PDA

View Full Version : Apple's Consumer Marketshare Much Higher?




MacRumors
Oct 11, 2007, 06:46 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Fortune's Apple 2.0 Blog (http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2007/10/11/report-apple-gains-29-share-of-notebooks/) reports on an analyst research note by Berstein Research's Toni Sacconaghi Jr that reframes some of Apple's notebook marketshare numbers.

In breaking notebook shares into 5 separate price ranges (quintiles), Sacconaghi found that Apple's marketshare amongst the most expensive quintile of notebooks was as high as 29%. Of course, also based on his data, Apple lost marketshare amongst the bottom three quintiles (cheapest notebook sales).

Unfortunately, these numbers by themselves are near meaningless. However, the most interesting tidbit of information gleaned was when they excluded business sales: Apple's 29% notebook marketshare rose to 46% when counting only consumer + educational sales.

This may confirm anecdotal reports (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/05/mac-marketshare-at-universities-booming/) that Apple's marketshare appears to be booming amongst college campuses. As a result, Apple's consumer marketshare could be substantially higher than the traditional 5-6% marketshare numbers would suggest.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/11/apples-consumer-marketshare-much-higher/)



chr1s60
Oct 11, 2007, 06:50 PM
Colleges and college students seem to be the highest supporters of Apple. Just walk around a college campus for a day and anyone carrying a laptop that isn't made by Apple seems out of place. My college library also had a whole section in the library that was all Mac. I think these students and colleges are the ones that will take Apple to the next level.

elppa
Oct 11, 2007, 06:53 PM
Market share can be twisted any which way you like. If you are measuring Apple against every single computer ever shipped with an OS inside then they won't do very well.

I think sales and profit are far more important figures for how a company is doing. If you have 60% market share but struggle to make any money then it's no good anyway.

If you count people who actually choose go out an buy their own Computer for home use then the figure has always been higher than 4-5% anyway.

Eidorian
Oct 11, 2007, 06:54 PM
I'm seeing more Macs on campus.

...And more users telling me they bought a Mac since they're computer illiterate...

That's still good right?

pixlnet
Oct 11, 2007, 06:56 PM
Apple notebooks sales are surging. Every time I visit my Apple store I see at least a couple people walk out with macbooks and probably one guy with a macbook pro. What's even more interesting is how fast they're selling iPhones. I see the Apple employees run back there a couple times and bring out a couple each visit in the back.

If you want to see how well the notebooks are selling, just go to a college campus. The kids who don't have one want one or plan to purchase one soon. They're expensive compared to some (like the one I just picked up at Best Buy for $299) so you'll notice the trend at better universities.

For the business people I haven't seen many people with Macs....but I almost always see a couple people on the train with macbooks. Usually younger people but some older accountant looking types. Even my sister was thinking about an iMac....she needs Office and Citrix for work but would love to do the cool stuff with her photos, cards, etc for the kids. Best of both worlds though...just take the serial off your Dell box and use Boot Camp when you need it.

alexhp03
Oct 11, 2007, 07:00 PM
Around my college campus, over half of the people I see have MacBooks/MacBook Pros (although very little of PPC portables) I mean just like any other college campus, you can see Macs are starting to become pretty popular in the education market.

rented mule
Oct 11, 2007, 07:00 PM
This may confirm anecdotal reports (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/05/mac-marketshare-at-universities-booming/) that Apple's marketshare appears to be booming amongst college campuses. As a result, Apple's consumer marketshare could be substantially higher than the traditional 5-6% marketshare numbers would suggest.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/11/apples-consumer-marketshare-much-higher/)

'course it is...why do we need someone else to point this out. Everyone knows that PCs are common place in businesses and businesses take up a large amount of the PC market share. This isn't new and nobody needs to point this out like it's some amazing new discovery.

When I'm talking about game developers and how they base their decisions to port to other platforms, I always explain why it's stupid for them to consider that they're reaching to 95% of computer users by targeting PCs when probably around 10-15% of the PCs and probably another 30% are people from countries that simply don't enforce intellectual property rights and pirate software like there's no tomorrow (but that's another story).

So if we only consider the consumer user base, for sure Apple holds a much larger market share. This is not rocket science.

Eidorian
Oct 11, 2007, 07:03 PM
Around my college campus, over half of the people I see have MacBooks/MacBook Pros (although very little of PPC portables) I mean just like any other college campus, you can see Macs are starting to become pretty popular in the education market.PowerPC users seem to be a lot of the old guard Macintosh users.

Intels are switcher machines.

elppa
Oct 11, 2007, 07:04 PM
Usually younger people but some older accountant looking types.

You may have just offended some people! :D

bigandy
Oct 11, 2007, 07:05 PM
Just walk around a college campus for a day and anyone carrying a laptop that isn't made by Apple seems out of place.

over here, they're ashamed to carry their laptop out of it's case (if they can lift it up at all), in case someone tells them they're just not stylish... ;)

liven2
Oct 11, 2007, 07:06 PM
For a few years now I can not even count how many people I know have bought a Mac. Then these converts get their friends to buy a Mac. I think the market share numbers are higher.I would say more like 8 or 9% at least... Just my 2 cents...:D

goodcow
Oct 11, 2007, 07:06 PM
I work at a community college, and I have to say for those students not as economically inclined as private colleges, Dells are king. I see the odd MacBook or MacBook Pro now and then, but by and large it's Dells, followed by Lenovos.

gnasher729
Oct 11, 2007, 07:09 PM
What's sad is comments to the original blog asking how many percent of laptops were in each quintile...

NewSc2
Oct 11, 2007, 07:10 PM
It's not all good news... the article states that Macs have maximized their laptop market share, because their laptops only cover the premium end.

ChrisA
Oct 11, 2007, 07:11 PM
I work in a fairly conservative aerospace company. The average age here for even software developers is well over 40. But still when I walk down the halls i notice empty black MBP boxes in the trash carts or left out to be picked up and pt in the cart. If I can notice one or two empty boxes being thrown out every day there must be many more.

justflie
Oct 11, 2007, 07:11 PM
There are definitely more Macs visible on campus now than when I started my undergraduate work 6 years ago (2nd year grad student). Very rarely do I go through the campus center without seeing at least a few and that's just fine by me. I know of a lot of friends that are planning on making a Mac their next computer when they graduate or when their computer bites the dust. Notebooks are the most popular item on the wishlist.

PS: ChrisA: Hire me! :) ME with aero thesis. lol

cohibadad
Oct 11, 2007, 07:12 PM
Best of both worlds though...just take the serial off your Dell box and use Boot Camp when you need it.

Dell serials require Dell hardware AFAIK. At least when combined with the Dell MS OS disk. Never tried it with non-Dell MS OS disk although.

Football1maniac
Oct 11, 2007, 07:12 PM
Remember Apple's stance during the Apple-Microsoft deal? "People who usually buy Apple products, think a little differently then the rest of them do." Don't most college kids "Think Different" and go with the computer that won't crash? Apple isn't just a company, it has now been inscribed as a Culture Icon. If you see the Apple Logo, your hip.

