I guess what I am getting at is that some of you don't seem to realize how significant and cutting edge Microsoft is. Anyone would concede that Apple is wins on a retail-customer products, and that Apple is brutalizing MS in the mobile phone segment. But MS literally dominates the market for servers, and other enterprise applications. The XBOX has been an overwhelming success (not financially, but in terms of brand recognition).
Microsoft? Cutting Edge? Good one.
Oh, wait. You were serious? You're out of your mind. Microsoft hasn't done anything cutting edge for years. Their dominance in servers (if that is even true these days) doesn't change that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchnellFowVay
Moreover, while average PC is certainly cheaper than the average Mac, they share 99% of the same components (with the exception of the casing and Operating System).
That is, of course, totally false.
First, look at the iMac. Many of the components are not available on any other PC. The power supply, motherboard, case, display, keyboard, mouse, and OS all come to mind.
Second, there is the matter of specs. Even though the RAM (for example) looks like garden variety RAM, Apple consistently sets their specs well above industry averages. There are plenty of examples where generic third party RAM don't work as the motherboard requires good quality RAM which meets Apple's specs.
Finally, there's the matter of your silly attempt to lump all PCs together. Do you understand the difference between a $399 Walmart PC and your $3,000 hand-built system? Apple doesn't sell anything comparable to the low-end crapware systems out there. I don't think anyone ever said that Mac build quality was significantly different than the BEST PCs out there. But few people are buying those - most people are buying the junk ware systems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchnellFowVay
There is a reason why boutique computer builders only build Windows computers. There is a reason why my $3,000 desktop setup that I built myself runs Windows.
Probably several possible reasons:
1. You're not smart enough to use Macs.
2. You make your living on tech support which means that your income depends on Windows' failures and you feel some loyalty.
3. You're just simply a geek and love to spend time troubleshooting.
4. You're able to keep your Windows system running smoothly -- which is difficult and unusual enough that you like being able to brag about it.
5. Like many rabid Apple haters, you never even considered anything different.
So which is it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchnellFowVay
But I digress. It is plainly clear that Apple beats MS in profitability and in growth in the consumer market. That does not make MS a "low-end" company, nor does it mean that MS has failed to grow.
Actually, it's the fact that Microsoft has not grown significantly which demonstrates that Microsoft has not grown. Compare Microsoft's growth rate in sales, profitability, and market cap to Apple's over the last 5 or 10 years. It is the FACTS which show that Microsoft's growth rate is far below Apple's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchnellFowVay
As an aside, I own both an 11" macbook air and a 13" MBP. I have Windows 7 on both. I cannot remember that last time I even bothered with OSX. I readily admit that OSX is the most user-friendly OS on the planet, but I am far more effective on W7.
That's nice. Care to explain why anyone would care?
Furthermore, it doesn't change the fact that the information you posted above was all wrong.
Oh, and btw, if you really are using a MBA, you just destroyed your own argument. AFAIK, the only part of the MBA which is the same as generic PCs is the CPU. So much for your "Macs are 99% the same as PCs" argument.
I think iOS kinda proved that was wrong. That was certainly the old view, that interface needed to be localized and customized. I very much doubt that Nokia will go down that route again. At any rate the modern clean tile look of WP7 should work perfectly well across a lot of markets.
un-uh. first, iOS and its Android knock off offer a very simple top level UI - a grid of apps. that can readily be adapted for anything/anyplace just by simply adding more icons (i.e., specialized apps for a certain market). Apple of course does not allow any telco to customize the iOS UI beyond that at all. but Android does, which makes it the most flexible of all (it's open!).
second and further, Apple is not trying to make the iPhone all things to all people. its target is consumers with pretty good incomes. but Nokia's Symbian phones were all things to all people. that was the market - volume sales - that WP 7 would have to take over.
but the key idea of WP 7's tiles is grouping/cross linking of apps and web services/notifications by specific activities. that's a neat idea, but it was designed for a typical USA user situation. the differing popular local apps and services in India, Indonesia, Brazil, etc. - if they work in WP 7 at all (they don't now) - may not be tile-integration-friendly.
and MS has said that, like Apple, it will not let telcos cusomtize the WP 7 UI and put their telco services up front, which is how they make lots of money.
with all these complications i just don't see WP 7 working globally in Nokia's prior position.
