Not sure if someone else already posted this - but at some point - someone should find a way to track how many PCs are disposed of relative to Macs. Or how many new units purchased are in addition to vs to replace existing equipment.
I've got Macs that are 10 years old and still in use - PCs that old - if they still work at all - may only be useful in a thin client mode if you have a system powerful enough to run a number of virtual machines that the thin clients can remote into.
Same here with many working old Macs, even base model iBook G4 running Leopard with no problems. I have commented before that the residual value on Macs should also be a factor in looking at the whole comparative price thing. The ability to sell a Mac at a few years old and put that money towards a new one means the new one is the same price as a Dell! Try that with a three year old Dell $600 door stop!
I think the practice of including these $299 netbooks with their whopping 6GB drives and limited functionality (not all of them just the really cheap ones stacked by the hundreds at Wal-Mart) into the PC shipment market share numbers is suspect. If these netbooks are being counted as PC's then the iPod Touch should as well.
edit: (further thoughts) Windows Based cash registers/sales terminals and ATM machines are not counted in the PC shipments market share calculations and some of them have more functionality than these ultra cheap netbooks. iPod Touches, iPhones, other smart phones and netbooks should be counted in their own category as they are blurring into many categories but they are not traditional PCs.
Just because they are small and lighter in the processor dept does not make these a new category. They don't all have 6GB drives and i fail to see how they have that much of a limited functionality besides not being able to run 3D and Pro Apps. They are just small. These laptops are about as powerful as some decent laptops from 3-4 years ago, heck sometimes more powerful than the eMachines. Do we put eMachines in a separate category too? No they are PCs, just a bit less powerful.
I have an Acer Aspire One and it is quite capable for what it is used for, especially with Linux on it. I wiped XP Shmome off of it and am now toying with putting Leopard on it too. I do hope Apple releases a tiny laptop like my Acer though. I love the portability and travelability of it.
Only Microsoft is profiting from the netbook phenomenon.
Actually, I've heard they aren't. At least not yet.
Vista won't run on these machines, forcing MS to stay in a business they really want to exit: selling Win XP, and selling it reportedly for netbooks at less than $20 a copy.
As atom processors improve, Win 7 beta already runs well on netbooks and will become the only OS MS offers for them - and at a prettier penny as Win 7 is - however it stacks up against OS X - already being regarded as MS's best OS to date and thus worth a greater premium over Linux - just as Macs are considered worth a premium over Win machines.
This is relevant to a thread on Apple Market share, as if Win 7 is only "good enough" to appeal to current Win users as a significant improvement, that's, well, good enough for MS, so the challenge for Snow Leopard is to not just keep their edge, but to increase the gap in usability and appeal to maintain high end mind share. Not that easy to initially get across in a release which is mostly under the hood and which will really only show in applications still on the drawing board.....
Vista won't run on these machines, forcing MS to stay in a business they really want to exit: selling Win XP, and selling it reportedly for netbooks at less than $20 a copy.
I think $20 is a high estimate. Remember, the OEMs had Linux as counter so they could easily say that if you offer us WinXP at a certain price we will just use Linux. MS certainly didn't want that and overall it would be better to just give them XP to maintain their dominance than to lose any more marketshare.
I think there was a reported 25M netbooks sold (please adjust if incorrect) and at $20 a pop for the WinXP you stated. If Windows are on 80% of them that that $400M in profit for MS. Remember, all the R&D for XP is long done so this cost them nothing. That is a pretty good bump if they really are getting $20 per machine.
I think there was a reported 25M netbooks sold (please adjust if incorrect) and at $20 a pop for the WinXP you stated. If Windows are on 80% of them that that $400M in profit for MS. Remember, all the R&D for XP is long done so this cost them nothing. That is a pretty good bump if they really are getting $20 per machine.
The 25 million is an estimate of netbook sales for this year. It was around 10 to 12 million sold last year.
I think that there is a chance that Microsoft might actually be losing money on the whole netbook phenomenon. A small percentage of them aren't even running MS software and these little machines must (to some extent) be cannibalising sales of notebooks running Vista.
I have read estimates that those 25 million netbooks could gobble up sales of 8 million conventional PC laptops.... running Vista. How much would that cost Microsoft?
I have read estimates that those 25 million netbooks could gobble up sales of 8 million conventional PC laptops.... running Vista. How much would that cost Microsoft?
I am of the camp that thinks that netbooks only supplement full computers or are used as your main computer for a very short time.