JoeG4
Oct 11, 2007, 07:12 PM
goodcow, at the CC I go to, I have yet to see someone using a laptop that wasn't a mac, but it's also pretty high up the food chain as far as community colleges go.

Really though, combine this with the speculation that a HUGE CHUNK OF MAC USERS ARE COLLEGE STUDENTS....

HrmmmmmMMMMMM!

College students.. gaming?

Ya know, I really think the game studios are F*@#%ing idiots ignoring this "3% of the computing market?" when it's probably more like 40% of their current target audience, at least.

nagromme
Oct 11, 2007, 07:15 PM
And one day, as we commute to work in our hovercars, we'll start to wonder why we keep putting up with Windows at work, when everyone's using Macs at home and having so many fewer problems :)

sushi
Oct 11, 2007, 07:22 PM
PowerPC users seem to be a lot of the old guard Macintosh users.

Intels are switcher machines.
Interesting point.

Over the years, most of the folks that I've known that use Mac laptops tend to use them for 3-5 years. Whereas those who use PC laptops tend to use them for 1-2 years. Granted this is a subjective observation.

But it makes sense as the new users are probably the switchers and therefore are using the MBs and MBPs. Whereas the "Old Guard" as you say, are still happily using their current iBooks and PowerBooks.

Personally, I figure that my PowerBook that I've had for almost 4 years will work for me another year or two. Then I will upgrade. :)

Eidorian
Oct 11, 2007, 07:24 PM
But it makes sense as the new users are probably the switchers and therefore are using the MBs and MBPs. Whereas the "Old Guard" as you say, are still happily using their current iBooks and PowerBooks.

Personally, I figure that my PowerBook that I've had for almost 4 years will work for me another year or two. Then I will upgrade. :)See what I mean? :D

My own switcher blood isn't content. I need a Mac Pro or something to tweak.

benpatient
Oct 11, 2007, 07:27 PM
hmn....if you remove business sales from the most expensive 25% of laptop sales, you have basically removed all but the 25 lb "extreme gaming" laptops and Apple's Pro models.

So all this particular bit of info means is that the MBP costs more than most other high-end laptops...as much as most expensive business laptops.

You have to max out one of Dell's 3lb ultra-portable 12" enterprise notebooks (or get one of the aforementioned cinder block XPS gaming rigs) to get up anywhere over 2,000 dollars....

So MacBook Pro's are expensive compared to most laptops...I'm sure glad someone told me!

Also, I'm very curious about how they determined how many of Apple's laptops sold were in the top "quintile" when Apple doesn't release detailed sales information of its product lines...did he just make it up by guessing? Standing in an Apple Store and taking a count of who bought which machine?

Bah.

GSMiller
Oct 11, 2007, 07:27 PM
I wanted a Mac for years, my student discount just made it even better. My iMac turns 1 tomorrow :)

sushi
Oct 11, 2007, 07:32 PM
See what I mean? :D
Guilty! :D :D :D

My own switcher blood isn't content. I need a Mac Pro or something to tweak.
Now don't get me wrong. I would like a new MB or MBP today. They are so nice. However, my PowerBook does what I need it to do so I really can't justify the cost of upgrading at this point. :(

Doctor Q
Oct 11, 2007, 07:33 PM
It's not surprising that Macs get short shrift in many businesses, where the IT department doesn't want to deal with a "minority" platform. If only they'd realize that they can justify their own existence as a support center for their organization, and expand their department, by providing broader support to employees across platforms, rather than sticking to the short-sighted "one size fits all" philosophy.

Given all that, it's surprising that Linux is gaining acceptance in the corporate world.

rented mule
Oct 11, 2007, 07:33 PM
goodcow, at the CC I go to, I have yet to see someone using a laptop that wasn't a mac, but it's also pretty high up the food chain as far as community colleges go.

Really though, combine this with the speculation that a HUGE CHUNK OF MAC USERS ARE COLLEGE STUDENTS....

HrmmmmmMMMMMM!

College students.. gaming?

Ya know, I really think the game studios are F*@#%ing idiots ignoring this "3% of the computing market?" when it's probably more like 40% of their current target audience, at least.

The game studios/developers are somewhat retarded. They go off numbers like "5% Mac market share" and "95% PC/Windows market share" without looking at the gist of it. Remove all the business PCs out there and the crowd that can afford a cheap PC but could never afford to buy the software or games to go with it or live in countries so corrupt, that pirating is tolerated or even applauded (yeah, I'm looking at you Russia and China) and we're left with a consumer segment that would play a game and can actually afford buying one.

Numbers would probably look more like 10% Mac, 90% PC...with a large chunk of this 10% consumer Mac market being young adults that would probably enjoy playing games.

CalfCanuck
Oct 11, 2007, 07:47 PM
Well, speaking from statistical viewpoint, the article was nonsense.

His conclusion is that Apple holds almost 50% of the high-end of the market, so it only has limited growth potential: "But if you look at the high-priced markets Apple chooses to play in, says Sacconaghi, you see that it already has a surprisingly dominant market share without much room for growth".

Total nonsense!

Even if Apple had 100% of the top quintile, it could still be growing much faster than the overall market. It is just that it would "grow down" into controlling more of the cheaper sections of the market.

Pretty weak analysis to be quoted on a business site (though I don't really expect much insight from these...).

Zegna
Oct 11, 2007, 07:51 PM
The research was heavily based on the NA market alone, so it seems.

So I believe, globally, the traditional marketshare number of 5% still stands.

But this surge in sales is deservedly beneficial for Apple, although I'm particularly concerned whether the satisfaction of consumers will deteriorate overtime if Apple is blinded by the surge of it's wealth and forgot it's original producer ethos.

levitynyc
Oct 11, 2007, 07:57 PM
This article does not surprise me. Macs have been getting better and better since I was at college.

My freshman year, we had Cubes at the computer labs at Rutgers and they worked like ****. I bashed Macs based on the horrible hockey puck mouse and the high crash rate of MS programs on the cube.

Towards my senior year, people bought iPods and suddenly I started seeing ibooks pop up left and right.

4 years later, my friend's son goes to Fordham in NYC and speculates that half the class brings a macbook or pro with them to class everyday. I have been telling him for months to get a mac (which i was always told, that they suck) and now he can't get one soon enough. He is enamored with OSX and how gorgeous and functional the MBP is.

Granted, Fordham is expensive and represents high class, high cost, but still, I would imagine this trend is growing at colleges around the country.

Who knows? Perhaps when these kids graduate in a few years they wont want to part with their macs when they get to the workplace and perhaps we can see more macs in the workplace.

lord patton
Oct 11, 2007, 07:59 PM
What's sad is comments to the original blog asking how many percent of laptops were in each quintile...

err, no. The quintiles are defined by price. The comments asking what *percentage of units* are in each quintile are actually raising an essential question.


Also, I'm very curious about how they determined how many of Apple's laptops sold were in the top "quintile" when Apple doesn't release detailed sales information of its product lines...did he just make it up by guessing? Standing in an Apple Store and taking a count of who bought which machine?

Bah.

Good question. Although some analysts do stake out Apple Stores... beats working.

