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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
This is likely the most smug, arrogant post I have seen in ages. Well done.
Thanks for that link; quite handy as you can select various statistics (Browser, Browser Version, Mobile Browser, Operating System, Mobile OS, Search Engine, Mobile Search, Mobile vs. Desktop, Screen Resolution, Social Media, Digg vs Reddit) and region and time period. Strangely, the #1 mobile browser is Opera with 22% (iPhone 17%, iPod 6%). On which devices is Opera the default?
Thanks for that link; quite handy as you can select various statistics (Browser, Browser Version, Mobile Browser, Operating System, Mobile OS, Search Engine, Mobile Search, Mobile vs. Desktop, Screen Resolution, Social Media, Digg vs Reddit) and region and time period. Strangely, the #1 mobile browser is Opera with 22% (iPhone 17%, iPod 6%). On which devices is Opera the default?
Thanks,
PhilBoogie
Looking at it by region it's high in the regions where symbian is still popular, asia and south america - so presumably symbian.
Actually a casual look at Nintendo's figures shows that the Xbox is roughly even in the EU, but absolutely nowhere in Japan. It's not American patriotism at play, it's Japanese patriotism, or Japanese game preferences.
Quote:
Motorola is so much stronger in US than in rest of the world. It is American product, after all.
Apple is stronger than Moto in the EU, but it is reversed in the US. Moto's strength in the US is thus unlikely to be due to American patriotism. I would argue that it's more related to Nokia's inability to ever penetrate the US market, which allowed Moto to hold share there, back when they were still the two big industry leaders. More on that later.
Quote:
Apple is so much stronger in US than in rest of the world. It is American product, after all.
Again, not true. Until recently Apple's profits were higher in the EU than in the US. Apple's marketshare is roughly equivalent between the two in the handset market.
Quote:
American car brands are so much stronger in US than in rest of the world. They are American products, after all.
American car makers really are stronger in the US. than most other countries - It's not loyalty though, it's just geography. The car market has always been more driven by local production - mass market cars are expensive to ship around. Every car-maker thus has to have plant in every market in which they operate.
American car makers are actually slightly stronger in Canada than they are in the US - are Canadians more patriotically American?
Now... Nokia was never American brand and never achieved success it had in Europe, Asia... pretty much anywhere else. But now, Nokias are going to be WP7 products as well; American products. Noone can say, but I wouldn't be surprised if Americanised Nokia doesn't end up being much more successful in US than it was before. It will be interesting to watch.
Nokia didn't get anywhere in the US but it wasn't because it wasn't patriotism, it was because the American handset market was unique and didn't play to Nokia's strengths. Nokia historically was a hardware driven handset maker that provided the best GSM reception, talk times etc. America has never been primarily GSM, it has been a much more fluid space technologically, and the driver wasn't Nokia - it was Qualcomm.
Consumer electronics firms like Sony & Samsung were happy to buy chipsets from Qualcomm but that wasn't Nokia's DNA, so it spent years trying to home grow it's own solutions. Even once it did admit defeat and start paying Qualcomm it has never known how to sell itself in a market where it has no unique technical strength.
I'm not sure if WP7 will make much difference though Elop, as an outsider, may have some success in making Nokia change their approach in the US.
Actually Microsoft's customer satisfaction was higher than Apple's after Windows 7 was released; don't know how do they compare right now, but it wasn't long ago. But don't confuse MS customer satisfaction to Dell, HP, Asus... and other hardware vendors' customer satisfaction.
It depends which survey you go with - ASCI has MS at a score of 78, and their most recent numbers have Apple at 86 - though there is a category difference of course.
There was a YouGov poll back in 2010 that put MS higher, but I can't find any details from YouGov on that so it's hard to know what their methodology was - I suspect that ACSI would be considered more definitive.
I'd like to see consumer and business sales broken out...I think apple is huge w/ consumers...not so huge w/ business. Businesses are locked into MS.
Not to mention charity, they practically give their stuff away to charity & so do many others. Apple's charity pricing is pretty pathetic, in fact overall their business department is pathetic. Ballmer is actually lucky that they don't seem to care about that, cause if they start caring PCs are in huge trouble.
Comments
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
This is likely the most smug, arrogant post I have seen in ages. Well done.
Ballmer looks older and thinner on the picture.
Apart from adblockers, I also block any pictures of Steve B. So I couldn't tell...
Nokia is drowning and Microsoft's life boat has a hole in it.
