The current model is also the quietest production desktop computer. Maybe most computer geeks generally don't care about noise, but most computer users aren't computer geeks.
I agree it's very quite and mac displays are great.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Besides, was the iMac ever in its history a high performance machine? I think you have your proportions messed up too, I don't think "most" owners were pissed. Probably just the vocal minority.
Well the problem is they don't have a high performace machine at all. Many mac owners have been looking for a mid level desktop computer. Apple as a company cares more about looks than performace, in the intel world that really has to change if they plan to keep pace. I believe many mac owners believe the new iMac would have the conroe chip and the simple fact is it couldn't be done because of heat issues based on the iMac design.
I don't understand why some mac owners believe that Apple makes their hardware. There isnt anything in an imac that you can't buy anywhere. There is nothing special about the hardware, Apple is a software company that pretents to be a hardware company.
People talk about the Zune failure in this thread can we say mac g4 cube or for that matter mac mini. I mean why even bother.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
That's simply not true. In most cases, it's probably just one app. For new buyers, it's often a fall-back in case they don't like OS X. Switching platforms is a major step.
So lets agree on this even if its for one or two apps, what do these guys have such an attitude? I mean use it all, use what you like and give up on this them and us mentality.
What gets under my skin is the ipod is doing well and these fanboys hang onto that like they are winning some personal contest. Its annoying as hell. I mean after 30 years they were bound to win the market share in something.
You come on this site once a month to troll. Is that somehow smarter?
Its not about being a troll I use all forms of mp3 players and I have five computers in my house two are Apple computers.
Computers are suppose to be fun and they are tools we use, mac users get all emotional about this stuff.
My first comment in this thread was very logical I asked if the person considered 2% of a market share a failure when Apple carried that throughout their entire product line.
The answer should be who cares what the market share is if you like the product.
My comparision was based your opinion that 2% market share after 2 months was a failure.
And as I said, it's a stupid comparison. You're comparing the market for bread based products including bagles and donuts with wooden hatstand sales. It's that far out of left field stupid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
Apple couldn't break 2-3% market share for decades.
Again, simply not true but do continue believing it. Santa is real too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
Your fooling yourself if you think people don't care about the cpu or its specs. Even most imac owners were pissed when Apple decided to turn the imac into nothing than a laptop with big screen, using a mobile chip compared to a true desktop, yet a again putting looks before performance.
You're confusing 'most people' with geeks. Most people really don't care as long as it performs the task at hand. They've already decided they want a Mac for what it does, not how the electrons are shoved about. 'Most people' are also perfectly fine with laptops - they outsell desktop computers - and apart from the FSB speed there's no real shortcoming in the iMac since they use desktop components for everything else.
Of course the advantage of using a mobile CPU is that it's quieter and cooler which is one of the design goals behind the iMac. If you want noisy and hotter, look elsewhere. Most people buying an iMac probably want the former rather than the latter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
Still using 8 track tapes? Your telling me to keep up. Your posting about products you don't even use. Ya thats smart.
Do you have a Zune?
Just because I choose not to own or use a particular product doesn't mean I don't have an informed opinion on it. I have quite an opinion on nuclear reactors too but haven't got around to purchasing one yet. So, are you part of the 2% of the HDD mp3 player market that bought a Zune or are you just expressing an opinion on something you don't even use too?
"Speaking to the Associated Press about Microsoft's Xbox 360, Gartner Inc, the leading provider of research and analysis on the global information technology industry, recently estimated that Xbox 1 had about 34% of the global game systems market. They also estimated Playstation 2 to have 51% marketshare and Nintendo at 15%."
I believe you need to keep up. Would you like to take a guess on Xbox 360 market share compared to Nintendo and Sony now?
These aren't estimates from an analyst, those are actual sales. End of Q3 2006, Xbox had 15%, 360 20%. Sony lost 5% of it's share (ps2) in that period which isn't surprising bearing in mind PS3 hadn't shipped. Wii hadn't either.
Didn't take 10 seconds to google for actual sales figures instead of analyst wishful thinking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
Competition? Do you work for Apple? This is what you idiots don't understand competition is good for the end user. You know like Intel/AMD, Nvidia/ATI its what keeps progress moving foward. You act like your winning something if Apple can keep a decent ipod market share.
No, I don't work for Apple but yes the iPod having so high a marketshare and being profitable to many of us Macheads is like winnng something - the lottery or North Sea Oil revenue. It keeps Apple profitable so they can spend the iPod cash on more important stuff we actually care about rather than fluffy shit like mp3 players. It's the kind of thing Microsoft would love obviously to break out from their two products that actually are profitable.
Competition is an interesting one for Mac owners since we only buy our computers from one manufacturer it doesn't really matter what AMD, Intel, Nvidia or ATi do to compete against each other since we're mostly 'stuck' (and that's too strong a word since at the moment the machines rock) with what Apple gives us. As long as they progress, it's not so important. It's not like we're ever going to be slower than PCs these days is it?
I also think technological changes in some stupid competitive war between two sparing partners often leads to some particularly asstastic hacks to provide extra marketing points rather than actually stepping back and doing what's right. See the Pentium 4 for a perfect example. See the current Quad chips for another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
I know that must be why all the mac users put bootcamp on there computers so they can run Windows programs. You hate the "competition so much but you couldn't run shit without them.
Plainly not true since 'all users' simply don't. 3 Macs here. None of them have Bootcamp. I've one Mac with VirtualPC though for the sole purpose of running different versions of IE. I'm a web developer so have to check that anything I've done displays ok in IE 6 and 7. If I wasn't a web developer, or Microsoft continued to support IE on the Mac, I'd have absolutely no need for Windows.
As has been said before...
"Windows. It's the New Classic"
You use it when you really really have to but when you've not used it for months you wonder why it's taking up disk space and delete it. Most of the switchers I know have gradually weaned themselves off of Windows apps after switching when they realize MacOSX is a much nicer place to stay in.
Maybe before you do any more posting about "fanboys" and "idiots" you could take note that you, by far, are the most emotionally jacked up person posting on this thread.
It's a growing phenomena, as far as I can see: the reverse Apple snob. They're so filled with withering contempt for how "smug" Apple users are they go out of their way to find Apple enthusiasts so they can start to rant about "fan boys" and how all the Apple zealots are so damn full of themselves they can hardly stand it.
The sane thing to do, of course, would simply be to avoid discussions that don't interest you and whose participants you find distasteful.
And as I said, it's a stupid comparison. You're comparing the market for bread based products including bagles and donuts with wooden hatstand sales. It's that far out of left field stupid.
You really like that word stupid don't you. It's a valid comparision just because you say its not doesn't make it true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign
Again, simply not true but do continue believing it. Santa is real too.
Really? Before the intro of the Intel processor Apples market share ranged from 2 -2.9%, peaking at 6.1% this Oct, right behind Gateway. Now how sad is that to be behind Gateway?