NewSc2
Oct 11, 2007, 08:03 PM
Also, I'm very curious about how they determined how many of Apple's laptops sold were in the top "quintile" when Apple doesn't release detailed sales information of its product lines...did he just make it up by guessing? Standing in an Apple Store and taking a count of who bought which machine?

Bah.

Apple does state how many Macbooks and Macbook Pros they've sold.

twoodcc
Oct 11, 2007, 08:08 PM
great news! i bet it is much higher

Eriamjh1138@DAN
Oct 11, 2007, 08:22 PM
A survey found that among businesses that use Macs, Apple computers make up 100% of the computers used.

A survey found that Apple commands 75% of all notebook machines are all white.

Lame. :rolleyes:

KingYaba
Oct 11, 2007, 08:45 PM
So the conservative numbers report Apple holds a 5-6% market share. It would not surprise me if Apple passes the 10% within the next two years directly attributed to their notebooks sales.

inkswamp
Oct 11, 2007, 08:57 PM
It will be interesting to see how this affects Apple's market share in the future. All these Mac-literate types in college will join the work force and, in some situations, will be in a position to ask for a Mac to use at work. In some cases, these people may be in the position to decide PC vs. Mac for entire depts. in the workplace and may not be so knee-jerk anti-Mac as previous generations of computer users.

That, combined with Apple's apparent willingness in the last half-decade to play nice with Windows, will be Apple's best hope for gaining a better foothold in business.

arn
Oct 11, 2007, 09:14 PM
Well, speaking from statistical viewpoint, the article was nonsense.


Yep, as mentioned, the numbers by themselves are almost meaningless. But I hadn't seen the extraction of Business sales before.

arn

jackc
Oct 11, 2007, 09:15 PM
Nooooo, I'm not going to be part of the elite anymore!

MattInOz
Oct 11, 2007, 09:16 PM
I'm seeing more Macs on campus.

...And more users telling me they bought a Mac since they're computer illiterate...

That's still good right?

That's more than good,
It means when these people get real jobs they'll expect real technology to help them.
bosses are going to hearing alot of...
"your paying me to do .... not be a computer nerd"

maninthemoon
Oct 11, 2007, 09:19 PM
I was in a coffee shop a couple days ago and it was like an apple commercial.
Every laptop in the shop (small place maybe 4,5 laptops). Was either a mb or mbp. Everybody sitting there behind the glowing apples.

Digital Skunk
Oct 11, 2007, 09:25 PM
Not my photo but it makes the same statement. I think the college was in Illinois somewhere and a member of these forums posted it.

87183

Those poor students with PCs not learning a thing because the instructor is showing them with iPhoto... :(

Sucks to be using Vista right now.

henjin
Oct 11, 2007, 09:35 PM
Colleges and college students seem to be the highest supporters of Apple. Just walk around a college campus for a day and anyone carrying a laptop that isn't made by Apple seems out of place. My college library also had a whole section in the library that was all Mac. I think these students and colleges are the ones that will take Apple to the next level.

who cares? Really why does this matter?

motulist
Oct 11, 2007, 09:42 PM
I've been saying this for YEARS and it's only become more and more significant.

Market share is merely the amount of computers that are sold that ship with a specific OS. But the actual number of people running computers with a particular OS on it (aka installed userbase) is a TOTALLY different number.

There are two primary reasons between the difference in the number of Windows vs Mac computers sold (marketshare) and the number of Windows vs Mac computers that people actually use (installed user base).

1) Macintosh computers are used for much longer periods before being replaced be a new computer.

For instance, if 10 people buy Macs and keep them for 2 years before they buy new replacement Macs, and 10 other people buy Windows machines but buy new replacement Windows machines after 1 year, then the market share would show 10 Windows machines bought every year but only 5 Mac macs bought every year, which suggests that there are twice as many Windows machines out there - but in reality there are 10 windows machines out there being used but also 10 Macs out there being used.

2) TONS of machines that get sold with MS Windows on it are absolutely irrelevant to the number of people actually using that OS on their primary computer.

SO many of the computers that get sold with MS Windows on it wind up being used in ways that are meaningless, such as in ATM machines, kiosks, etc. And TONS and TONS (and TONS!) of computers sold with MS Windows on are used in a manner where the OS is basically meaningless, meaning the user can't install any applications, they can only run the small number of basic programs allowed by the system administrator. This includes ALL the computers that are used in ways where the user is only given basic system privileges, such as ALL the MILLIONS of machines that are in the cubicles of businesses with managed computers, all the computers in libraries, school rooms, college computer floors, etc.

-

Once you subtract the number of computers where the OS is meaningless and offset the length of time that a Mac vs an MS Windows computer will be used before being replaced, then you wind up with a number much closer to accurately representing the number of computers that are ACTUALLY running a particular OS in a meaningful way.

Once you factor out those aspects you get close to actual number of computers that people have installed on the computer in their real life.

And so the number of computers running OS X in a meaningful way vs. MS Windows shows a LOT more people using OS X than gets reported in the media.

hadlock
Oct 11, 2007, 09:42 PM
PowerPC users seem to be a lot of the old guard Macintosh users.

Intels are switcher machines.

Old Guard PPC users must be running beige 603es or somthing. Apple started their "switch" campaign in 2000 (I think) and I purchased my 550 g4 tibook in jan of 01 after seeing my friend's 500mhz tibook a couple months prior. Do I get to be called "old guard" when i get my second mac (hopefully the santa rosa based macbooks with LED backlights... whenever they arrive) sometime next year?

AppleIntelRock
Oct 11, 2007, 09:59 PM
I'm not surprised... apple's most expensive laptops don't tend to have as much of an :apple:premium as the lower-end models do.

EagerDragon
Oct 11, 2007, 10:01 PM
And one day, as we commute to work in our hovercars, we'll start to wonder why we keep putting up with Windows at work, when everyone's using Macs at home and having so many fewer problems :)

Because of all the old gard at work, most of the IT department I seen is primarly over 40 specialy manager that make the decision. They are too scared to take a chance. They spend most of the IT budget fighting virus and reloading windows machines cause they are blue screening a lot.

My company buys over 10,000 pc's a year and maybe 500 Macs for those in the creative side.

Business will be changing when all the new colloege students start entering the work force and want a Mac not a pc at work.

BTW I am over 50.

aristotle
Oct 11, 2007, 10:03 PM
As a windows software developer who works in IT for a large company, I can tell you that Application developers should be looking at the consumer+educational market numbers and ignoring the business sales unless their product does not compete directly with MSFT office and is likely to fit in with a high percentage of locked down corporate desktops/laptops.

The large majority of business machines are so locked down and standardized by the corporate Sys Admins that companies other than MSFT are going to have a hard time making any inroads onto corporate desktops. These companies should instead look at focussing on the home, educational and soho home business markets where mac marketshare is skyrocketing.

AppleIntelRock
Oct 11, 2007, 10:03 PM
Business will be changing when all the new colloege students start entering the work force and want a Mac not a pc at work.


I'd say within ten years we'll have about 1/4 of the market- beacuse of what you mentioned.

EagerDragon
Oct 11, 2007, 10:08 PM
I'd say within ten years we'll have about 1/4 of the market- beacuse of what you mentioned.