Classic! May I use this as a signature? I wanted Sol's but Tallest Skil already took it - lol
Cheers,
PhilBoogie
http://gs.statcounter.com/
Thanks for that link; quite handy as you can select various statistics (Browser, Browser Version, Mobile Browser, Operating System, Mobile OS, Search Engine, Mobile Search, Mobile vs. Desktop, Screen Resolution, Social Media, Digg vs Reddit) and region and time period. Strangely, the #1 mobile browser is Opera with 22% (iPhone 17%, iPod 6%). On which devices is Opera the default?
Thanks,
PhilBoogie
Thanks for that link; quite handy as you can select various statistics (Browser, Browser Version, Mobile Browser, Operating System, Mobile OS, Search Engine, Mobile Search, Mobile vs. Desktop, Screen Resolution, Social Media, Digg vs Reddit) and region and time period. Strangely, the #1 mobile browser is Opera with 22% (iPhone 17%, iPod 6%). On which devices is Opera the default?
Thanks,
PhilBoogie
Looking at it by region it's high in the regions where symbian is still popular, asia and south america - so presumably symbian.
Xbox 360 is so much stronger in US than in rest of the world. It is American product, after all.
http://www.vgchartz.com/article/8258...rate-briefing/
Actually a casual look at Nintendo's figures shows that the Xbox is roughly even in the EU, but absolutely nowhere in Japan. It's not American patriotism at play, it's Japanese patriotism, or Japanese game preferences.
Motorola is so much stronger in US than in rest of the world. It is American product, after all.
Apple is stronger than Moto in the EU, but it is reversed in the US. Moto's strength in the US is thus unlikely to be due to American patriotism. I would argue that it's more related to Nokia's inability to ever penetrate the US market, which allowed Moto to hold share there, back when they were still the two big industry leaders. More on that later.
Apple is so much stronger in US than in rest of the world. It is American product, after all.
Again, not true. Until recently Apple's profits were higher in the EU than in the US. Apple's marketshare is roughly equivalent between the two in the handset market.
American car brands are so much stronger in US than in rest of the world. They are American products, after all.
American car makers really are stronger in the US. than most other countries - It's not loyalty though, it's just geography. The car market has always been more driven by local production - mass market cars are expensive to ship around. Every car-maker thus has to have plant in every market in which they operate.
American car makers are actually slightly stronger in Canada than they are in the US - are Canadians more patriotically American?
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/07...nada-june.html
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/07...-brand-in.html
Now... Nokia was never American brand and never achieved success it had in Europe, Asia... pretty much anywhere else. But now, Nokias are going to be WP7 products as well; American products. Noone can say, but I wouldn't be surprised if Americanised Nokia doesn't end up being much more successful in US than it was before. It will be interesting to watch.
Nokia didn't get anywhere in the US but it wasn't because it wasn't patriotism, it was because the American handset market was unique and didn't play to Nokia's strengths. Nokia historically was a hardware driven handset maker that provided the best GSM reception, talk times etc. America has never been primarily GSM, it has been a much more fluid space technologically, and the driver wasn't Nokia - it was Qualcomm.
Consumer electronics firms like Sony & Samsung were happy to buy chipsets from Qualcomm but that wasn't Nokia's DNA, so it spent years trying to home grow it's own solutions. Even once it did admit defeat and start paying Qualcomm it has never known how to sell itself in a market where it has no unique technical strength.
I'm not sure if WP7 will make much difference though Elop, as an outsider, may have some success in making Nokia change their approach in the US.
Actually Microsoft's customer satisfaction was higher than Apple's after Windows 7 was released; don't know how do they compare right now, but it wasn't long ago. But don't confuse MS customer satisfaction to Dell, HP, Asus... and other hardware vendors' customer satisfaction.
It depends which survey you go with - ASCI has MS at a score of 78, and their most recent numbers have Apple at 86 - though there is a category difference of course.
http://www.theacsi.org/index.php?opt...=14&Itemid=261
http://www.theacsi.org/index.php?opt...=14&Itemid=265
There was a YouGov poll back in 2010 that put MS higher, but I can't find any details from YouGov on that so it's hard to know what their methodology was - I suspect that ACSI would be considered more definitive.
I'd like to see consumer and business sales broken out...I think apple is huge w/ consumers...not so huge w/ business. Businesses are locked into MS.
Not to mention charity, they practically give their stuff away to charity & so do many others. Apple's charity pricing is pretty pathetic, in fact overall their business department is pathetic. Ballmer is actually lucky that they don't seem to care about that, cause if they start caring PCs are in huge trouble.
Hum, excuse me Ballmer, but who's making all the profits???
Microsoft does not manufacture hardware in the personal computer space. It licenses operating systems, and is making a huge profit doing so.
If you want to compare Apple's margins, better to compare them with Dell or HP.