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign
You're confusing 'most people' with geeks. Most people really don't care as long as it performs the task at hand. They've already decided they want a Mac for what it does, not how the electrons are shoved about. 'Most people' are also perfectly fine with laptops - they outsell desktop computers - and apart from the FSB speed there's no real shortcoming in the iMac since they use desktop components for everything else.
Of course the advantage of using a mobile CPU is that it's quieter and cooler which is one of the design goals behind the iMac. If you want noisy and hotter, look elsewhere. Most people buying an iMac probably want the former rather than the latter.
I'm thinking your getting this whole Geek thing mixed up with educated. I understand that most people walk blindly into a mac store or compusa and buy whatever the sales person tells them is great. Being educated does not make someone a geek.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign
Do you have a Zune?
Just because I choose not to own or use a particular product doesn't mean I don't have an informed opinion on it. I have quite an opinion on nuclear reactors too but haven't got around to purchasing one yet. So, are you part of the 2% of the HDD mp3 player market that bought a Zune or are you just expressing an opinion on something you don't even use too?
Not yet but I plan to replace my ipod video witha Zune. I like the nano 8gb for overall use. Ive used the Zune many times its a good player. They are all good players. Your opinion wasn't informed. The simple fact is most ipods are used by PC users which means that anytime MS wants to make deals with Dell, HP, Gateway they can at anytime. They could give away Zunes if they wanted too.
So the question is what does 2% really mean now, the answer is nothing, so your informed opinion means nothing. MS is not Creative Labs they could kill the ipod if they wanted too and most likely plan too.
The big question that no one can answer right now is how many ipods will be replaced with ipods and how many will be replaced with Zunes. MS like with everything else is in this for the long run. Perfect example they are pretty much killing Sony in the console race. Vista will be the largest OS system upgrade in history. I can get you a link to that but im sure its not hard for even you to figure out with Dell and HP handing out express upgrades for Vista.
These aren't estimates from an analyst, those are actual sales. End of Q3 2006, Xbox had 15%, 360 20%. Sony lost 5% of it's share (ps2) in that period which isn't surprising bearing in mind PS3 hadn't shipped. Wii hadn't either.
Didn't take 10 seconds to google for actual sales figures instead of analyst wishful thinking.
I can find ten other valid links to dispute those numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign
No, I don't work for Apple but yes the iPod having so high a marketshare and being profitable to many of us Macheads is like winnng something - the lottery or North Sea Oil revenue. It keeps Apple profitable so they can spend the iPod cash on more important stuff we actually care about rather than fluffy shit like mp3 players. It's the kind of thing Microsoft would love obviously to break out from their two products that actually are profitable.
Competition is an interesting one for Mac owners since we only buy our computers from one manufacturer it doesn't really matter what AMD, Intel, Nvidia or ATi do to compete against each other since we're mostly 'stuck' (and that's too strong a word since at the moment the machines rock) with what Apple gives us. As long as they progress, it's not so important. It's not like we're ever going to be slower than PCs these days is it?
I also think technological changes in some stupid competitive war between two sparing partners often leads to some particularly asstastic hacks to provide extra marketing points rather than actually stepping back and doing what's right. See the Pentium 4 for a perfect example. See the current Quad chips for another.
That entire statement is by far the stupidest thing you have said. Your manufacturer does not make their own computers, they buy from everyone you listed so it clearly matters what happens to those vendors. If ATI can not compet with Nvidia they gpu's jump in price. If AMD can not compete with Intel the same happens. The same 7600gt card that is in my iMAC is in one of my pc's. Its all the same. Apple yet again IS NOT a hardware company.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign
Plainly not true since 'all users' simply don't. 3 Macs here. None of them have Bootcamp. I've one Mac with VirtualPC though for the sole purpose of running different versions of IE. I'm a web developer so have to check that anything I've done displays ok in IE 6 and 7. If I wasn't a web developer, or Microsoft continued to support IE on the Mac, I'd have absolutely no need for Windows.
As has been said before...
"Windows. It's the New Classic"
You use it when you really really have to but when you've not used it for months you wonder why it's taking up disk space and delete it. Most of the switchers I know have gradually weaned themselves off of Windows apps after switching when they realize MacOSX is a much nicer place to stay in.
Well thats actually smart, hell im shocked. Thats another thing I can't understand people that by macs to run Windows. The entire point of owning a mac is for the OS, yet people buy them because they are 'sexy', yes I have actually seen that said on here many times.
Maybe before you do any more posting about "fanboys" and "idiots" you could take note that you, by far, are the most emotionally jacked up person posting on this thread.
It's a growing phenomena, as far as I can see: the reverse Apple snob. They're so filled with withering contempt for how "smug" Apple users are they go out of their way to find Apple enthusiasts so they can start to rant about "fan boys" and how all the Apple zealots are so damn full of themselves they can hardly stand it.
The sane thing to do, of course, would simply be to avoid discussions that don't interest you and whose participants you find distasteful.
Emotional about what? Did someone die? I thought we were talking about Mp3 players. Not really something to get emotional about. I don't feel any tears I don't think I feel emotional. I will check and get back to you.
I'm thinking your getting this whole Geek thing mixed up with educated. I understand that most people walk blindly into a mac store or compusa and buy whatever the sales person tells them is great. Being educated does not make someone a geek.
I agree that many people buy blindly. Shout your anguish unto the Cosmos. Curse God and die. But many people - generally people who are unaware of slashdot - make educated choices and buy iMacs. You may not believe this, but some people are both smart and uninterested in buying the most powerful, when easiest will do just as well, if not better.
Being an educated consumer means buying what you need and what suits you best. The best specs are usually not all that relevant to most consumers, and most people really want to do a few things, and high-demand programs are largely absent in these computers. Furthermore, things like the iSight make the computer do more, rather than do the same old things, but with better graphics. Think PS3 versus Wii and get back to me in 5 years.
Obsessing about processor speed or GPU is a real geek thing to do, since most of the programs on most platforms are very responsive regardless. You may very well be educated, but your lust for technical excellence is not driven by knowledge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
I can find ten other valid links to dispute those numbers.
Then do it; this is a debate, not a bragging contest.
And stop bashing design. Beauty affects you every day of your life, and the elegance and coolness of Apples does affect the way people feel and work, even if it is subconscious.
You really like that word stupid don't you. It's a valid comparision just because you say its not doesn't make it true.
But it's not a valid comparison.
With computers, Apple sells mid to high end laptops, AIO desktops, Workstation class high end desktops, a rackmount server and a small form factor PC. That's a very small proportion of the computer market. Their share of the computer market is therefore small because they do not sell computers into every market segment. On unit sales alone they're going to be way down in share because they don't sell into the budget market or into the office worker market.
