Could Apple be poised to take a big chunk of marketshare?
i've had this weird idea rattling around in my head of what apple will/could do to get a lot of marketshare quickly.
the long release time between xp and vista has put ms in a pretty precarious position with regards to user retention. since a lot of normal people wait to buy their computers until it comes pre-loaded with a new operating system, there are a lot of pretty old pc's out there right now. these folks have been waiting for vista for a while and are likely getting pretty tired of their current computer setups. in the meantime, mac os x has been getting good press here and there and many of those same people have broken their apple "cherry" with the ipod and itunes.
if apple can time the release of leopard fairly close to the release of vista, they could make a pretty serious maneuver that would strike right into the middle of the windows userbase. they could release tiger for generic x86 machines for a very low price (say $50). the people who want the latest and greatest of apple's operating system would still be buying macs and apple would still be enjoying their margins.
the people who are getting frustrated with their xp systems could either 1) buy vista for a fairly hefty sum, 2) buy a new computer with vista pre-loaded for a heftier sum or 3) buy mac os x 10.4 for a small fee just to see what it's like. if tiger works better on their aging hardware than xp did then apple makes microsoft look foolish. if it works just as well as vista, then microsoft looks pitiful. all of the r&d for tiger has already been covered and releasing it for other x86 computers would be pure profit (other than the expense of adding in some more drivers). users have nothing to lose by dropping $50 on their old computers to see if they could get more life out of them. apple has a lot to gain and could minimize the threat to their hardware margins.
there might even be people who would be willing to try it and still buy a new machine, in this case a new macintosh. even if they don't buy a new machine now, apple could gain a lot of markshare when the next wave of computer upgraders come through.
microsoft would likely try to hit apple where it hurts, which is microsoft office for mac. but since macs run on intel chips now and they're obviously amenable to the idea of running things in a virtualized environment, the loss of office for the mac platform isn't nearly as scary as it once was. if they let windows applications run natively in the os x environment, then microsoft basically can't stop developing microsoft office for macs because they could just run the windows version.
what do you think? does this theory make any sense? seems like the least dangerous way to convert a lot of people all at once. sure they might lose a little on hardware sales to people who would buy a dell and run the previous generation of os. but it would likely be offset because even if only a fraction of those switchers buy machines from apple they get a big chunk of profit from them. if 10 of 100 people who use this "generic" version of os x buy a mac next time, they probably more tha make up for the cheap folks who would be willing to run an old system to save on the hardware costs.
the long release time between xp and vista has put ms in a pretty precarious position with regards to user retention. since a lot of normal people wait to buy their computers until it comes pre-loaded with a new operating system, there are a lot of pretty old pc's out there right now. these folks have been waiting for vista for a while and are likely getting pretty tired of their current computer setups. in the meantime, mac os x has been getting good press here and there and many of those same people have broken their apple "cherry" with the ipod and itunes.
if apple can time the release of leopard fairly close to the release of vista, they could make a pretty serious maneuver that would strike right into the middle of the windows userbase. they could release tiger for generic x86 machines for a very low price (say $50). the people who want the latest and greatest of apple's operating system would still be buying macs and apple would still be enjoying their margins.
the people who are getting frustrated with their xp systems could either 1) buy vista for a fairly hefty sum, 2) buy a new computer with vista pre-loaded for a heftier sum or 3) buy mac os x 10.4 for a small fee just to see what it's like. if tiger works better on their aging hardware than xp did then apple makes microsoft look foolish. if it works just as well as vista, then microsoft looks pitiful. all of the r&d for tiger has already been covered and releasing it for other x86 computers would be pure profit (other than the expense of adding in some more drivers). users have nothing to lose by dropping $50 on their old computers to see if they could get more life out of them. apple has a lot to gain and could minimize the threat to their hardware margins.
there might even be people who would be willing to try it and still buy a new machine, in this case a new macintosh. even if they don't buy a new machine now, apple could gain a lot of markshare when the next wave of computer upgraders come through.
microsoft would likely try to hit apple where it hurts, which is microsoft office for mac. but since macs run on intel chips now and they're obviously amenable to the idea of running things in a virtualized environment, the loss of office for the mac platform isn't nearly as scary as it once was. if they let windows applications run natively in the os x environment, then microsoft basically can't stop developing microsoft office for macs because they could just run the windows version.
what do you think? does this theory make any sense? seems like the least dangerous way to convert a lot of people all at once. sure they might lose a little on hardware sales to people who would buy a dell and run the previous generation of os. but it would likely be offset because even if only a fraction of those switchers buy machines from apple they get a big chunk of profit from them. if 10 of 100 people who use this "generic" version of os x buy a mac next time, they probably more tha make up for the cheap folks who would be willing to run an old system to save on the hardware costs.
Comments
Don't forget, there are still a lot of people running Windows 2000, not to mention OS9 on G5's, G4's and older. I've not seen any completely convincing numbers about a mass migration to OSX even among Mac users. What is the percentage of all Macs running OSX? If anyone has solid figures that would prove or disprove this, I'd love to see it.