[QUOTE=jragosta;1899422]Microsoft? Cutting Edge? Good one.
Oh, wait. You were serious? You're out of your mind. Microsoft hasn't done anything cutting edge for years. Their dominance in servers (if that is even true these days) doesn't change that.
The only way MajorCrap could become cutting edge would be to include a 10-pack of double-edge safety razors with every Windoze 7 purchase.
And, bottom line, Apple's market cap is significantly higher than Microsoft's.
End of discussion.
Ballmer is an embarrassment.
actually factually... market cap is not a bottom line... it's a market's perception on the bottom line.
the bottom line is and will always be: profit.
the more profit, the more market cap should be. and if market cap doesn't track, then the company can buy back the stock and become private again. Get rid of stockholder meetings, 10Qs etc etc, mutual fund meddling, public retirement fund oversight... all that crap.
As to your 2nd point. I dunno... I'm sure his mother loves him...
In reality, he's using binoculars to see ahead of him the Mobile space accelerating away from him where Apple and Android are speeding off, and in the rear-view he's ignoring the traffic behind him that is gaining ground on him and shrugging it off as nothing.
I'm sure he thinks that once Microsoft releases Windows 8 which will be preferred by businesses and by most consumer tablet users that everything will change in Microsoft's favor. There are some that honestly believe that the first Windows 8 tablet will be much better overall than Apple's 3rd or 4th generation iPad because the Windows 8 tablet will supposedly do EVERYTHING by running a full desktop OS in a 3/8" thick case. I'm sure if it were that easy then Apple could just as soon recompile Lion and run that on the iPad or some new iPad Plus. However, I doubt it. Most consumers are looking for simplicity, not complexity on a tablet.
The problem MS has is that it's huge and businesses like Apps for iOS just wouldn't materially affect its bottom line, in the way that say 100mil WP7 phones a year would if it could only get people to buy them. The desktop is stagnant, and all the trends are against windows there. The rise of China. The rise of thin-clients. The rise of notebooks as primary computers. Notebooks are a little better, but there we see windows losing out to linux/chrome powered netbooks at one end, and MBP/MBAs at the other - and Tablets may end up eating a big chunk of that market.
Productivity software? Increasingly people find that google docs or iWork is enough, very few people really need the pivot table power of Excel or the monstrosity that is Word. Lets not even talk about Powerpoint.
MS can only choose between fighting on Apple or Google's turf, or becoming a stagnant 'cash-cow', that slowly dwindles into irrelevancy.
Are you trying to set a record for number of posts?
What other reason could you have for 1000+ posts in a month? Just come out of a coma?
Anyone who thinks the component design and parts in a Mac Pro, iMac, Macbook, etc., are the same as the standard generic PC motherboard you can buy from ASUS, Biostar, Gigabyte, MSi, etc., I can only assume:
You've never studied IC Design
You've never built a Clone PC from Barebones to Workstation/Server Class
Anyone who thinks the component design and parts in a Mac Pro, iMac, Macbook, etc., are the same as the standard generic PC motherboard you can buy from ASUS, Biostar, Gigabyte, MSi, etc., I can only assume:
You've never studied IC Design
You've never built a Clone PC from Barebones to Workstation/Server Class
You don't mind fabricating as second nature
You are paid to spread disinformation
or you just repeat what you read from others.
Are you saying that my mac mini runs rings around my bf's acer netbook is because of better components and NOT pixie dust and the ground up hopes and dreams of virgin unicorns?! I'm shocked!