Apple are actually fairly successful in the markets they choose to compete in. For instance, laptop sales aimed at college students or Workstations for video pros.
Saying they have 2% of the computer market and that they're therefore unsuccessful is stupid since they aren't even attempting to address the whole of the market unlike say Dell or HP and the market is HUGE by comparison to just hard disk based audio players.
You're comparing a broad market with a narrow vertical market. The dynamics are totally different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
Really? Before the intro of the Intel processor Apples market share ranged from 2 -2.9%, peaking at 6.1% this Oct, right behind Gateway. Now how sad is that to be behind Gateway?
No it didn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
I'm thinking your getting this whole Geek thing mixed up with educated. I understand that most people walk blindly into a mac store or compusa and buy whatever the sales person tells them is great. Being educated does not make someone a geek.
No I'm not. I'm educated. I really don't care what the CPU is, just what it does. Geeks care about what it is. Educated people care about what it does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
Not yet but I plan to replace my ipod video witha Zune. I like the nano 8gb for overall use. Ive used the Zune many times its a good player. They are all good players. Your opinion wasn't informed. The simple fact is most ipods are used by PC users which means that anytime MS wants to make deals with Dell, HP, Gateway they can at anytime. They could give away Zunes if they wanted too.
I've read the specs. I know what the Zune does and doesn't do. No way would I choose one over an iPod even if I could run the Zune software anyway.
Sure Microsoft could start giving them away but that would be pretty stupid (there that word again) as they'd be losing $250 a shot instead of just $50.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
So the question is what does 2% really mean now, the answer is nothing, so your informed opinion means nothing. MS is not Creative Labs they could kill the ipod if they wanted too and most likely plan too.
Nice logic. So your opinion is that we should be buying Zunes, or accepting freebies, even though they have less features than an iPod and don't work with Macs, because more people have PCs and MS are likely to compete by losing money when they can't compete on features?
Is it any wonder we're rooting for Apple?
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
The big question that no one can answer right now is how many ipods will be replaced with ipods and how many will be replaced with Zunes.
Well, that can be answered now. Apple's share dropped by 0.8% after the Zune launch so since Sansa's, Creative's and the other PlaysForSure partners share dropped it's safe to say not many iPods were replaced by Zunes. More likely, Zunes replaced old PFS players. I bet Creative are blissfully happy with Microsoft just now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
MS like with everything else is in this for the long run. Perfect example they are pretty much killing Sony in the console race.
But they aren't. Sony are killing Sony in the console race and so far PS3 sales haven't been going long enough to create any impression.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
Vista will be the largest OS system upgrade in history. I can get you a link to that but im sure its not hard for even you to figure out with Dell and HP handing out express upgrades for Vista.
No shit sherlock. The OS with the 90% of the market gets an upgrade and it'll be the largest upgrade in history. How do you come up with these insights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
I can find ten other valid links to dispute those numbers.
Go on then. Sales figures, not analyst predictions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
That entire statement is by far the stupidest thing you have said. Your manufacturer does not make their own computers,
Of course they do. That's why they're called 'Apple Computer Inc.'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
they buy from everyone you listed so it clearly matters what happens to those vendors. If ATI can not compet with Nvidia they gpu's jump in price. If AMD can not compete with Intel the same happens. The same 7600gt card that is in my iMAC is in one of my pc's. Its all the same. Apple yet again IS NOT a hardware company.
Of course they are. WTF am I typing on if it's not Apple hardware?
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
Well thats actually smart, hell im shocked. Thats another thing I can't understand people that by macs to run Windows. The entire point of owning a mac is for the OS, yet people buy them because they are 'sexy', yes I have actually seen that said on here many times.
It's both. The entire point of owning a Mac isn't just the OS. Who else makes a stylish all in one quiet computer with an OS tailored for it? I can well understand why someone might want a Mac Mini for Windows if they wanted to run Windows - there's nothing that size that cheap. I was thinking of getting a couple to run Linux on as office servers to be honest.
Its not about being a troll I use all forms of mp3 players and I have five computers in my house two are Apple computers.
Computers are suppose to be fun and they are tools we use, mac users get all emotional about this stuff.
My first comment in this thread was very logical I asked if the person considered 2% of a market share a failure when Apple carried that throughout their entire product line.
The answer should be who cares what the market share is if you like the product.
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
Maybe before you do any more posting about "fanboys" and "idiots" you could take note that you, by far, are the most emotionally jacked up person posting on this thread.
It's a growing phenomena, as far as I can see: the reverse Apple snob. They're so filled with withering contempt for how "smug" Apple users are they go out of their way to find Apple enthusiasts so they can start to rant about "fan boys" and how all the Apple zealots are so damn full of themselves they can hardly stand it.
The sane thing to do, of course, would simply be to avoid discussions that don't interest you and whose participants you find distasteful.
It is interesting that the "reverse Apple snob" as I see it is someone that has come from the PC world and now, fearing being lost in perceived Mac "fandom", continues a mix of PC and Mac use, iPod and non-iPod use. Said people would claim steadfastly, "I'm not a Mac user, I just use Macs"
...I can well understand why someone might want a Mac Mini for Windows if they wanted to run Windows - there's nothing that size that cheap...
I've been researching something to run Torrents and H.264 or Xvid Encoding round the clock, and the Mac Mini is perfect for this. I priced out some Dells and even looked at homebake small-form-factor solutions, and nothing comes close to a Mac Mini running OSX and WINXP2pro via Parallels.
It would be the workhorse computer, something silent and cool (heatwise, sex-wise--there I said it) and low power drawing since it is left on 24/7.
This would free up my main AMD64 rig to go 2GB, RAID0 2x7200rpm SATA 80gb drives, 6600GT 128MB VRAM for WINXP2pro latest PC gaming and web surfing when not playing games. Maybe a 7600GT or 7900GS for a bit more smoothness.
A PS2/USB/DVI keyboard-display-switch thingy (KVM) and I'm sorted out ready to rock. PC+Mac... And I don't need to go and harass either PCheads or Macheads on the forums.
Since this has been a bone of some contention here, this is how many consoles have actually been sold worldwide in the PS2- Xbox1- Gamecube generation:
Xbox1- 24 million
"Speaking with GameDaily BIZ, a Microsoft representative responded to Pachter's analysis, stating that the "Xbox (V1) is a robust platform with more than 24 million units in living rooms..."
"Tetsuhiko pointed out that the company had shipped 230 million PS-family machines worldwide since 2000, with PS2 amounting to 112 million systems and PSP totaling 22.9 million systems."
(*Note that's 112 million PS2s shipped not sold. However, that does not make a huge difference (a couple of million consoles perhaps) as retailers generally cannot afford to hold a tremendous number of consoles in inventory. 20 million consoles in inventory would be an entire year's supply for PS2; I haven't heard of any retailers who keep a year's supply lying around).