LOL assuming that Apple still makes computers in 10 years.

EagerDragon
Oct 11, 2007, 10:12 PM
As a windows software developer who works in IT for a large company, I can tell you that Application developers should be looking at the consumer+educational market numbers and ignoring the business sales unless their product does not compete directly with MSFT office and is likely to fit in with a high percentage of locked down corporate desktops/laptops.

The large majority of business machines are so locked down and standardized by the corporate Sys Admins that companies other than MSFT are going to have a hard time making any inroads onto corporate desktops. These companies should instead look at focussing on the home, educational and soho home business markets where mac marketshare is skyrocketing.

Yup, we have our own build for the PC, for Solaris, for AIX, for Linux, and for MS server. They are all lock down.

My PC for work takes over 90 seconds to boot due to all the junk they install (I go get coffee), most other people I see in the train boot in about 20 seconds.

AppleIntelRock
Oct 11, 2007, 10:12 PM
LOL assuming that Apple still makes computers in 10 years.

i don't see the pc market going anywhere THAT soon :D

Eidorian
Oct 11, 2007, 10:26 PM
That's more than good,
It means when these people get real jobs they'll expect real technology to help them.
bosses are going to hearing alot of...
"your paying me to do .... not be a computer nerd"I won't be out of a job then. I just wish users knew a little more.

Old Guard PPC users must be running beige 603es or somthing. Apple started their "switch" campaign in 2000 (I think) and I purchased my 550 g4 tibook in jan of 01 after seeing my friend's 500mhz tibook a couple months prior. Do I get to be called "old guard" when i get my second mac (hopefully the santa rosa based macbooks with LED backlights... whenever they arrive) sometime next year?You've been around since before Intel. :p

winterspan
Oct 11, 2007, 10:29 PM
hmn....if you remove business sales from the most expensive 25% of laptop sales, you have basically removed all but the 25 lb "extreme gaming" laptops and Apple's Pro models.

So all this particular bit of info means is that the MBP costs more than most other high-end laptops...as much as most expensive business laptops.

You have to max out one of Dell's 3lb ultra-portable 12" enterprise notebooks (or get one of the aforementioned cinder block XPS gaming rigs) to get up anywhere over 2,000 dollars....


top 20% of laptops - business = macbook pro + "extreme gaming" laptops
You are really generalizing here. You are leaving out most decent 17" laptops that aren't stripped down to hell. If you configure a regular Dell, Sony, Acer, etc 17" unit (not gaming models) with upper middle specs you can easily get to the macbook pro prices... Even 15" laptops with great specs get up there too...

Bosunsfate
Oct 11, 2007, 11:19 PM
And one day, as we commute to work in our hovercars, we'll start to wonder why we keep putting up with Windows at work, when everyone's using Macs at home and having so many fewer problems :)

Hovercars...how very un "PC". :p

It's not surprising that Macs get short shrift in many businesses, where the IT department doesn't want to deal with a "minority" platform. If only they'd realize that they can justify their own existence as a support center for their organization, and expand their department, by providing broader support to employees across platforms, rather than sticking to the short-sighted "one size fits all" philosophy.

Given all that, it's surprising that Linux is gaining acceptance in the corporate world.

One of my customers is a huge MS fan and has just laughed over the past few years at anything Apple. His stance has always been, in the business world MS is where its at, becuase for a large company standardization is what makes IT life easy.

Since Vista has come out and the iPhone, believe that or not, he has actually started to change his tune. He's not switching out his system, but his change in attitude speaks volumes. Time will tell.

As a windows software developer who works in IT for a large company, I can tell you that Application developers should be looking at the consumer+educational market numbers and ignoring the business sales unless their product does not compete directly with MSFT office and is likely to fit in with a high percentage of locked down corporate desktops/laptops.

The large majority of business machines are so locked down and standardized by the corporate Sys Admins that companies other than MSFT are going to have a hard time making any inroads onto corporate desktops. These companies should instead look at focussing on the home, educational and soho home business markets where mac marketshare is skyrocketing.

My company originally started with Mac only deployments. 18 years ago and the only solid GUI was a Mac. Abourt 7 years ago we stopped supporting Mac platforms as our customers were all standardizing in MS and OSX was not in the cards for us. See my post above.

Our owners have always been Mac fans and a good portion of our development staff still code on Macs. Ironic, eh?

Anyway, upward market share is key for us as it means we'll need to eventually support the Mac OSX platform. And I can't wait becuase our stuff will look soooo much better on OSX.:D

mdriftmeyer
Oct 11, 2007, 11:30 PM
College Sales result in Post-College Sales, results in Businesses working with the best who also have a background in OS X.

The more the future workforce is exposed to OS X and even Linux the more rapidly Windows market share will erode.

thejadedmonkey
Oct 11, 2007, 11:53 PM
I work at a community college, and I have to say for those students not as economically inclined as private colleges, Dells are king. I see the odd MacBook or MacBook Pro now and then, but by and large it's Dells, followed by Lenovos.

I think it's far higher at my community college. Also, many kids I know who have a Dell now want an Apple for later.

wheezy
Oct 12, 2007, 12:28 AM
Now don't get me wrong. I would like a new MB or MBP today. They are so nice. However, my PowerBook does what I need it to do so I really can't justify the cost of upgrading at this point. :(

That, I've discovered, is the downside of a Mac. Unless you have money to spend at will, upgrading your Mac is a much longer process vs PC because the old ones just keep going. I could never fully justify selling my 1Ghz Powerbook because it was so stable and reliable and quick enough that I never did it. Until last week. I'm starting to dive into Aperture a lot on my work Macbook and I need something that can run that. So.... hopefully first of November I'll get a new iMac with Leopard. Bring it on!

MattInOz
Oct 12, 2007, 12:52 AM
Hovercars...how very un "PC". :p
Yes we'll all be catching Hover Short Buses.


My company originally started with Mac only deployments. 18 years ago and the only solid GUI was a Mac. Abourt 7 years ago we stopped supporting Mac platforms as our customers were all standardizing in MS and OSX was not in the cards for us. See my post above.

Our owners have always been Mac fans and a good portion of our development staff still code on Macs. Ironic, eh?

Anyway, upward market share is key for us as it means we'll need to eventually support the Mac OSX platform. And I can't wait becuase our stuff will look soooo much better on OSX.:D

Sounds Like Apple really need to open the Mystic Yellow Box for you Guys.

MacFly123
Oct 12, 2007, 02:19 AM
At my university ALMOST every person that doesn't have a Mac doesn't simply because they can't afford one, but they almost all want one, and end up getting one later after they save up. In the mean time they make excuses as to why they have a cheap PC and are embarrassed by them.

Oh ya.... and once they get their first Mac they ALL say they will NEVER switch back to PCs :)

seenew
Oct 12, 2007, 02:54 AM
The library at SCAD just replaced all ~50 eMacs with brand new aluminum iMacs. Very, very sexy.

Evangelion
Oct 12, 2007, 03:06 AM
It's not surprising that Macs get short shrift in many businesses, where the IT department doesn't want to deal with a "minority" platform. If only they'd realize that they can justify their own existence as a support center for their organization, and expand their department, by providing broader support to employees across platforms, rather than sticking to the short-sighted "one size fits all" philosophy.

