, after two years on the Mac, starting to think that SOMEDAY I might need those things. With the iMac, one can expand the RAM and the HD. Most consumers won't even do these things. Anything else can be done with external devices. There is ZERO reason why people need a more expandable iMac. If you need that stuff, you should be looking at low end tower. Yes, it cost more, but the iMac was created for people that wanted a computer that works, works well, and doesn't give them any shit. It also needs to be cost effective, have great Apple design and runs the Mac OS. It does all this, and it's now time for a redesign, which it is getting in two weeks.
3) I'm sure Apple has played around with OSX for x86. But I think they won't do it. They won't do it because it would be "hardware business suicide" for them if it was a succesful effort. As great as Apple design is and all, I don't know that I would pay $4500 for a top of the line G4 with a display when I could run the Mac OS on a top of the line PC system for 2500...or less! Or, if the iniative was a failure, it would cost a fortune in lost capital and even more in bad PR. It would be a no-win situation. UNLESS, Apple WANTS to get out of the hardware business....now that could happen I suppose.
4) [quote] really believe that a frontier still exists in non-technology orientated buisness. I believe if Apple releases a revolutionary solution for this, especially in retail, properly market it, and give it 5 years for perception of Apple and its place in everyday life to skyrocket, then Apple will find itself basking in the luxuries of 15-20% market share. <hr></blockquote>
I'm not really sure what you mean here. Do you mean Apple should release a non-computer product? What, like a salad shooter? Wait, that still has technology in it. Perhaps a Apple-branded furniture? Yeah. See there is one problem with that....they are A COMPUTER COMPANY/DIGITAL LIFESTYLE COMPANY. Getting market share by releasing non-computer like products is like GM getting market share by releasing, well, a salad shooter. WTF?
Apple needs to update its products and advertise more. It needs more frequent product updates and needs to be a bit more competitive with its specs for the price it charges. A little price dipping wouldn't hurt either.
You, with all due repsect, are proceding from a false assumption....that being Apple is truly hell-bent on getting market share. Although they might want to increase it....what they really want is to be a luxury brand, like Mercedes or Lexus (Mercedes has about a 5% share). What they really want is to be really freakin' profitable. Just because Jobs is a screaming liberal, which he is, doesn't mean he LIKES MONEY any less!
I any case, I think their share is going to go up anyway because of the retail stores, which look like they are going to be massively succesful, and the fact the biege box makers are tanking right now. There isn't much of a future for those companies....pretty soon we'll be left with Dell and HP-Compaq. Gateway is going down...we know that, so where does that leave Apple? In the right place , I think.
[ 12-24-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
<strong>2) The iMac IS EXPANADBLE! Average Consumers once a-freakin-gain, do not need PCI slots and additional drive bays. I am just now, after two years on the Mac, starting to think that SOMEDAY I might need those things. With the iMac, one can expand the RAM and the HD. Most consumers won't even do these things. Anything else can be done with external devices. There is ZERO reason why people need a more expandable iMac. If you need that stuff, you should be looking at low end tower. Yes, it cost more, but the iMac was created for people that wanted a computer that works, works well, and doesn't give them any shit. It also needs to be cost effective, have great Apple design and runt he Mac OS. It does all this, and it's now time for a redesign, which it is getting in two weeks. </strong><hr></blockquote>
::cough:: Graphics card ::cough::
If the iMac is going to be taken seriously as a home (and therefore game) machine going foward, it will need an upgradable video card.
<strong>
::cough:: Graphics card ::cough::
If the iMac is going to be taken seriously as a home (and therefore game) machine going foward, it will need an upgradable video card.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well perhaps....I could understand that. But you are assuming that your average consumer actually knows what a video card is. They don't, believe me....I KNOW they don't!
My own father, who ironically enough used to be a computer operator many years ago...had this conversation with me.
Me: So, you got a new PC. What graphics card does it have in it?
Dad: It has 3-D graphics!!!
Me: Wow.
Yeah...wow. Apple doesn't WANT consumers to be able to upgrade their machines...so they can sell them NEW machines in 2-3 years. And, BTW. that conversation with my father was with a man who has used Apple, Wintel and others. He has had computers since 1983 or before. Do you honestly think that Grandma Moses who is using her first computer knows WTF a VIDEO CARD is???
BWWHAHAHAHAHA.
It is not always a good idea to upgrade anyway. The other parts of the machine get obsolete just as fast...bus, motherboard architecture, etc. I may eventually CONSIDER a G4 upgrade for my Pismo...but that would depend on pricing. If it was, say, $599...I would laugh my ass off and go buy a Tibook. It just isn't a smart idea.
<strong>does Apple have what it takes to turn the tide and win back market share.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not 50% worth, and frankly we don't WANT them to be able to reach that goal. Do you have any idea how many people that number (50%) represents?? Do you know how huge a company Apple would have to become in order to serve them in even a half-assed way? Do you realize that by definition a company that big will be less nimble and less able to meet market demands for creative, elegantly designed products?
To attain so much market share, Apple would have to become a lot more like Microsoft or AOL, than the company we are currently used to. People don't get that no matter what Windows does, Apple *already has* more than enough of a critical mass of users...users that can sustain it indefinitely, and which can motivate 3rd party developers to make products for us. Hence everything we already have available to us, despite all the bad times and doomsday predictions we've been through.
I wouldn't mind Apple getting hold of say another 5% of the market -- perhaps get a better grip on the collegiate educational market and a real strangle-hold on the graphics and creative design markets (like 3D and audio, not just 2D and publishing)...but beyond that, I couldn't care less if Microsoft always has better than 80% of the market. They can have em.