Adding it all up, the total worldwide console installed base for the PS2-Xbox1-Gamecube generation looks to be about 155 million consoles (I was generous and knocked a couple million off of the PS2 figure to reflect the shipped not sold factor). Given that, worldwide marketshare for that generation is:
Playstation 2: 71%
Xbox 1: 15%
Gamecube: 14%
The '34% worldwide marketshare' figure being trumpted by some in the Xbox fan contingent seems to be not of installed base, but looks more like current quarterly sales figures for Xbox1 and Xbox 360 combined, during a time of constrained PS3 and Wii supplies.
That figure does not reflect worldwide installed base in any fashion (there'd have to be ~45 million Xbox console sales in the past few years that no one knew about, even MS's own representatives, lol), but only current quarterly sales. It is also very reasonable to expect that percentage will drop substantially as PS3 and Wii launch supply woes ease and production ramps up.
What I can't understand is: How does a company that attracts approx. 120 million visitors to its websites in a month (story posted later by AI), getting TONS of free publicity for its new product as the "killer" of an existing mega-hit product that sells in the millions, and pricing it below cost, manage to sell not more than a few hundred thousand?!
I think MSFT has toally lost its marketing acumen.
Someone working for the Zune division and is halfway smart would be foolish not to be considering bailing right about now, before his/her resume gets permanently scarred.
What I can't understand is: How does a company that attracts approx. 120 million visitors to its websites in a month (story posted later by AI), getting TONS of free publicity for its new product as the "killer" of an existing mega-hit product that sells in the millions, and pricing it below cost, manage to sell not more than a few hundred thousand?!
I think MSFT has toally lost its marketing acumen.
Someone working for the Zune division and is halfway smart would be foolish not to be considering bailing right about now, before his/her resume gets permanently scarred.
This thing is finished.
Sorry to be replying to my own post, but I meant: (1) "approx 117 million," and (2) "story posted earlier by AI."
It is interesting to see how zune will survive and how ipod could maintain its dominance. But it does not stop there, I can feel that the computer industry will change a lot in the coming near future. Thus the same question will apply for the os, i.e how windows could maintain its dominance while we could see a significant growth of osx user, especially since mac comes with intel flavour.
From time to time, apple has adopting the industry standard (software and hardware wise) thus the mac os user would be able to work in the pc world. Now mac even embraces windows os, thus we can see that apple is closing its gap to pc and its reducing reasons to be afraid of using apple computers and of wasting money for machine which is not compatible with pc world. With this strategy apple has quite succeeded in encouraging people to try mac. Also the pricing of the mac products is very competitive compared to the pc market. Only the HD display is still bit too high.
With the last release of macbook/macbook pro plus other mac lines, apple has grown its market share thru the consumer and small office segments. It is not the time yet for Apple to push corporate/enterprise segment to switch to mac osx. But the penetration of mac hardware could have a good start since in the near future employees of corporates could bargain to the IT dept to have mac with windows installed thus allowed the IT dept easily maintain its job. Also, it would depend on how good leopard and bootcamp in implementing the dual both concept, especially in supporting vista by providing the device drivers. If the IT dept does not like the mac osx, it could simply installed the vista solely on the mac hardware given the mac have a complete device drivers.
Thinking about this, it reminds me how wintel machines had pushed mainframe computers (IBM) to the corner. In the late of 70s, who will think that IBM will lose its crown someday. Thus I believe that there would never be an immortal king of technology. The king would change from time to time thus it is not impossible that MS could lose its crown if it does not have a right innovation and focus on more clear vision other than windows os and office apps. I think Apple has a great opportunity in the coming 2-3 years to strengthen its existence since it still have a lot of innovation it its sleeve and some of it even waiting in the pipeline, namely, iPhone, iTV, next generation iPod, better macs, etc.
In the leading edge sector, to be able to grow is only thru innovation which is acceptable for the given era. I still remember the Kodak case which had developed the digital camera but in the wrong era in which there's no support from the related technology such as printer, media card, the pc itself, etc. Thus the great innovation still could be a failure if released in a wrong time. BUT it would be even worse if the company is not good in an innovation.
Bill gates would never be bankrupt and MS is a rich company but it is dying as a leading edge technology company. We will see the destiny of MS in the coming 5 years. The only thing could save MS business is the right man who is good in innovation and have a clear vision of future computing world. And the condition is becoming more critical since Bill Gates will leave the company. I think Bill Gates himself realizes that he is not good in the vision and software but he is a good businessman that come up with a good business model and strategy such as forcing pc manufacturers to pre-installed windows, etc.
Again, it is interesting to see the coming near future of the computer industry.
What I can't understand is: How does a company that attracts approx. 120 million visitors to its websites in a month (story posted later by AI), getting TONS of free publicity for its new product as the "killer" of an existing mega-hit product that sells in the millions, and pricing it below cost, manage to sell not more than a few hundred thousand?!
I think MSFT has toally lost its marketing acumen.
Bingo. I myself was pretty suprised that the Zune didn't do better than it did, between the massive ad budget, the Microsoft name hype, the 'iPod killer' (lol) hype, fresh new kid on the block status, and the subsidized 'we're gonna take a loss on this' pricing.
I'm sure MS will eventually improve their iPod and iTunes knockoffs (ditch the crap-brown color, get rid of the weird 'points' system for the Zune Store), but even then, there's no compelling reason to switch, and a lot of good reasons not to.
So Zune ends up being just another 'me too' product in the space, aka so what?, in the consumer's eyes. \
I'd actually say the figures are wrong... although I did note subtly that they said HD MP3 players...
Lets just look at MP3 players...
Apple had sold 67,635,000 iPods last time I checked (and will have sold more since then).
Sandisk, Creative, Sony... generics have all sold quite a few million MP3 players.
Microsoft has sold less than 1 million Zunes. If it's 1 million by June 2007 (8 months)... I'd guess that'd mean they are selling about 125 000 a month to make that mark, so have probably only sold about 250 000 so-far.
Now, the magic. EVEN IF they had sold 1000 000, can someone tell me what 1000 000 is as a percentage of 67,635,000?
We're talking Apple having sold 68x the number of MP3 players that Microsoft has. Microsoft has a 1.48% market share if Apple were their only competitor. But they're not!
And Microsoft hasn't sold 1000 000 Zunes, its sold around 250 000.
I'd guess there's around 100 000 000 MP3 players in the market. How does this make M$ look...
250 000 Zunes sold, 100 000 000 MP3 players.
0.25% market share of the MP3 player market! NOTHING! That's more than about $100 000 of marketing for each .1 of a %.
No. Installed base is not market share. They are specific terms that mean specific things, and should not be confused with each other.
And the report did say 9% of HDD players sold in the US on November were because that's the market it is in. This is a very good start month for Zune despite not having a flash-based player. I imagine MS may have sold more Zunes than Cingular sold ROKRs.