That's not really true. A lot of it boils down to Apples support. Do they provide on-site support? What if my company wants to standardize on one particular model, what happens when Apple updates their computer-lineup? Can we still get that older model we standardized on? What if we didn't want our user-machines to have DVD-burners, could Apple modify their machines accordingly?

The difference between PC's and Macs as far as corporate IT is concerned is that with PC's they IT-department can pick and choose the hardware to suit their needs. With Macs they need to modify their needs to fit the hardware, due to the fact that Apple has a lot narrower product-lineup than PC-manufacturers do.

As to the "shortsighted one-size fits all"-philosophy... It simply makes sure to standardize. Ideally there would be just one model of computer provided to the users. Having more than one makes things more complex. Having different OS'es mixed in to it would make things A LOT more comples.

It's nice to think that "I want to provide my users a choice!". But in reality that road leads to madness. Trust me, I have been down that road. For example: We support four different types of laptops (from one manufacturer). Two of those use one type power-adapter, while the other two use different type. So we need separate power-adapters in stock for every type. two of the machines has 15" screens, two have 12" screens, so we need two diferent sizes of privacy-screens. Batteries are different in every model, so we need four different kind of batteries in stock. If we had Macs as well, things would be different in software-side as well. The systems that we have designed for Windows in mind suddenly would not work or would require extensive modifications.

The list goes on.

gnasher729
Oct 12, 2007, 03:24 AM
[QUOTE=lord patton;4312357]err, no. The quintiles are defined by price. The comments asking what *percentage of units* are in each quintile are actually raising an essential question./QUOTE]

No, the quintiles are not _defined_ by price.

One quintile is _defined_ to be exactly twenty percent. No more, no less. That is basic statistics. Median divides your data into two identical groups, quartile is four groups, quintile is five groups, percentile would be hundred groups. The top quintile _always_ contains exactly twenty percent.

PCMacUser
Oct 12, 2007, 03:31 AM
At my university ALMOST every person that doesn't have a Mac doesn't simply because they can't afford one, but they almost all want one, and end up getting one later after they save up. In the mean time they make excuses as to why they have a cheap PC and are embarrassed by them.

Oh ya.... and once they get their first Mac they ALL say they will NEVER switch back to PCs :)

I think it's got a lot to do with what people perceive as 'cool'. Mac laptops look great, so naturally kids/young people at university want them.

PCMacUser
Oct 12, 2007, 03:32 AM
The difference between PC's and Macs as far as corporate IT is concerned is that with PC's they IT-department can pick and choose the hardware to suit their needs. With Macs they need to modify their needs to fit the hardware, due to the fact that Apple has a lot narrower product-lineup than PC-manufacturers do.

As to the "shortsighted one-size fits all"-philosophy... It simply makes sure to standardize. Ideally there would be just one model of computer provided to the users. Having more than one makes things more complex. Having different OS'es mixed in to it would make things A LOT more comples.

I totally agree.

JobsRules
Oct 12, 2007, 03:40 AM
At friend worked at a UK retailer a while back and they were selling around 35% Mac to HP, Sony and other Windows products. He said that post-Intel sales certainly shot up as people didn't have to worry so much about not being Windows compatible.

If you strip out the zillions of PCs sold to corporations as little more than terminals, Mac marketshare is now probably pretty hot.

Mac Kiwi
Oct 12, 2007, 04:35 AM
This is fascinating -ie the Apple brand becoming a cultural icon.It reminds me so much of a lot of the guys who ride the Harley look a likes because they cannot afford a Harley itself...I had no idea the brand was now so strong.


As for Macs on campuses,here my sister in law is a law lecturer.A few years ago there was a wholesale removal all of the unis Macs,bar hers {because she would not give it up} Thing is just recently I hear the university is now swimming in Macs once more.


The only thing which makes me a bit nervous about the rise of the marketshare is,how long is it going to be before we get malware etc etc.


Also I was talking to my ISP the other day and a tech is telling me to check my system for key loggers :rolleyes:...I didnt get into it with him..

MattJessop
Oct 12, 2007, 04:41 AM
See, in the UK these numbers are naturally lower.

I was speaking to an IT technician guy on the first day, and I just remember him saying that 'The only people here who use Macs are you, me, the teachers, and the Americans'

And in all fairness, if I see somebody in the cafe with a Mac, usually they're american.

Although out of my 8 flatmates (that I regularly see) 3 of us use Macs, one of which has only had it about a week :)

christian_k
Oct 12, 2007, 04:47 AM
Higher market share for any competition to windows is good news.

But when will they start to do more outside the US to be more successful internationaly?

I live in Germany and Apple as a computer maker is virtually non existent here. There is almost no advertising for Apple (and if there is advertising, it is just for iPod). There is no Apple store in Germany, only a few specialized retailers like Gravis in major cities. There are a lot of computer shops here and department stores also sell computers, but almost never Mac. Even at schools or universities you will only find Macs if the institution is related to arts, media or design. I'm sure a lot of people here don't even know that other platforms but windows exist. Three years(?) or so ago I was at a trade show with Mac products in Cologne and Apple wasn't even there!

But why? With a population of 82 Mio. Germany isn't as big as the US, but surely not an unimportant market. Also it is not a "poor" country. Most people here can afford Macs (typical laptops sold here are not or not much cheaper than a MacBook) and of course a lot of people are just "********d up" with Windows.

I work as a developer in a games company. I'd really like to convince my Boss that a Mac port would be good. But as long as Apple doesn't do more to become visible my chances will be bad.
(Out game is 3D, but targeted at casual gamers and even the GMA chips can handle it fine. So we wouldn't have problems with Mac specs).

Why don't they do a bit more?

Christian

Macinposh
Oct 12, 2007, 05:24 AM
Higher market share for any competition to windows is good news.

But when will they start to do more outside the US to be more successful internationaly?

I live in Germany and Apple as a computer maker is virtually non existent here.


Here about 1000km up north,in scandinavia,the situation is very different.

In universities apple is booming,especially in the media schools,where it is de-facto computer.
Apple has really reached the younger generation.
Now even the bigger computer/electronic retailers have the growing :apple: stand or even department.


I saw a funny sight last saturday in the biggest computer retailer shop around here.

In the 400m2 PC department there was one person fondling the computers. One. And he smelled of genuine nerd. A bit like linux or ubuntu.

In the 25m2 Apple department there was 22 persons crammed. 22.
Half of them women. No smell of sweat in that booth. Only slight scent of perfume.



People can have their opinions about the apples business modell (i do...) but it seems to be working quite nicely.

demallien
Oct 12, 2007, 06:39 AM
Apple's really starting to pick up in France as well. I'm seeing more and more on the metro, for example. Plus they have a fairly large presence in big computer sellers, like Surcouf and FNAC. There's always a crowd around the macs, when the other computers are barely looked at.

jellomizer
Oct 12, 2007, 06:54 AM
Well being that Apple doesn't have low end laptops it makes it very difficult to get into that market, unless apple starts making low end systems... which could be disastrous for Apple. Apple been trying to get the reputation of the better PC, Like Gateway did back in the mid 90's and Dell in the early 2000's. And what called Gateways down fall, after gaining significant market share in the higher end they started competing in cost, by going in cost while they got signifgant market share they shortly got reputation for poor quality and lost all they have gain... Dell is in this spiral too right now and loosing to Apple and HP. Now if Apple is smart they will stay away from the low end market and stay focus on the mid-high end, they may be able to maintain their gains.