But seriously, claiming PC's (from the cheapest to the most expensive) have the same guts as a mac is ridiculous. Heck, apple even uses better screens than most PC laptops I've seen. And look at Dell's current advertising campaign. They're making a big deal over changeable covers. Really?! That's important for a potential buyer?
actually factually... market cap is not a bottom line... it's a market's perception on the bottom line.
the bottom line is and will always be: profit.
the more profit, the more market cap should be. and if market cap doesn't track, then the company can buy back the stock and become private again. Get rid of stockholder meetings, 10Qs etc etc, mutual fund meddling, public retirement fund oversight... all that crap.
No, you're using only one definition of 'bottom line'.
The definition you are using is #1 - a financial statement term.
The definition I was using is #2 - the final result.
The final result (if you prefer) is that according to the evaluation of millions of investors, Apple is worth 50% more than Microsoft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
Anyone who thinks the component design and parts in a Mac Pro, iMac, Macbook, etc., are the same as the standard generic PC motherboard you can buy from ASUS, Biostar, Gigabyte, MSi, etc., I can only assume:
You've never studied IC Design
You've never built a Clone PC from Barebones to Workstation/Server Class
You don't mind fabricating as second nature
You are paid to spread disinformation
or you just repeat what you read from others.
And, yet, the same stupid claim is being made constantly by the Apple-hating trolls. Go figure.
Oh, wait. You were serious? You're out of your mind. Microsoft hasn't done anything cutting edge for years. Their dominance in servers (if that is even true these days) doesn't change that.
We should be nice to MS, if WP7 had been 3 or 4 years earlier it would have been cutting edge. By MS standards 3-4 years late is bang up to date.
Funny how Balls-mer is shouting about 350M new PCs per year when he just announced 400M Windows 7 licenses sold. Everyone thought that was so impressive yesterday. Now we see that it is really just over a year's new PC sales.
Since I doubt that the 400M number is excluding new PC sales, given that since Oct 2009 when Win 7 was launched, there have been about 600M PCs sold, that 400M is about 2/3 of that total. Assuming that 25M were Macs, the the same were Linux/Unix boxes, then the 400M number is not so very impressive. When XP was launched in 2001 the total new PC market was 130M, it is no wonder that Win & has outsold XP 18 months into its life. Perhaps they should look at share of new PC/installed base etc. I would think that XP was probably doing better in replacing WinME or Win98 since i don't think there were many who actively searched for WinME downgrade.
To recap, 600M PCs sold since Win7 launch, the same for non-Windows PCs, 400M Win 7 licenses, (of which let's say 50M were upgrades to people who could not wait for their next PC to get off Vista/XP), then MS sales of Win 7 is about 63% of new PC sales - yawn (a lot of XP on cheap netbooks and cheap laptops in 2009/10).
(600 - 25 - 25)/(400-50) =63% of new PCs shipped with Win7 since Oct 2009.
(suggesting 200M shipped with XP).
As of April/May 2011, XP was still about 8 points higher than Win7 in the installed base (38% vs 30%).
Mentioning that Apple takes 1/3 of PC industry profits off 4% of unit sales is just rubbing it in.
Steve Jobs conceded defeat in the "PC wars" 14 years ago. Ballmer still thinks it's the first or second inning. That said, Mac sales are growing at a rabid pace, and every time somebody buys their first mac, that's one less sale for MS.
One less sale for MS, again and again till Windows goes away and MS makes something better than Mac OS X.
Though this seems very improbable, MS will end up making something else and eventually get out of the OS department if it survives the death of Windows OS at all.
It's interesting that people don't upgrade Windows as much as they do their computers (most still use 10 year old XP! meaning people don't buy Windows itself much). A great majority of Mac users upgrade Mac OS X every time, till they want to, or have to upgrade their Mac. (Or simply buy more, different Macs)
In other words people like Mac OS X and want the newest and best, where as most Windows users don't get excited about newer versions of Windows because there just isn't much to get excited about. Malware and Windows problems are still there.