Comments
Your [sic] posting about products you don't even use. Ya thats [sic] smart.
You come on this site once a month to troll. Is that somehow smarter?
The current model is also the quietest production desktop computer. Maybe most computer geeks generally don't care about noise, but most computer users aren't computer geeks.
I agree it's very quite and mac displays are great.
Besides, was the iMac ever in its history a high performance machine? I think you have your proportions messed up too, I don't think "most" owners were pissed. Probably just the vocal minority.
Well the problem is they don't have a high performace machine at all. Many mac owners have been looking for a mid level desktop computer. Apple as a company cares more about looks than performace, in the intel world that really has to change if they plan to keep pace. I believe many mac owners believe the new iMac would have the conroe chip and the simple fact is it couldn't be done because of heat issues based on the iMac design.
I don't understand why some mac owners believe that Apple makes their hardware. There isnt anything in an imac that you can't buy anywhere. There is nothing special about the hardware, Apple is a software company that pretents to be a hardware company.
People talk about the Zune failure in this thread can we say mac g4 cube or for that matter mac mini. I mean why even bother.
That's simply not true. In most cases, it's probably just one app. For new buyers, it's often a fall-back in case they don't like OS X. Switching platforms is a major step.
So lets agree on this even if its for one or two apps, what do these guys have such an attitude? I mean use it all, use what you like and give up on this them and us mentality.
What gets under my skin is the ipod is doing well and these fanboys hang onto that like they are winning some personal contest. Its annoying as hell. I mean after 30 years they were bound to win the market share in something.
You come on this site once a month to troll. Is that somehow smarter?
Its not about being a troll I use all forms of mp3 players and I have five computers in my house two are Apple computers.
Computers are suppose to be fun and they are tools we use, mac users get all emotional about this stuff.
My first comment in this thread was very logical I asked if the person considered 2% of a market share a failure when Apple carried that throughout their entire product line.
The answer should be who cares what the market share is if you like the product.
My comparision was based your opinion that 2% market share after 2 months was a failure.
And as I said, it's a stupid comparison. You're comparing the market for bread based products including bagles and donuts with wooden hatstand sales. It's that far out of left field stupid.
Apple couldn't break 2-3% market share for decades.
Again, simply not true but do continue believing it. Santa is real too.
Your fooling yourself if you think people don't care about the cpu or its specs. Even most imac owners were pissed when Apple decided to turn the imac into nothing than a laptop with big screen, using a mobile chip compared to a true desktop, yet a again putting looks before performance.
You're confusing 'most people' with geeks. Most people really don't care as long as it performs the task at hand. They've already decided they want a Mac for what it does, not how the electrons are shoved about. 'Most people' are also perfectly fine with laptops - they outsell desktop computers - and apart from the FSB speed there's no real shortcoming in the iMac since they use desktop components for everything else.
Of course the advantage of using a mobile CPU is that it's quieter and cooler which is one of the design goals behind the iMac. If you want noisy and hotter, look elsewhere. Most people buying an iMac probably want the former rather than the latter.
Still using 8 track tapes? Your telling me to keep up. Your posting about products you don't even use. Ya thats smart.
Do you have a Zune?
Just because I choose not to own or use a particular product doesn't mean I don't have an informed opinion on it. I have quite an opinion on nuclear reactors too but haven't got around to purchasing one yet. So, are you part of the 2% of the HDD mp3 player market that bought a Zune or are you just expressing an opinion on something you don't even use too?
http://www.xbox365.com/news.cgi?id=GGPGLLPGLL11130359
"Speaking to the Associated Press about Microsoft's Xbox 360, Gartner Inc, the leading provider of research and analysis on the global information technology industry, recently estimated that Xbox 1 had about 34% of the global game systems market. They also estimated Playstation 2 to have 51% marketshare and Nintendo at 15%."
I believe you need to keep up. Would you like to take a guess on Xbox 360 market share compared to Nintendo and Sony now?
Why guess when you've actual sales figures. See http://news.softpedia.com/news/Micro...ny-41026.shtml
These aren't estimates from an analyst, those are actual sales. End of Q3 2006, Xbox had 15%, 360 20%. Sony lost 5% of it's share (ps2) in that period which isn't surprising bearing in mind PS3 hadn't shipped. Wii hadn't either.
Didn't take 10 seconds to google for actual sales figures instead of analyst wishful thinking.
Competition? Do you work for Apple? This is what you idiots don't understand competition is good for the end user. You know like Intel/AMD, Nvidia/ATI its what keeps progress moving foward. You act like your winning something if Apple can keep a decent ipod market share.
No, I don't work for Apple but yes the iPod having so high a marketshare and being profitable to many of us Macheads is like winnng something - the lottery or North Sea Oil revenue. It keeps Apple profitable so they can spend the iPod cash on more important stuff we actually care about rather than fluffy shit like mp3 players. It's the kind of thing Microsoft would love obviously to break out from their two products that actually are profitable.
Competition is an interesting one for Mac owners since we only buy our computers from one manufacturer it doesn't really matter what AMD, Intel, Nvidia or ATi do to compete against each other since we're mostly 'stuck' (and that's too strong a word since at the moment the machines rock) with what Apple gives us. As long as they progress, it's not so important. It's not like we're ever going to be slower than PCs these days is it?
I also think technological changes in some stupid competitive war between two sparing partners often leads to some particularly asstastic hacks to provide extra marketing points rather than actually stepping back and doing what's right. See the Pentium 4 for a perfect example. See the current Quad chips for another.
I know that must be why all the mac users put bootcamp on there computers so they can run Windows programs. You hate the "competition so much but you couldn't run shit without them.
Plainly not true since 'all users' simply don't. 3 Macs here. None of them have Bootcamp. I've one Mac with VirtualPC though for the sole purpose of running different versions of IE. I'm a web developer so have to check that anything I've done displays ok in IE 6 and 7. If I wasn't a web developer, or Microsoft continued to support IE on the Mac, I'd have absolutely no need for Windows.
As has been said before...
"Windows. It's the New Classic"
You use it when you really really have to but when you've not used it for months you wonder why it's taking up disk space and delete it. Most of the switchers I know have gradually weaned themselves off of Windows apps after switching when they realize MacOSX is a much nicer place to stay in.
It's a growing phenomena, as far as I can see: the reverse Apple snob. They're so filled with withering contempt for how "smug" Apple users are they go out of their way to find Apple enthusiasts so they can start to rant about "fan boys" and how all the Apple zealots are so damn full of themselves they can hardly stand it.
The sane thing to do, of course, would simply be to avoid discussions that don't interest you and whose participants you find distasteful.
And as I said, it's a stupid comparison. You're comparing the market for bread based products including bagles and donuts with wooden hatstand sales. It's that far out of left field stupid.