No one is using OS 9 on a G5. None of the G5's ever shipped with OS 9.
Not many people are using OS 9 at all actually. Most computers with OS 9 are sitting in the basement of a public school - and very few home computers are still running OS 9. Windows 2000 is more common (vs. XP compared to OS 9 vs XP), but virtually all businesses have switched to XP, and most home consumer users have now as well. I mean... they've had five years
No one is using OS 9 on a G5. None of the G5's ever shipped with OS 9.
...
Every G5 shipped with MacOS 9 as the Classic environment. My first G5 shipped with it preinstalled. My last PowerMac G5 required me to install it from the System Restore disk. I use it everyday.
Every G5 shipped with MacOS 9 as the Classic environment. My first G5 shipped with it preinstalled. My last PowerMac G5 required me to install it from the System Restore disk. I use it everyday.
You're using the "Classic environment"...you're not booting into OS 9. I think SpamSandwich's post was explicit. He was talking about running Win2k on PCs and OS 9 on G5s and G4s. But you can't run OS 9 on a G5. He said "I've not seen any completely convincing numbers about a mass migration to OSX even among Mac users" insinuating that OS 9 was still being run on G5...it isn't. You're running OS X and then running "Classic" to run OS 9 apps.
Maybe he meant that a lot of people with OS X on a G5 were using OS 9 apps exclusively and, to him, that meant they hadn't migrated to OS X...but that wouldn't make much sense. They are indeed using OS X...they just choose to run OS 9 apps in a compatibility layer. The migration to OS X in this case may have been forced...but there's no doubt about it that these people have migrated.
You're using the "Classic environment"...you're not booting into OS 9. I think SpamSandwich's post was explicit. He was talking about running Win2k on PCs and OS 9 on G5s and G4s. But you can't run OS 9 on a G5. He said "I've not seen any completely convincing numbers about a mass migration to OSX even among Mac users" insinuating that OS 9 was still being run on G5...it isn't. You're running OS X and then running "Classic" to run OS 9 apps.
Maybe he meant that a lot of people with OS X on a G5 were using OS 9 apps exclusively and, to him, that meant they hadn't migrated to OS X...but that wouldn't make much sense. They are indeed using OS X...they just choose to run OS 9 apps in a compatibility layer. The migration to OS X in this case may have been forced...but there's no doubt about it that these people have migrated.
You're right. I was typing too quickly and forgot to edit.
I meant OS9 on G3s, G4s. I'm still using OS9 on my G4 as an emergency backup system, even though I transitioned to OSX (running on a G5, naturally) over a year ago. I still end up having to go back to the G4 for CAD work. I can't forgive Apple for screwing up OS9 emulation on OSX. Absolutely idiotic.
The main point of the post was not every Apple computer owner has migrated, even at this late stage, and even after Steve Jobs (in a real George Bush standing on the flight deck moment) declared the transition complete. The number of users actually using OSX sounded small to me, whenever Jobs quoted a figure about the transition... Here's the question again... How many Mac computers are there AND what is the verified number of the OSX installed base?
---UPDATE---
10-28-06... BREAKING NEWS!... I just re-checked my OS9 Classic emulation mode (I haven't been able to use it for over a year) AND IT WORKS AGAIN!!! Hallelujah! It's been fixed! ... Never mind.
People expect relatively little from their computers (read: Windows) now. I recently met a new macbook owner who was relatively computer savvy. She wasn't very impressed with it yet, having had it for just a few days. I asked if I could show her some stuff and had it tell her a joke, use Exposé in all forms, shift Exposé, dictionary in Safari, control-option-Apple- 8, have a bunch of programs open at once...
Her eyes lit up and she thanked me. Two weeks later, she came to me and told me how she now was using voice commands to open documents and surf the net. I haven't done that yet in over 8 years with Apple. She told me that she showed all her friends who were shocked and were going to get their own Macs soon. The point? This is the kind of momentum that is built on a solid foundation. It's not a fad. Fads tap into fashion. Truly popular things tap into peoples' lives and make them better. Macs do that.
2007 = BIG!
1.61 million Macs? It's astonishing news. But it's been coming for quite a while now. With Leopard and...yes, even Vista...exposure is going to be at an all time high for the Mac. The computer press. Has it ever been this popular with Mac coverage? With Vista vs Leopard head to heads as well?
I can quite easily see Apple bursting the 2 million bubble per quarter quite soon. If not for the Christmas season, what about post Leopard quarter? 2007 could be a big year in that respect.
In a couple of years, will 3 million Macs per quarter be surprising?
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. Where are the Christmas adverts that show the Mac iChat videoing, the dock, widgets, iLife...etc. ? I guess the stores can do that. And for now, the iPod is the Mac's advertising arm to get people into the stores to be exposed to computers that Apple makes.
Yes, I think they are. Gateway's US no.3 spot is first up. Apple are breathing down their necks.
I think the key ball to watch is the lap top market share. First in the US. Then internationally. (eg the UK always follows the US eventually...)
Lemon Bon Bon
10% here we come.