Actually, Apple is selling you an experience. The hardware and software (both of which Apple is a maker) are tools they use. Jobs had a very nice quote in this year's iPad 2 presentation about how Apple merges the best of technology and the liberal arts to create great products.
Are you saying that my mac mini runs rings around my bf's acer netbook is because of better components and NOT pixie dust and the ground up hopes and dreams of virgin unicorns?! I'm shocked!
But seriously, claiming PC's (from the cheapest to the most expensive) have the same guts as a mac is ridiculous. Heck, apple even uses better screens than most PC laptops I've seen. And look at Dell's current advertising campaign. They're making a big deal over changeable covers. Really?! That's important for a potential buyer?
Don't forget the unicorn tears. That's at least a quarter of the cost of a Mac.
It's like comparing Apples to Oranges, one Company sells well designed products at a premium price while other sells products to the masses at discount prices.
Yep. It's easy to have tons of sales when you make machines that are lucky to last over a year.
Also, how do the dollars stack up. and what's Windows marketshare etc.
It might be 10 to 1 Windows over Mac but there was a time when was more like 20 to 1. And Ballmer really wants us to think that he's not a tad nervous about that
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futuristic
But seriously, I think the "let's sell a super-cheap Mac to boost market share" plan would backfire. The reason being that for the last two decades, Apple has been a premium brand—the Apple logo means something.
Yep it means a machine that doesn't break down in two years. It means a machine that is backed by in store techs, trainers etc. Hate to break it to folks but your AppleCare etc barely covers the cost of a single repair. And certainly doesn't cover the cost of the staff to fix it. Not to mention the trainers etc for the free workshops. Where do you think that money comes off. It's part of what you buy when you buy the computer. Or the ipad or whatever. There's also licensing fees that many 'the components only cost' folks aren't taking into account. etc.
Perhaps Steve Ballmer is planning an advertising tie-in with Chris Kattan's character from the Saturday Night Live. You know, to make a play for the young crowd, show them Microsoft is still as cool as ever.
The adverts will feature Steve and Chris in gold lamé hot pants -- Aarrrrgggghh! I've gone blind!
Comments
I think Ballmer is just hurt because the "I'm a Mac" campaign was such a success and their Windows commercials (with Seinfeld) just sucked!!
He is hurt because the "I'm a Mac" campaign parodied Gates and not him.
I guess what I am getting at is that some of you don't seem to realize how significant and cutting edge Microsoft is. Anyone would concede that Apple is wins on a retail-customer products, and that Apple is brutalizing MS in the mobile phone segment. But MS literally dominates the market for servers, and other enterprise applications. The XBOX has been an overwhelming success (not financially, but in terms of brand recognition).
Microsoft? Cutting Edge? Good one.
Oh, wait. You were serious? You're out of your mind. Microsoft hasn't done anything cutting edge for years. Their dominance in servers (if that is even true these days) doesn't change that.
Moreover, while average PC is certainly cheaper than the average Mac, they share 99% of the same components (with the exception of the casing and Operating System).
That is, of course, totally false.
First, look at the iMac. Many of the components are not available on any other PC. The power supply, motherboard, case, display, keyboard, mouse, and OS all come to mind.
Second, there is the matter of specs. Even though the RAM (for example) looks like garden variety RAM, Apple consistently sets their specs well above industry averages. There are plenty of examples where generic third party RAM don't work as the motherboard requires good quality RAM which meets Apple's specs.
Finally, there's the matter of your silly attempt to lump all PCs together. Do you understand the difference between a $399 Walmart PC and your $3,000 hand-built system? Apple doesn't sell anything comparable to the low-end crapware systems out there. I don't think anyone ever said that Mac build quality was significantly different than the BEST PCs out there. But few people are buying those - most people are buying the junk ware systems.
There is a reason why boutique computer builders only build Windows computers. There is a reason why my $3,000 desktop setup that I built myself runs Windows.
Probably several possible reasons:
1. You're not smart enough to use Macs.
2. You make your living on tech support which means that your income depends on Windows' failures and you feel some loyalty.