You really like that word stupid don't you. It's a valid comparision just because you say its not doesn't make it true.
Again, simply not true but do continue believing it. Santa is real too.
Really? Before the intro of the Intel processor Apples market share ranged from 2 -2.9%, peaking at 6.1% this Oct, right behind Gateway. Now how sad is that to be behind Gateway?
You're confusing 'most people' with geeks. Most people really don't care as long as it performs the task at hand. They've already decided they want a Mac for what it does, not how the electrons are shoved about. 'Most people' are also perfectly fine with laptops - they outsell desktop computers - and apart from the FSB speed there's no real shortcoming in the iMac since they use desktop components for everything else.
Of course the advantage of using a mobile CPU is that it's quieter and cooler which is one of the design goals behind the iMac. If you want noisy and hotter, look elsewhere. Most people buying an iMac probably want the former rather than the latter.
I'm thinking your getting this whole Geek thing mixed up with educated. I understand that most people walk blindly into a mac store or compusa and buy whatever the sales person tells them is great. Being educated does not make someone a geek.
Do you have a Zune?
Just because I choose not to own or use a particular product doesn't mean I don't have an informed opinion on it. I have quite an opinion on nuclear reactors too but haven't got around to purchasing one yet. So, are you part of the 2% of the HDD mp3 player market that bought a Zune or are you just expressing an opinion on something you don't even use too?
Not yet but I plan to replace my ipod video witha Zune. I like the nano 8gb for overall use. Ive used the Zune many times its a good player. They are all good players. Your opinion wasn't informed. The simple fact is most ipods are used by PC users which means that anytime MS wants to make deals with Dell, HP, Gateway they can at anytime. They could give away Zunes if they wanted too.
So the question is what does 2% really mean now, the answer is nothing, so your informed opinion means nothing. MS is not Creative Labs they could kill the ipod if they wanted too and most likely plan too.
The big question that no one can answer right now is how many ipods will be replaced with ipods and how many will be replaced with Zunes. MS like with everything else is in this for the long run. Perfect example they are pretty much killing Sony in the console race. Vista will be the largest OS system upgrade in history. I can get you a link to that but im sure its not hard for even you to figure out with Dell and HP handing out express upgrades for Vista.
Why guess when you've actual sales figures. See http://news.softpedia.com/news/Micro...ny-41026.shtml
These aren't estimates from an analyst, those are actual sales. End of Q3 2006, Xbox had 15%, 360 20%. Sony lost 5% of it's share (ps2) in that period which isn't surprising bearing in mind PS3 hadn't shipped. Wii hadn't either.
Didn't take 10 seconds to google for actual sales figures instead of analyst wishful thinking.
I can find ten other valid links to dispute those numbers.
No, I don't work for Apple but yes the iPod having so high a marketshare and being profitable to many of us Macheads is like winnng something - the lottery or North Sea Oil revenue. It keeps Apple profitable so they can spend the iPod cash on more important stuff we actually care about rather than fluffy shit like mp3 players. It's the kind of thing Microsoft would love obviously to break out from their two products that actually are profitable.
Competition is an interesting one for Mac owners since we only buy our computers from one manufacturer it doesn't really matter what AMD, Intel, Nvidia or ATi do to compete against each other since we're mostly 'stuck' (and that's too strong a word since at the moment the machines rock) with what Apple gives us. As long as they progress, it's not so important. It's not like we're ever going to be slower than PCs these days is it?
I also think technological changes in some stupid competitive war between two sparing partners often leads to some particularly asstastic hacks to provide extra marketing points rather than actually stepping back and doing what's right. See the Pentium 4 for a perfect example. See the current Quad chips for another.
That entire statement is by far the stupidest thing you have said. Your manufacturer does not make their own computers, they buy from everyone you listed so it clearly matters what happens to those vendors. If ATI can not compet with Nvidia they gpu's jump in price. If AMD can not compete with Intel the same happens. The same 7600gt card that is in my iMAC is in one of my pc's. Its all the same. Apple yet again IS NOT a hardware company.
Plainly not true since 'all users' simply don't. 3 Macs here. None of them have Bootcamp. I've one Mac with VirtualPC though for the sole purpose of running different versions of IE. I'm a web developer so have to check that anything I've done displays ok in IE 6 and 7. If I wasn't a web developer, or Microsoft continued to support IE on the Mac, I'd have absolutely no need for Windows.
As has been said before...
"Windows. It's the New Classic"
You use it when you really really have to but when you've not used it for months you wonder why it's taking up disk space and delete it. Most of the switchers I know have gradually weaned themselves off of Windows apps after switching when they realize MacOSX is a much nicer place to stay in.
Well thats actually smart, hell im shocked. Thats another thing I can't understand people that by macs to run Windows. The entire point of owning a mac is for the OS, yet people buy them because they are 'sexy', yes I have actually seen that said on here many times.
Maybe before you do any more posting about "fanboys" and "idiots" you could take note that you, by far, are the most emotionally jacked up person posting on this thread.
It's a growing phenomena, as far as I can see: the reverse Apple snob. They're so filled with withering contempt for how "smug" Apple users are they go out of their way to find Apple enthusiasts so they can start to rant about "fan boys" and how all the Apple zealots are so damn full of themselves they can hardly stand it.
The sane thing to do, of course, would simply be to avoid discussions that don't interest you and whose participants you find distasteful.
Emotional about what? Did someone die? I thought we were talking about Mp3 players. Not really something to get emotional about. I don't feel any tears I don't think I feel emotional. I will check and get back to you.
I'm thinking your getting this whole Geek thing mixed up with educated. I understand that most people walk blindly into a mac store or compusa and buy whatever the sales person tells them is great. Being educated does not make someone a geek.
I agree that many people buy blindly. Shout your anguish unto the Cosmos. Curse God and die. But many people - generally people who are unaware of slashdot - make educated choices and buy iMacs. You may not believe this, but some people are both smart and uninterested in buying the most powerful, when easiest will do just as well, if not better.
Being an educated consumer means buying what you need and what suits you best. The best specs are usually not all that relevant to most consumers, and most people really want to do a few things, and high-demand programs are largely absent in these computers. Furthermore, things like the iSight make the computer do more, rather than do the same old things, but with better graphics. Think PS3 versus Wii and get back to me in 5 years.
Obsessing about processor speed or GPU is a real geek thing to do, since most of the programs on most platforms are very responsive regardless. You may very well be educated, but your lust for technical excellence is not driven by knowledge.
I can find ten other valid links to dispute those numbers.
Then do it; this is a debate, not a bragging contest.
And stop bashing design. Beauty affects you every day of your life, and the elegance and coolness of Apples does affect the way people feel and work, even if it is subconscious.
You really like that word stupid don't you. It's a valid comparision just because you say its not doesn't make it true.