Confidemus
Oct 12, 2007, 06:54 AM
In the 25m2 Apple department there was 22 persons crammed. 22.
Half of them women. No smell of sweat in that booth. Only slight scent of perfume.

That's it. I go to the Mac department:D

But joking apart, decisions for a computer in business are very "male". Feelings and emotions, having a nice working equipment and all this stuff are more "female". But things develop. People get more mature, even the "males" start understanding the emotional context of a working situation.

BTW I'm male...
Confidemus

macFanDave
Oct 12, 2007, 07:18 AM
about Apple's market share among people who are free to choose their computer.

Personally, I would be 100% Macs if I could, but the companies I have worked for are always sticking me with these ****** Dells!

JFreak
Oct 12, 2007, 07:24 AM
Over the years, most of the folks that I've known that use Mac laptops tend to use them for 3-5 years. Whereas those who use PC laptops tend to use them for 1-2 years. Granted this is a subjective observation.

I've also noticed this very same phenomenon. Macs generally work fast enough for up to 5 years but Windows people begin to complain after half a year. Not many are using their generic PC laptop for 3 years, most feel justified to buy a new one after 18(ish) months of use. And that's one of the reasons why they settle for "the cheapest" computer available.

One of my PC-using friends just recently made this observation on his own. He decided that once his now 6 months old "new laptop that has already begun to noticeably slow down" has reached the age of 18 months, he will surely be buying a Mac laptop. He would want to buy one right now, but cannot justify the purchase to his wife because his PC laptop is still rather new :)

And my father has just reached a point where he feels his 5 year old iBook has served him long enough.

Quite a difference? The PC guy buys is soon to buy a fifth laptop before the Mac guy decides to buy #2. Surely the Mac guy pays less for his "expensive" hardware...

Lesser Evets
Oct 12, 2007, 07:56 AM
So this really tells us that 'marketshare' doesn't mean anything. It also means that the press and information gathering services are absolutely crap.

...did we not know this already? Who was born last night? Come on, admit.

BTW, did anyone mention Steve Jobs in this thread yet? Then I shall:

It's all Steve Jobs' fault. He should have released OSX 10.5 by now.

jocknerd
Oct 12, 2007, 08:21 AM
UVA does a yearly study of incoming freshmen and technology. Check this article out: http://www.virginia.edu/uvatoday/newsRelease.php?id=1361

Mac usage is 20% now compared to 3% in 2002. Princeton University said that 40% of their computer sales were Macs.

And if you go to any developer conferences, there is a huge number of Macs being used. A coworker of mine went to the Python Developers Conference in 2005 and talked about how many Macs were there. I went to the ColdFusion Developers Conference this year and Macs made up about 30% of the laptops there. And more impressively, the majority of the well-known ColdFusion gurus were using Macs. And go to Ruby on Rails Conference. They actually give out awards to users who don't have Macs. They call them non-conformists.

Yep, if you don't count the sales of PC's to businesses, Macs have a very good market share.

Consultant
Oct 12, 2007, 08:40 AM
PowerPC users seem to be a lot of the old guard Macintosh users.

Intels are switcher machines.

Well, I had a PowerBook 1.5 17" before getting the latest MBP 17" Santa Rosa. I guess I am a switcher... =p

Still have PowerMac G4 and iMac G5. Selling G5 soon. (Also had SE30, LC2, PPC clone, various PowerMac, various iBook, and G4 Cube which is incredible for the time because it's silent!)

Consultant
Oct 12, 2007, 08:50 AM
hmn....if you remove business sales from the most expensive 25% of laptop sales, you have basically removed all but the 25 lb "extreme gaming" laptops and Apple's Pro models.

So all this particular bit of info means is that the MBP costs more than most other high-end laptops...as much as most expensive business laptops.

You have to max out one of Dell's 3lb ultra-portable 12" enterprise notebooks (or get one of the aforementioned cinder block XPS gaming rigs) to get up anywhere over 2,000 dollars....

So MacBook Pro's are expensive compared to most laptops...I'm sure glad someone told me!

Also, I'm very curious about how they determined how many of Apple's laptops sold were in the top "quintile" when Apple doesn't release detailed sales information of its product lines...did he just make it up by guessing? Standing in an Apple Store and taking a count of who bought which machine?

Bah.

MacBook Pro:
- has a better design
- weights much less than the competition
- is thinner than the competition
- has better battery life
- has ambient light sensor
- does not need anti-virus, etc. (windoze machine require it, which takes a hit on CPU, as much as 10%)
- cannot be infected into a spam botnet (most spams, as much as 90% of spam are sent from infected windoze machines)
- actually sleeps / hibernates when you close the lid
- does not slow down inexplicably a few months after a clean install
- does not have noisy fans on the bottom blowing hot air
- makes minimal noise compared to other laptops
- has a smaller power supply and better cord management (1/2 the size of others)
- has slot loading dvd drive
- has integrated microphone that actually works
- has standard set of keyboard for all laptops across the line
- has Mac OS X
- requires minimal support (saves you time, is your time worthless?)


The upfront cost might be more, but due to the longer usable life and lower support costs, it actually costs less to own a Mac. That's without mention the usability issues with windoze machines.

b33k34
Oct 12, 2007, 09:46 AM
In the UK almost everyone i know either personally or through work is planning to make their next PERSONAL computer purchase a Mac. I suspect there's a major switch brewing in the 'home/personal' market (remember this will take time to feed through - they're not going to junk a good PC).

However, i don't see any sign at all that Apple is making inroads into businesses and that's ultimately what will limit their market share. Businesses generally have a regular 3 year replacement cycle as well whereas, outside the geek/enthusiast market, home users keep their computers much longer.

Pixbae
Oct 12, 2007, 09:52 AM
At my college, (just graduated), it was interesting to watch people snatch up Macs as their PCs died before graduation. Most of the people with macs made it through all four years on the same machine...

I know Apple's popularity among college students has a lot to do with the iPod and the "coolness" factor... but didn't a lot of this generation (myself included) use macs in public elementary schools? Sure, most of those schools then switched to PCs before we graduated high school, but the concept of using a mac isn't 100% new. Maybe Apple's early education investment is finally paying off?

0racle
Oct 12, 2007, 10:15 AM
Don't most college kids "Think Different"
Statistically, no. You were probably closer to the mark saying Apple has become trendy.

Digital Skunk
Oct 12, 2007, 10:39 AM
That's not really true. A lot of it boils down to Apples support. Do they provide on-site support? What if my company wants to standardize on one particular model, what happens when Apple updates their computer-lineup? Can we still get that older model we standardized on? What if we didn't want our user-machines to have DVD-burners, could Apple modify their machines accordingly?