I have purchased two netbooks in the past year, but with WinXP on them since they had the better components in them. This is two sales of WinXP that I wouldn't have bought if not for netbooks as I am a Mac user when it comes to my main systems. I installed Mac OS X on the MSI WInd and I'm bought the Acer Aspire One in a pinch knowing that the WiFi driver had no OS X KEXT, but I'm hopeful.
I am of the camp that thinks that netbooks only supplement full computers or are used as your main computer for a very short time.
I agree that not many netbooks will be the 'main' computer, but a lot of people (and families) already have more than one computer... with the rise of the laptop in the last few years.
The main thrust of the "Netbook Brigade" has always been.... that "they are cheap", and in this economic climate people want to save money. If you are buying a cheaper system in order to save money then, conversely, you must be NOT buying the more expensive system
Remember, a netbook might not be replacing another computer but it certainly could be delaying the purchase of an upgrade to one's main system.
The 25 million is an estimate of netbook sales for this year. It was around 10 to 12 million sold last year.
I think that there is a chance that Microsoft might actually be losing money on the whole netbook phenomenon. A small percentage of them aren't even running MS software and these little machines must (to some extent) be cannibalising sales of notebooks running Vista.
I have read estimates that those 25 million netbooks could gobble up sales of 8 million conventional PC laptops.... running Vista. How much would that cost Microsoft?
Basically what he said - whether MS is getting $5 (or $2) or $10-20/machine, most of that is not incremental revenue, rather a more profitable sale of (also by now fully cost-amortized) Vista not made, and so money outta their pocket (or if you prefer, never in it).
Win 7 will change the whole MS/Linux/netbook profit and value equation though, since a) it will run OK and b) be popular, even if the premium over Linux NB's increases.
I'm so glad the open source movement and Linux exist - for what they've given us and for keeping the comp more honest - but am so much an end user after decades I'm only going to personally choose polished major apps with open source roots like OS X and Firefox. And yeah, I'm probably running bits of open source code every day of my life - at an ATM (unless it's still running OS/2!) - maybe under the hood of my car - but I'm not going to load Linux and choose desktops and etc. anymore.
Leaving the only real wild card in the space between smart phones and small notebooks either Apple (or two guys in a garage somewhere we'll be talking about 30 years from now the way we talk about Woz and Steve today).
Not being overly impressed by anything in that space so far, I'd love to see Apple (or the two guys or two gals or two genetically modified seals or whatever's in that garage) really reinvent this wheel.
Comments
Not sure if someone else already posted this - but at some point - someone should find a way to track how many PCs are disposed of relative to Macs. Or how many new units purchased are in addition to vs to replace existing equipment.
I've got Macs that are 10 years old and still in use - PCs that old - if they still work at all - may only be useful in a thin client mode if you have a system powerful enough to run a number of virtual machines that the thin clients can remote into.
Same here with many working old Macs, even base model iBook G4 running Leopard with no problems. I have commented before that the residual value on Macs should also be a factor in looking at the whole comparative price thing. The ability to sell a Mac at a few years old and put that money towards a new one means the new one is the same price as a Dell! Try that with a three year old Dell $600 door stop!
I think the practice of including these $299 netbooks with their whopping 6GB drives and limited functionality (not all of them just the really cheap ones stacked by the hundreds at Wal-Mart) into the PC shipment market share numbers is suspect. If these netbooks are being counted as PC's then the iPod Touch should as well.
edit: (further thoughts) Windows Based cash registers/sales terminals and ATM machines are not counted in the PC shipments market share calculations and some of them have more functionality than these ultra cheap netbooks. iPod Touches, iPhones, other smart phones and netbooks should be counted in their own category as they are blurring into many categories but they are not traditional PCs.
Just because they are small and lighter in the processor dept does not make these a new category. They don't all have 6GB drives and i fail to see how they have that much of a limited functionality besides not being able to run 3D and Pro Apps. They are just small. These laptops are about as powerful as some decent laptops from 3-4 years ago, heck sometimes more powerful than the eMachines. Do we put eMachines in a separate category too? No they are PCs, just a bit less powerful.
I have an Acer Aspire One and it is quite capable for what it is used for, especially with Linux on it. I wiped XP Shmome off of it and am now toying with putting Leopard on it too. I do hope Apple releases a tiny laptop like my Acer though. I love the portability and travelability of it.
Only Microsoft is profiting from the netbook phenomenon.
Actually, I've heard they aren't. At least not yet.
Vista won't run on these machines, forcing MS to stay in a business they really want to exit: selling Win XP, and selling it reportedly for netbooks at less than $20 a copy.
As atom processors improve, Win 7 beta already runs well on netbooks and will become the only OS MS offers for them - and at a prettier penny as Win 7 is - however it stacks up against OS X - already being regarded as MS's best OS to date and thus worth a greater premium over Linux - just as Macs are considered worth a premium over Win machines.