But it's not a valid comparison.
With computers, Apple sells mid to high end laptops, AIO desktops, Workstation class high end desktops, a rackmount server and a small form factor PC. That's a very small proportion of the computer market. Their share of the computer market is therefore small because they do not sell computers into every market segment. On unit sales alone they're going to be way down in share because they don't sell into the budget market or into the office worker market.
Apple are actually fairly successful in the markets they choose to compete in. For instance, laptop sales aimed at college students or Workstations for video pros.
Saying they have 2% of the computer market and that they're therefore unsuccessful is stupid since they aren't even attempting to address the whole of the market unlike say Dell or HP and the market is HUGE by comparison to just hard disk based audio players.
You're comparing a broad market with a narrow vertical market. The dynamics are totally different.
Really? Before the intro of the Intel processor Apples market share ranged from 2 -2.9%, peaking at 6.1% this Oct, right behind Gateway. Now how sad is that to be behind Gateway?
No it didn't.
I'm thinking your getting this whole Geek thing mixed up with educated. I understand that most people walk blindly into a mac store or compusa and buy whatever the sales person tells them is great. Being educated does not make someone a geek.
No I'm not. I'm educated. I really don't care what the CPU is, just what it does. Geeks care about what it is. Educated people care about what it does.
Not yet but I plan to replace my ipod video witha Zune. I like the nano 8gb for overall use. Ive used the Zune many times its a good player. They are all good players. Your opinion wasn't informed. The simple fact is most ipods are used by PC users which means that anytime MS wants to make deals with Dell, HP, Gateway they can at anytime. They could give away Zunes if they wanted too.
I've read the specs. I know what the Zune does and doesn't do. No way would I choose one over an iPod even if I could run the Zune software anyway.
Sure Microsoft could start giving them away but that would be pretty stupid (there that word again) as they'd be losing $250 a shot instead of just $50.
So the question is what does 2% really mean now, the answer is nothing, so your informed opinion means nothing. MS is not Creative Labs they could kill the ipod if they wanted too and most likely plan too.
Nice logic. So your opinion is that we should be buying Zunes, or accepting freebies, even though they have less features than an iPod and don't work with Macs, because more people have PCs and MS are likely to compete by losing money when they can't compete on features?
Is it any wonder we're rooting for Apple?
The big question that no one can answer right now is how many ipods will be replaced with ipods and how many will be replaced with Zunes.
Well, that can be answered now. Apple's share dropped by 0.8% after the Zune launch so since Sansa's, Creative's and the other PlaysForSure partners share dropped it's safe to say not many iPods were replaced by Zunes. More likely, Zunes replaced old PFS players. I bet Creative are blissfully happy with Microsoft just now.
MS like with everything else is in this for the long run. Perfect example they are pretty much killing Sony in the console race.
But they aren't. Sony are killing Sony in the console race and so far PS3 sales haven't been going long enough to create any impression.
Vista will be the largest OS system upgrade in history. I can get you a link to that but im sure its not hard for even you to figure out with Dell and HP handing out express upgrades for Vista.
No shit sherlock. The OS with the 90% of the market gets an upgrade and it'll be the largest upgrade in history. How do you come up with these insights?
I can find ten other valid links to dispute those numbers.
Go on then. Sales figures, not analyst predictions.
That entire statement is by far the stupidest thing you have said. Your manufacturer does not make their own computers,
Of course they do. That's why they're called 'Apple Computer Inc.'.
they buy from everyone you listed so it clearly matters what happens to those vendors. If ATI can not compet with Nvidia they gpu's jump in price. If AMD can not compete with Intel the same happens. The same 7600gt card that is in my iMAC is in one of my pc's. Its all the same. Apple yet again IS NOT a hardware company.
Of course they are. WTF am I typing on if it's not Apple hardware?
Well thats actually smart, hell im shocked. Thats another thing I can't understand people that by macs to run Windows. The entire point of owning a mac is for the OS, yet people buy them because they are 'sexy', yes I have actually seen that said on here many times.
It's both. The entire point of owning a Mac isn't just the OS. Who else makes a stylish all in one quiet computer with an OS tailored for it? I can well understand why someone might want a Mac Mini for Windows if they wanted to run Windows - there's nothing that size that cheap. I was thinking of getting a couple to run Linux on as office servers to be honest.
Its not about being a troll I use all forms of mp3 players and I have five computers in my house two are Apple computers.
Computers are suppose to be fun and they are tools we use, mac users get all emotional about this stuff.
My first comment in this thread was very logical I asked if the person considered 2% of a market share a failure when Apple carried that throughout their entire product line.
The answer should be who cares what the market share is if you like the product.
Maybe before you do any more posting about "fanboys" and "idiots" you could take note that you, by far, are the most emotionally jacked up person posting on this thread.
It's a growing phenomena, as far as I can see: the reverse Apple snob. They're so filled with withering contempt for how "smug" Apple users are they go out of their way to find Apple enthusiasts so they can start to rant about "fan boys" and how all the Apple zealots are so damn full of themselves they can hardly stand it.
The sane thing to do, of course, would simply be to avoid discussions that don't interest you and whose participants you find distasteful.
It is interesting that the "reverse Apple snob" as I see it is someone that has come from the PC world and now, fearing being lost in perceived Mac "fandom", continues a mix of PC and Mac use, iPod and non-iPod use. Said people would claim steadfastly, "I'm not a Mac user, I just use Macs"
...I can well understand why someone might want a Mac Mini for Windows if they wanted to run Windows - there's nothing that size that cheap...
I've been researching something to run Torrents and H.264 or Xvid Encoding round the clock, and the Mac Mini is perfect for this. I priced out some Dells and even looked at homebake small-form-factor solutions, and nothing comes close to a Mac Mini running OSX and WINXP2pro via Parallels.
It would be the workhorse computer, something silent and cool (heatwise, sex-wise--there I said it) and low power drawing since it is left on 24/7.
This would free up my main AMD64 rig to go 2GB, RAID0 2x7200rpm SATA 80gb drives, 6600GT 128MB VRAM for WINXP2pro latest PC gaming and web surfing when not playing games. Maybe a 7600GT or 7900GS for a bit more smoothness.
A PS2/USB/DVI keyboard-display-switch thingy (KVM) and I'm sorted out ready to rock. PC+Mac... And I don't need to go and harass either PCheads or Macheads on the forums.
http://www.aten.com seems to be where its at...
Xbox1- 24 million
"Speaking with GameDaily BIZ, a Microsoft representative responded to Pachter's analysis, stating that the "Xbox (V1) is a robust platform with more than 24 million units in living rooms..."
10/16/06 http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=83846
Playstation 2 - 112 million
"Tetsuhiko pointed out that the company had shipped 230 million PS-family machines worldwide since 2000, with PS2 amounting to 112 million systems and PSP totaling 22.9 million systems."