The difference between PC's and Macs as far as corporate IT is concerned is that with PC's they IT-department can pick and choose the hardware to suit their needs. With Macs they need to modify their needs to fit the hardware, due to the fact that Apple has a lot narrower product-lineup than PC-manufacturers do.

As to the "shortsighted one-size fits all"-philosophy... It simply makes sure to standardize. Ideally there would be just one model of computer provided to the users. Having more than one makes things more complex. Having different OS'es mixed in to it would make things A LOT more comples.

It's nice to think that "I want to provide my users a choice!". But in reality that road leads to madness. Trust me, I have been down that road. For example: We support four different types of laptops (from one manufacturer). Two of those use one type power-adapter, while the other two use different type. So we need separate power-adapters in stock for every type. two of the machines has 15" screens, two have 12" screens, so we need two diferent sizes of privacy-screens. Batteries are different in every model, so we need four different kind of batteries in stock. If we had Macs as well, things would be different in software-side as well. The systems that we have designed for Windows in mind suddenly would not work or would require extensive modifications.

The list goes on.

Totally agree. My communication department went with Avid on their file servers mainly because Avid worked in a deal for a few high end editing systems and a 20TB server with 50 seats or so of a lower end editing system. The total package was a bit more expensive than the Xserve and FCP but in the end we ended up with more seats, and when you have to purchase that stuff legally and by the books it gets expensive. We would have loved to go with Xserve, FCP and Xsan but Apple just wasn't working with us.

We will still teach our students FCP along with the others but Avid made us a better offer in terms of IT, Licensing, and Support. When it comes to buying things for personal use Apple is changing the game and making it easier for users to buy and understand their entire computer system out of the box. But when it comes to big business and large infrastructures that need multiple licenses of software and racks of servers to run it Apple is still a bit shaky. We could have gone with Apple budget wise, but we saved more in the long run going with Avid and I am sure many IT guys are thinking the same way when they have to make decisions.

Doctor Q
Oct 12, 2007, 10:50 AM
That's not really true. A lot of it boils down to Apples support. Do they provide on-site support? What if my company wants to standardize on one particular model, what happens when Apple updates their computer-lineup? Can we still get that older model we standardized on? What if we didn't want our user-machines to have DVD-burners, could Apple modify their machines accordingly?

The difference between PC's and Macs as far as corporate IT is concerned is that with PC's they IT-department can pick and choose the hardware to suit their needs. With Macs they need to modify their needs to fit the hardware, due to the fact that Apple has a lot narrower product-lineup than PC-manufacturers do.

As to the "shortsighted one-size fits all"-philosophy... It simply makes sure to standardize. Ideally there would be just one model of computer provided to the users. Having more than one makes things more complex. Having different OS'es mixed in to it would make things A LOT more comples.

It's nice to think that "I want to provide my users a choice!". But in reality that road leads to madness. Trust me, I have been down that road. For example: We support four different types of laptops (from one manufacturer). Two of those use one type power-adapter, while the other two use different type. So we need separate power-adapters in stock for every type. two of the machines has 15" screens, two have 12" screens, so we need two diferent sizes of privacy-screens. Batteries are different in every model, so we need four different kind of batteries in stock. If we had Macs as well, things would be different in software-side as well. The systems that we have designed for Windows in mind suddenly would not work or would require extensive modifications.

The list goes on.I've been on both sides of this, since I do support (where I have to deal with the variety of equipment out there) and I've helped frustrated employees who have to fight for every application and customization of "their" desktop computer (usually a PC). I've learned to favor the employee's side. I vote to let IT's job be "a lot more complex" or "a road to madness," as you put it. Spend more on support. Stock 10 different power adapters. And let employees use what makes them most efficient.

I don't dispute your concerns; I just draw a different conclusion about the lesser of two evils. I'm presenting one side of an argument that can't really be entirely one-sided. It has to be balanced with common sense, or IT would have no way to keep everyone operational and the network secure. Perhaps give employees choices from among half the available models; not all models, and not a single model. Centrally control virus checkers, but let people use whichever office suite they prefer. And so on.

As for Apple's changing hardware models, the salvation is Apple's proven record in compatibility. New models run the same software, so upgrades should be painless and a mix of models should not require different versions of software. At my office, we've spent months upgrading some staff members from XP to Vista, with installers for old software failing, driver problems, etc. Meanwhile, a Mac upgrade from an early model PPC Mac to the latest Power Mac was a simple matter of moving files over and re-running some installers. Done in minutes. Just an anecdote, but it reinforced my instincts.

Evangelion
Oct 12, 2007, 11:22 AM
I don't dispute your concerns; I just draw a different conclusion about the lesser of two evils. I'm presenting one side of an argument that can't really be entirely one-sided. It has to be balanced with common sense, or IT would have no way to keep everyone operational and the network secure. Perhaps give employees choices from among half the available models; not all models, and not a single model. Centrally control virus checkers, but let people use whichever office suite they prefer. And so on.

Well, I don't want to sound like the "dictatorial IT-guy", because I don't consider myself to be one. Our users are admins of their own machines. If they want to install their own app on their machines, they are free to do so. And we do provide them with choice: they can choose from several (well, in our case, two) laptops. One is a regural 15" laptop, the other is 12" tablet-pc. So our shop does give users choice, it's just not "free for all".

My previous workplace was "free for all". The employees who got laptops were allowed to select whatever they wanted, as long as it fit inside the budget (and ran certain custom-built apps, which basically mandated Windows). Desktops were self-built machines. What was the end-result? Well, everyone used a computer that was slightly different from each other. So installation of OS was 100% manual, since we couldn't have standardized images that could simply be dropped to the machine. Every model had their own quirks that we had to take in to account. Every machine had slightly different drivers. When I went to work on a machine, I could not really make any assumptions as to what kind of machine I would be working with, since they were different from each other.

As for Apple's changing hardware models, the salvation is Apple's proven record in compatibility. New models run the same software, so upgrades should be painless and a mix of models should not require different versions of software.

That's not what I'm talking about. Of course all PC's run same software as well. But when we select the models that we will be using, each model goes through rigorous testing. When we find a machine that we are happy with and that works, we stick to it. New models introduce all kinds of problems (as these forums demonstrate. "Never buy rev. A Apple"). With PC-manufacturers they can guarantee us certain longevity.

At my office, we've spent months upgrading some staff members from XP to Vista, with installers for old software failing, driver problems, etc. Meanwhile, a Mac upgrade from an early model PPC Mac to the latest Power Mac was a simple matter of moving files over and re-running some installers. Done in minutes. Just an anecdote, but it reinforced my instincts.

I don't dispute your experience, but it's just not what I was talking about.

Doctor Q
Oct 12, 2007, 02:11 PM
Evangelion: You've clearly seen both sides of the issue too! It sounds like your balanced approach is sensible.

I'm sure the tradeoffs change depending on the size and nature of the business. If I ran a massive customer service call center, I'd be more inclined to standardize all equipment, since jobs would be similar across employees. For that purpose, perhaps I'd choose PCs built to my exact specifications, and buy and support them in bulk. If I ran a small studio for digital artists, I'd give people plenty of freedom and it would be just the opposite.