3. You're just simply a geek and love to spend time troubleshooting.
4. You're able to keep your Windows system running smoothly -- which is difficult and unusual enough that you like being able to brag about it.
5. Like many rabid Apple haters, you never even considered anything different.
So which is it?
But I digress. It is plainly clear that Apple beats MS in profitability and in growth in the consumer market. That does not make MS a "low-end" company, nor does it mean that MS has failed to grow.
Actually, it's the fact that Microsoft has not grown significantly which demonstrates that Microsoft has not grown. Compare Microsoft's growth rate in sales, profitability, and market cap to Apple's over the last 5 or 10 years. It is the FACTS which show that Microsoft's growth rate is far below Apple's.
As an aside, I own both an 11" macbook air and a 13" MBP. I have Windows 7 on both. I cannot remember that last time I even bothered with OSX. I readily admit that OSX is the most user-friendly OS on the planet, but I am far more effective on W7.
That's nice. Care to explain why anyone would care?
Furthermore, it doesn't change the fact that the information you posted above was all wrong.
Oh, and btw, if you really are using a MBA, you just destroyed your own argument. AFAIK, the only part of the MBA which is the same as generic PCs is the CPU. So much for your "Macs are 99% the same as PCs" argument.
I think iOS kinda proved that was wrong. That was certainly the old view, that interface needed to be localized and customized. I very much doubt that Nokia will go down that route again. At any rate the modern clean tile look of WP7 should work perfectly well across a lot of markets.
un-uh. first, iOS and its Android knock off offer a very simple top level UI - a grid of apps. that can readily be adapted for anything/anyplace just by simply adding more icons (i.e., specialized apps for a certain market). Apple of course does not allow any telco to customize the iOS UI beyond that at all. but Android does, which makes it the most flexible of all (it's open!).
second and further, Apple is not trying to make the iPhone all things to all people. its target is consumers with pretty good incomes. but Nokia's Symbian phones were all things to all people. that was the market - volume sales - that WP 7 would have to take over.
but the key idea of WP 7's tiles is grouping/cross linking of apps and web services/notifications by specific activities. that's a neat idea, but it was designed for a typical USA user situation. the differing popular local apps and services in India, Indonesia, Brazil, etc. - if they work in WP 7 at all (they don't now) - may not be tile-integration-friendly.
and MS has said that, like Apple, it will not let telcos cusomtize the WP 7 UI and put their telco services up front, which is how they make lots of money.
with all these complications i just don't see WP 7 working globally in Nokia's prior position.
Oh, wait. You were serious? You're out of your mind. Microsoft hasn't done anything cutting edge for years. Their dominance in servers (if that is even true these days) doesn't change that.
The only way MajorCrap could become cutting edge would be to include a 10-pack of double-edge safety razors with every Windoze 7 purchase.
And, bottom line, Apple's market cap is significantly higher than Microsoft's.
End of discussion.
Ballmer is an embarrassment.
actually factually... market cap is not a bottom line... it's a market's perception on the bottom line.
the bottom line is and will always be: profit.
the more profit, the more market cap should be. and if market cap doesn't track, then the company can buy back the stock and become private again. Get rid of stockholder meetings, 10Qs etc etc, mutual fund meddling, public retirement fund oversight... all that crap.
As to your 2nd point. I dunno... I'm sure his mother loves him...
... unless she owns MSFT
;-)
In reality, he's using binoculars to see ahead of him the Mobile space accelerating away from him where Apple and Android are speeding off, and in the rear-view he's ignoring the traffic behind him that is gaining ground on him and shrugging it off as nothing.
I'm sure he thinks that once Microsoft releases Windows 8 which will be preferred by businesses and by most consumer tablet users that everything will change in Microsoft's favor. There are some that honestly believe that the first Windows 8 tablet will be much better overall than Apple's 3rd or 4th generation iPad because the Windows 8 tablet will supposedly do EVERYTHING by running a full desktop OS in a 3/8" thick case. I'm sure if it were that easy then Apple could just as soon recompile Lion and run that on the iPad or some new iPad Plus. However, I doubt it. Most consumers are looking for simplicity, not complexity on a tablet.