11/06/06 http://cens.com/cens/html/en/news/news_inner_11290.html
(*Note that's 112 million PS2s shipped not sold. However, that does not make a huge difference (a couple of million consoles perhaps) as retailers generally cannot afford to hold a tremendous number of consoles in inventory. 20 million consoles in inventory would be an entire year's supply for PS2; I haven't heard of any retailers who keep a year's supply lying around).
Gamecube - 21.2 million
as of 09/30/06 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_GameCube
Adding it all up, the total worldwide console installed base for the PS2-Xbox1-Gamecube generation looks to be about 155 million consoles (I was generous and knocked a couple million off of the PS2 figure to reflect the shipped not sold factor). Given that, worldwide marketshare for that generation is:
Playstation 2: 71%
Xbox 1: 15%
Gamecube: 14%
The '34% worldwide marketshare' figure being trumpted by some in the Xbox fan contingent seems to be not of installed base, but looks more like current quarterly sales figures for Xbox1 and Xbox 360 combined, during a time of constrained PS3 and Wii supplies.
That figure does not reflect worldwide installed base in any fashion (there'd have to be ~45 million Xbox console sales in the past few years that no one knew about, even MS's own representatives, lol), but only current quarterly sales. It is also very reasonable to expect that percentage will drop substantially as PS3 and Wii launch supply woes ease and production ramps up.
Hope that helped. 8)
.
I think MSFT has toally lost its marketing acumen.
Someone working for the Zune division and is halfway smart would be foolish not to be considering bailing right about now, before his/her resume gets permanently scarred.
This thing is finished.
What I can't understand is: How does a company that attracts approx. 120 million visitors to its websites in a month (story posted later by AI), getting TONS of free publicity for its new product as the "killer" of an existing mega-hit product that sells in the millions, and pricing it below cost, manage to sell not more than a few hundred thousand?!
I think MSFT has toally lost its marketing acumen.
Someone working for the Zune division and is halfway smart would be foolish not to be considering bailing right about now, before his/her resume gets permanently scarred.
This thing is finished.
Sorry to be replying to my own post, but I meant: (1) "approx 117 million," and (2) "story posted earlier by AI."
From time to time, apple has adopting the industry standard (software and hardware wise) thus the mac os user would be able to work in the pc world. Now mac even embraces windows os, thus we can see that apple is closing its gap to pc and its reducing reasons to be afraid of using apple computers and of wasting money for machine which is not compatible with pc world. With this strategy apple has quite succeeded in encouraging people to try mac. Also the pricing of the mac products is very competitive compared to the pc market. Only the HD display is still bit too high.
With the last release of macbook/macbook pro plus other mac lines, apple has grown its market share thru the consumer and small office segments. It is not the time yet for Apple to push corporate/enterprise segment to switch to mac osx. But the penetration of mac hardware could have a good start since in the near future employees of corporates could bargain to the IT dept to have mac with windows installed thus allowed the IT dept easily maintain its job. Also, it would depend on how good leopard and bootcamp in implementing the dual both concept, especially in supporting vista by providing the device drivers. If the IT dept does not like the mac osx, it could simply installed the vista solely on the mac hardware given the mac have a complete device drivers.
Thinking about this, it reminds me how wintel machines had pushed mainframe computers (IBM) to the corner. In the late of 70s, who will think that IBM will lose its crown someday. Thus I believe that there would never be an immortal king of technology. The king would change from time to time thus it is not impossible that MS could lose its crown if it does not have a right innovation and focus on more clear vision other than windows os and office apps. I think Apple has a great opportunity in the coming 2-3 years to strengthen its existence since it still have a lot of innovation it its sleeve and some of it even waiting in the pipeline, namely, iPhone, iTV, next generation iPod, better macs, etc.
In the leading edge sector, to be able to grow is only thru innovation which is acceptable for the given era. I still remember the Kodak case which had developed the digital camera but in the wrong era in which there's no support from the related technology such as printer, media card, the pc itself, etc. Thus the great innovation still could be a failure if released in a wrong time. BUT it would be even worse if the company is not good in an innovation.
Bill gates would never be bankrupt and MS is a rich company but it is dying as a leading edge technology company. We will see the destiny of MS in the coming 5 years. The only thing could save MS business is the right man who is good in innovation and have a clear vision of future computing world. And the condition is becoming more critical since Bill Gates will leave the company. I think Bill Gates himself realizes that he is not good in the vision and software but he is a good businessman that come up with a good business model and strategy such as forcing pc manufacturers to pre-installed windows, etc.
Again, it is interesting to see the coming near future of the computer industry.
What I can't understand is: How does a company that attracts approx. 120 million visitors to its websites in a month (story posted later by AI), getting TONS of free publicity for its new product as the "killer" of an existing mega-hit product that sells in the millions, and pricing it below cost, manage to sell not more than a few hundred thousand?!
I think MSFT has toally lost its marketing acumen.
Bingo. I myself was pretty suprised that the Zune didn't do better than it did, between the massive ad budget, the Microsoft name hype, the 'iPod killer' (lol) hype, fresh new kid on the block status, and the subsidized 'we're gonna take a loss on this' pricing.
I'm sure MS will eventually improve their iPod and iTunes knockoffs (ditch the crap-brown color, get rid of the weird 'points' system for the Zune Store), but even then, there's no compelling reason to switch, and a lot of good reasons not to.
So Zune ends up being just another 'me too' product in the space, aka so what?, in the consumer's eyes.
.
Lets just look at MP3 players...
Apple had sold 67,635,000 iPods last time I checked (and will have sold more since then).
Sandisk, Creative, Sony... generics have all sold quite a few million MP3 players.
Microsoft has sold less than 1 million Zunes. If it's 1 million by June 2007 (8 months)... I'd guess that'd mean they are selling about 125 000 a month to make that mark, so have probably only sold about 250 000 so-far.
Now, the magic. EVEN IF they had sold 1000 000, can someone tell me what 1000 000 is as a percentage of 67,635,000?
We're talking Apple having sold 68x the number of MP3 players that Microsoft has. Microsoft has a 1.48% market share if Apple were their only competitor. But they're not!
And Microsoft hasn't sold 1000 000 Zunes, its sold around 250 000.
I'd guess there's around 100 000 000 MP3 players in the market. How does this make M$ look...
250 000 Zunes sold, 100 000 000 MP3 players.
0.25% market share of the MP3 player market! NOTHING! That's more than about $100 000 of marketing for each .1 of a %.
0.25% market share of the MP3 player market!
No. Installed base is not market share. They are specific terms that mean specific things, and should not be confused with each other.
And the report did say 9% of HDD players sold in the US on November were because that's the market it is in. This is a very good start month for Zune despite not having a flash-based player. I imagine MS may have sold more Zunes than Cingular sold ROKRs.
.