This is relevant to a thread on Apple Market share, as if Win 7 is only "good enough" to appeal to current Win users as a significant improvement, that's, well, good enough for MS, so the challenge for Snow Leopard is to not just keep their edge, but to increase the gap in usability and appeal to maintain high end mind share. Not that easy to initially get across in a release which is mostly under the hood and which will really only show in applications still on the drawing board.....
Vista won't run on these machines, forcing MS to stay in a business they really want to exit: selling Win XP, and selling it reportedly for netbooks at less than $20 a copy.
I think $20 is a high estimate. Remember, the OEMs had Linux as counter so they could easily say that if you offer us WinXP at a certain price we will just use Linux. MS certainly didn't want that and overall it would be better to just give them XP to maintain their dominance than to lose any more marketshare.
I think there was a reported 25M netbooks sold (please adjust if incorrect) and at $20 a pop for the WinXP you stated. If Windows are on 80% of them that that $400M in profit for MS. Remember, all the R&D for XP is long done so this cost them nothing. That is a pretty good bump if they really are getting $20 per machine.
I think there was a reported 25M netbooks sold (please adjust if incorrect) and at $20 a pop for the WinXP you stated. If Windows are on 80% of them that that $400M in profit for MS. Remember, all the R&D for XP is long done so this cost them nothing. That is a pretty good bump if they really are getting $20 per machine.
The 25 million is an estimate of netbook sales for this year. It was around 10 to 12 million sold last year.
I think that there is a chance that Microsoft might actually be losing money on the whole netbook phenomenon. A small percentage of them aren't even running MS software and these little machines must (to some extent) be cannibalising sales of notebooks running Vista.
I have read estimates that those 25 million netbooks could gobble up sales of 8 million conventional PC laptops.... running Vista. How much would that cost Microsoft?
I have read estimates that those 25 million netbooks could gobble up sales of 8 million conventional PC laptops.... running Vista. How much would that cost Microsoft?
I am of the camp that thinks that netbooks only supplement full computers or are used as your main computer for a very short time.
I have purchased two netbooks in the past year, but with WinXP on them since they had the better components in them. This is two sales of WinXP that I wouldn't have bought if not for netbooks as I am a Mac user when it comes to my main systems. I installed Mac OS X on the MSI WInd and I'm bought the Acer Aspire One in a pinch knowing that the WiFi driver had no OS X KEXT, but I'm hopeful.
I am of the camp that thinks that netbooks only supplement full computers or are used as your main computer for a very short time.
I agree that not many netbooks will be the 'main' computer, but a lot of people (and families) already have more than one computer... with the rise of the laptop in the last few years.
The main thrust of the "Netbook Brigade" has always been.... that "they are cheap", and in this economic climate people want to save money. If you are buying a cheaper system in order to save money then, conversely, you must be NOT buying the more expensive system
Remember, a netbook might not be replacing another computer but it certainly could be delaying the purchase of an upgrade to one's main system.
The 25 million is an estimate of netbook sales for this year. It was around 10 to 12 million sold last year.
I think that there is a chance that Microsoft might actually be losing money on the whole netbook phenomenon. A small percentage of them aren't even running MS software and these little machines must (to some extent) be cannibalising sales of notebooks running Vista.
I have read estimates that those 25 million netbooks could gobble up sales of 8 million conventional PC laptops.... running Vista. How much would that cost Microsoft?
Basically what he said - whether MS is getting $5 (or $2) or $10-20/machine, most of that is not incremental revenue, rather a more profitable sale of (also by now fully cost-amortized) Vista not made, and so money outta their pocket (or if you prefer, never in it).
Win 7 will change the whole MS/Linux/netbook profit and value equation though, since a) it will run OK and b) be popular, even if the premium over Linux NB's increases.
I'm so glad the open source movement and Linux exist - for what they've given us and for keeping the comp more honest - but am so much an end user after decades I'm only going to personally choose polished major apps with open source roots like OS X and Firefox. And yeah, I'm probably running bits of open source code every day of my life - at an ATM (unless it's still running OS/2!) - maybe under the hood of my car - but I'm not going to load Linux and choose desktops and etc. anymore.
Leaving the only real wild card in the space between smart phones and small notebooks either Apple (or two guys in a garage somewhere we'll be talking about 30 years from now the way we talk about Woz and Steve today).
Not being overly impressed by anything in that space so far, I'd love to see Apple (or the two guys or two gals or two genetically modified seals or whatever's in that garage) really reinvent this wheel.