The problem MS has is that it's huge and businesses like Apps for iOS just wouldn't materially affect its bottom line, in the way that say 100mil WP7 phones a year would if it could only get people to buy them. The desktop is stagnant, and all the trends are against windows there. The rise of China. The rise of thin-clients. The rise of notebooks as primary computers. Notebooks are a little better, but there we see windows losing out to linux/chrome powered netbooks at one end, and MBP/MBAs at the other - and Tablets may end up eating a big chunk of that market.
Productivity software? Increasingly people find that google docs or iWork is enough, very few people really need the pivot table power of Excel or the monstrosity that is Word. Lets not even talk about Powerpoint.
MS can only choose between fighting on Apple or Google's turf, or becoming a stagnant 'cash-cow', that slowly dwindles into irrelevancy.
Are you trying to set a record for number of posts?
What other reason could you have for 1000+ posts in a month? Just come out of a coma?
Anyone who thinks the component design and parts in a Mac Pro, iMac, Macbook, etc., are the same as the standard generic PC motherboard you can buy from ASUS, Biostar, Gigabyte, MSi, etc., I can only assume:
Are you saying that my mac mini runs rings around my bf's acer netbook is because of better components and NOT pixie dust and the ground up hopes and dreams of virgin unicorns?! I'm shocked!
But seriously, claiming PC's (from the cheapest to the most expensive) have the same guts as a mac is ridiculous. Heck, apple even uses better screens than most PC laptops I've seen. And look at Dell's current advertising campaign. They're making a big deal over changeable covers. Really?! That's important for a potential buyer?
And..... that's why Microsoft is dying. Sorry but Google took your place long time ago.
Not where its been.
Ballmer is lost. But keep on keepin on Ballmer.
Google and Apple are creating a new world order while you're still eating steak in the executive suite...getting fatter and sloppier with each bite.
actually factually... market cap is not a bottom line... it's a market's perception on the bottom line.
the bottom line is and will always be: profit.
the more profit, the more market cap should be. and if market cap doesn't track, then the company can buy back the stock and become private again. Get rid of stockholder meetings, 10Qs etc etc, mutual fund meddling, public retirement fund oversight... all that crap.
No, you're using only one definition of 'bottom line'.
http://education.yahoo.com/reference.../bottom%20line
The definition you are using is #1 - a financial statement term.
The definition I was using is #2 - the final result.
The final result (if you prefer) is that according to the evaluation of millions of investors, Apple is worth 50% more than Microsoft.
Anyone who thinks the component design and parts in a Mac Pro, iMac, Macbook, etc., are the same as the standard generic PC motherboard you can buy from ASUS, Biostar, Gigabyte, MSi, etc., I can only assume:
And, yet, the same stupid claim is being made constantly by the Apple-hating trolls. Go figure.
Microsoft? Cutting Edge? Good one.
Oh, wait. You were serious? You're out of your mind. Microsoft hasn't done anything cutting edge for years. Their dominance in servers (if that is even true these days) doesn't change that.
We should be nice to MS, if WP7 had been 3 or 4 years earlier it would have been cutting edge. By MS standards 3-4 years late is bang up to date.
Are you trying to set a record for number of posts?
What other reason could you have for 1000+ posts in a month? Just come out of a coma?
Hey, it's good to have a goal
Since I doubt that the 400M number is excluding new PC sales, given that since Oct 2009 when Win 7 was launched, there have been about 600M PCs sold, that 400M is about 2/3 of that total. Assuming that 25M were Macs, the the same were Linux/Unix boxes, then the 400M number is not so very impressive. When XP was launched in 2001 the total new PC market was 130M, it is no wonder that Win & has outsold XP 18 months into its life. Perhaps they should look at share of new PC/installed base etc. I would think that XP was probably doing better in replacing WinME or Win98 since i don't think there were many who actively searched for WinME downgrade.