It's totally irrelevant to my way of thinking...even more so now that OS X is quickly maturing into an elegant and ultra-stable product that developers are only too happy to build products for. And the more products like the iPod and Ti Powerbook that come out, the more our "critical mass" will continue to expand, enough so that every year we will hopefully get two or three new developers on board to port some product to the Mac OS that we previously didn't have access to.
I think the future is bright....
[ 12-24-2001: Message edited by: Moogs ? ]</p>
Really I think people put way too much stock into the market share thing. Microsoft, unless broken up (seems highly unlikely at this point) will always have a large majority of the market. But even if they leave say 15-20% out there, that number represents an enormous number of users...more than enough to sustain Apple, UNIX types and a few others.
As long as Apple keeps making higher quality (even if marginally "slower") hardware, and a kick butt OS like OS X, the user base will continue to grow - perhaps by a couple million users a year. And the developers will continue to provide us with good wares and more of them.
We're in good shape as far as I'm concerned.
As far as Steve-o and all his hyperbole, it's all just for show. Anything he says in public like that, take it for what it is...something to draw attention to Apple products and paint MS as the bad guy (even while praising them for products like Office). It's just Steve running his mouth.
[ 12-24-2001: Message edited by: Moogs ? ]</p>
We're in good shape as far as I'm concerned.
I agree, i think people on these boards completely miss the point of the clock speed issue. Does it really matter that much? We are barely slower than most wintel computers. I am using a 450 Mhz G4 Cube and I have to tell you, this thing screams. It would be great if Apple did catch up on the Mhz side of things because it would be one less thing you would have to convince a PC buyer on. It doesnt rrally matter that much in the long run.
We are on good hands because Apple has been doing amazing things since 1997 and they are not stoping. Even if we do not see a G5 in MWSF we will see it this year. We will get a new iMac, a new iBook sometime this year. We might get more digital devices. Software is only getting better too.
And whatever happens to Motorola, happens. Our future is not inextricably tied to theirs.
We can get similar products from IBM at a minimum (perhaps branching out to other companies like AMD, or building their own chips later on)...IBM is a company that I think we can all agree is very healthy financially (and internally, unlike MOT) and creates high quality products whether you're talking processors, hard drives or voice recognition software.
All Apple has to do is keep on innovating and improving OS X, and the rest will more than likely take care of itself. There will be highs and lows along the way, but rest assured a couple years from now, and a couple years after that...we'll all still be here (using our Macs).
[ 12-24-2001: Message edited by: Moogs ? ]</p>
I think Apple would be thrilled to have a solid 6% consumer market share.
That would be a full 20% - 25% increase in business for Apple. That's roughly 3 million new Mac users. It would be nothing short of amazing. No joke, Apple will become a case-study for business students around the world.
Happy Holidays.
... 14 days to MWSF
However, I just purchased a file server from Dell. It's a Dell 4400 with the following:
- PIII 933 Xeon processor
- 512 MB RAM
- SCSI 160 Raid
- 8 Hot swap drive bays
- 1 18Gb SCSI 160 SCA Drive
- Hot swap PCI slots
- Redundant, hot-swap power supplies
- Redundant, hot-swap fans
- Something like 8 PCI slots
- 8 DIMM slots
- 2 Dual Intel NIC's (4 100B Ethernet connections linked through port-trunking)
All this for....ONLY $3000.00 shipped to my door!
The machine is a file server for a graphics network with 35 G4's.
Compare that machine to the top of the line G4! Compare it to the G4 servers and it's enbarassing for Apple!
At this point, I would rather see OSX for Intel than being stuck on the PPC. If this happened, you would see nearly 50% market share saturation in a few years with OSX.
The point is, Apple today has approximately 30 million users worldwide, and that number continues to grow each year. Apple doesn't need anything more than that to remain financially viable and an industry innovator for many years to come...
...and with that I bid all you worry-warts a Merry Christmas. Everything will be better than OK in the end, so relax and enjoy your Macs!
PS. It also took him about 7 weeks to get it.
Also it came with a wimpy graphics card ( a Dimond stealth ) which he had to replace with a G Force Ultra 2.
[ 12-25-2001: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
[quote]If the kids are using Apples at school, they will know that they are not just for graphics etc. <hr></blockquote>
Apple's were the computer of choice in many, mnay, many schools in the '80s.
Look what happened.
[ 12-24-2001: Message edited by: DoctorGonzo ]</p>
<strong><snip>However, I just purchased a file server from Dell. It's a Dell 4400 with the following:
- PIII 933 Xeon processor
- 512 MB RAM
- SCSI 160 Raid
- 8 Hot swap drive bays
- 1 18Gb SCSI 160 SCA Drive
- Hot swap PCI slots
- Redundant, hot-swap power supplies
- Redundant, hot-swap fans
- Something like 8 PCI slots
- 8 DIMM slots
- 2 Dual Intel NIC's (4 100B Ethernet connections linked through port-trunking)
All this for....ONLY $3000.00 shipped to my door!
The machine is a file server for a graphics network with 35 G4's.
Compare that machine to the top of the line G4! Compare it to the G4 servers and it's enbarassing for Apple!
At this point, I would rather see OSX for Intel than being stuck on the PPC. If this happened, you would see nearly 50% market share saturation in a few years with OSX.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmmmm I couldn't get a similar config for less than 4000...care to explain how you got it so cheap?