To recap, 600M PCs sold since Win7 launch, the same for non-Windows PCs, 400M Win 7 licenses, (of which let's say 50M were upgrades to people who could not wait for their next PC to get off Vista/XP), then MS sales of Win 7 is about 63% of new PC sales - yawn (a lot of XP on cheap netbooks and cheap laptops in 2009/10).
(600 - 25 - 25)/(400-50) =63% of new PCs shipped with Win7 since Oct 2009.
(suggesting 200M shipped with XP).
As of April/May 2011, XP was still about 8 points higher than Win7 in the installed base (38% vs 30%).
Mentioning that Apple takes 1/3 of PC industry profits off 4% of unit sales is just rubbing it in.
Steve Jobs conceded defeat in the "PC wars" 14 years ago. Ballmer still thinks it's the first or second inning. That said, Mac sales are growing at a rabid pace, and every time somebody buys their first mac, that's one less sale for MS.
One less sale for MS, again and again till Windows goes away and MS makes something better than Mac OS X.
Though this seems very improbable, MS will end up making something else and eventually get out of the OS department if it survives the death of Windows OS at all.
It's interesting that people don't upgrade Windows as much as they do their computers (most still use 10 year old XP! meaning people don't buy Windows itself much). A great majority of Mac users upgrade Mac OS X every time, till they want to, or have to upgrade their Mac. (Or simply buy more, different Macs)
In other words people like Mac OS X and want the newest and best, where as most Windows users don't get excited about newer versions of Windows because there just isn't much to get excited about. Malware and Windows problems are still there.
Apple is Hardware maker, not a Software maker
Actually, Apple is selling you an experience. The hardware and software (both of which Apple is a maker) are tools they use. Jobs had a very nice quote in this year's iPad 2 presentation about how Apple merges the best of technology and the liberal arts to create great products.
Are you saying that my mac mini runs rings around my bf's acer netbook is because of better components and NOT pixie dust and the ground up hopes and dreams of virgin unicorns?! I'm shocked!
But seriously, claiming PC's (from the cheapest to the most expensive) have the same guts as a mac is ridiculous. Heck, apple even uses better screens than most PC laptops I've seen. And look at Dell's current advertising campaign. They're making a big deal over changeable covers. Really?! That's important for a potential buyer?
Don't forget the unicorn tears. That's at least a quarter of the cost of a Mac.
BTW "The new iPad 3 Air. Now 25% more magical."
It's like comparing Apples to Oranges, one Company sells well designed products at a premium price while other sells products to the masses at discount prices.
Yep. It's easy to have tons of sales when you make machines that are lucky to last over a year.
Also, how do the dollars stack up. and what's Windows marketshare etc.
It might be 10 to 1 Windows over Mac but there was a time when was more like 20 to 1. And Ballmer really wants us to think that he's not a tad nervous about that
But seriously, I think the "let's sell a super-cheap Mac to boost market share" plan would backfire. The reason being that for the last two decades, Apple has been a premium brand—the Apple logo means something.
Yep it means a machine that doesn't break down in two years. It means a machine that is backed by in store techs, trainers etc. Hate to break it to folks but your AppleCare etc barely covers the cost of a single repair. And certainly doesn't cover the cost of the staff to fix it. Not to mention the trainers etc for the free workshops. Where do you think that money comes off. It's part of what you buy when you buy the computer. Or the ipad or whatever. There's also licensing fees that many 'the components only cost' folks aren't taking into account. etc.
You pay a lot but you get a lot for your money.
Perhaps Steve Ballmer is planning an advertising tie-in with Chris Kattan's character from the Saturday Night Live. You know, to make a play for the young crowd, show them Microsoft is still as cool as ever.
The adverts will feature Steve and Chris in gold lamé hot pants -- Aarrrrgggghh! I've gone blind!