JonboyDC
Oct 12, 2007, 05:12 PM
This isn't really new, is it? It's always been clear to me, since at least the early '90s, that whatever Apple's overall market share was, a significantly higher percentage of people were buying Macs for their home use. Apple's problem has always been with business sales. Admittedly, there was a period of time when people who would prefer Macs at home sucked it up and bought Windows machines so they could be compatible with work, and that phenomena is definitely passing. But I don't think Apple's share of the home market has ever been nearly as low as its overall market share.

(And, as noted, Apple's installed user base is higher still, because the machines have a longer useable lifespan.)

sushi
Oct 14, 2007, 01:18 AM
Business will be changing when all the new colloege students start entering the work force and want a Mac not a pc at work.
I think this will help shift things a bit in the work place.

The other enabling factor is the Intel Macs which can run Windows natively via Bootcamp or via emulation using Parallels or VMWare. The compatibility issue with Windows software becomes much less of an issue if any.

On a side note, I sure wish that Apple would coordinate with Microsoft for OWA access to be the same on the Mac as it is with Windows, or simply create the software themselves. OWA on the PC gives you so many more usable options.

That, I've discovered, is the downside of a Mac. Unless you have money to spend at will, upgrading your Mac is a much longer process vs PC because the old ones just keep going. I could never fully justify selling my 1Ghz Powerbook because it was so stable and reliable and quick enough that I never did it. Until last week. I'm starting to dive into Aperture a lot on my work Macbook and I need something that can run that. So.... hopefully first of November I'll get a new iMac with Leopard. Bring it on!
I hear ya! I definitely have the funds set aside for a new purchase, and even have a supporting wife.

But my PB15 (4 years old in a month) and PM933 (6 years old in a couple of months) still work fine for me. Curses to you Apple! ;)

At work we have the white Intel iMacs. So I get to use those and they are faster. I think that you'll like the new iMacs with Leopard. :)

We also recently purchased a nice Sony laptop. Came with Vista. What a dog -- it is so slow. So I put XP on it. Took a bit of effort with the drivers. But it works a whole lot better now.

One thing about Apple, is that each release of Mac OS X seems to get faster and works better. Hopefully Leopard will continue in that fashion.

As for Vista, I am waiting for SR2.

I've also noticed this very same phenomenon. Macs generally work fast enough for up to 5 years but Windows people begin to complain after half a year. Not many are using their generic PC laptop for 3 years, most feel justified to buy a new one after 18(ish) months of use. And that's one of the reasons why they settle for "the cheapest" computer available.

One of my PC-using friends just recently made this observation on his own. He decided that once his now 6 months old "new laptop that has already begun to noticeably slow down" has reached the age of 18 months, he will surely be buying a Mac laptop. He would want to buy one right now, but cannot justify the purchase to his wife because his PC laptop is still rather new :)

And my father has just reached a point where he feels his 5 year old iBook has served him long enough.
Over the years, I've helped numerous friends who have Macs since around the military and government there are few Mac support people. (Although that does seem to be changing these days which is good to see.)

One of the most common questions, do you think that it's time to upgrade. And this comes from folks who are happily using their Macs that are over 5 years old. In many cases, their Macs do what they need and there is no reason to upgrade so it becomes more of a case of want verses need.

On a side note, I recently showed a PC IT type who manages about 200 PCs, the Mac OS using a Intel iMac 17 inch. She was floored. Especially when I showed her how easy it was to run Windows natively and via Parallels. And how you could easily make backups.

Her mouth really hit the floor when I showed her in real time how easy it was to make backups of Windows. At work she uses Ghost. So I showed her the steps to do it on a BootCamp partition:
- I backed up my BootCamp partition with Disk Utility.
- Deleted it.
- Created the partition again -- even burned the driver CD.
- Formated the partition using the Windows install CD.
- Restored the files.
- Booted into Windows XP.

Did this in about an hour and 20 minutes. And most of the time, we spend chatting about different topics as we were waiting on the computer to complete the task at hand.

Of course I showed her how to do this in Parallels in the time it took to copy an image.

Now she wants to get a Mac. :)

Quite a difference? The PC guy buys is soon to buy a fifth laptop before the Mac guy decides to buy #2. Surely the Mac guy pays less for his "expensive" hardware...
Good point!

I guess the bottom line is you get what you pay for.

Doctor Q and Evangelion you both made some interesting posts regarding the IT side.

To share. I have a friend who worked in an IT shop for a medical unit where they have about 250 computers of varying makes and models. Their backup guy has images for each type of computer they use. So he must have one of each model in his backup room. I think that the current count is 8-9 computers. Simply amazing. With more freedom comes more work for the IT guys.

One organization I belonged to, used to have a very open policy. Then things started to go wrong and people were messing up their computers. They slowly went from open to being locked down to were you couldn't do anything. And the boot times went up considerably.

I think as an IT, you have to balance flexibility with standardization. Not an easy task to begin with and it gets way more complicated as the organization grows in size. Also, if you have a situation where you have widely dispersed offices that creates additional headaches as well.

Sometimes I think the best policy is have completely open systems, then smack the person repeatedly when they mess up their computer. ;)

Anyhow, I've enjoyed reading the posts that you both have made.

Eidorian
Oct 14, 2007, 01:26 AM
On a side note, I recently showed a PC IT type who manages about 200 PCs, the Mac OS using a Intel iMac 17 inch. She was floored. Especially when I showed her how easy it was to run Windows natively and via Parallels. And how you could easily make backups.

Her mouth really hit the floor when I showed her in real time how easy it was to make backups of Windows. At work she uses Ghost. So I showed her the steps to do it on a BootCamp partition:
- I backed up my BootCamp partition with Disk Utility.
- Deleted it.
- Created the partition again -- even burned the driver CD.
- Restored the files.
- Booted into Windows XP.

Did this in about an hour and 20 minutes. And most of the time, we spend chatting about different topics as we were waiting on the computer to complete the task at hand.

Of course I showed her how to do this in Parallels in the time it took to copy an image.

Now she wants to get a Mac. :)


Good point!

I guess the bottom line is you get what you pay for.I guess they were easily impressed. :rolleyes:

A virtual machines creation and duplication are just as easy in Windows. Boot Camp Assistant isn't anything special either. A lot of new users believe there's some special magic behind it.

Then again backing up in Windows is a pain even with enterprise software.


Doctor Q and Evangelion you both made some interesting posts regarding the IT side.

To share. I have a friend who worked in an IT shop for a medical unit where they have about 250 computers of varying makes and models. Their backup guy has images for each type of computer they use. So he must have one of each model in his backup room. I think that the current count is 8-9 computers. Simply amazing. With more freedom comes more work for the IT guys.

One organization I belonged to, used to have a very open policy. Then things started to go wrong and people were messing up their computers. They slowly went from open to being locked down to were you couldn't do anything. And the boot times went up considerably.

I think as an IT, you have to balance flexibility with standardization. Not an easy task to begin with and it gets way more complicated as the organization grows in size. Also, if you have a situation where you have widely dispersed offices that creates additional headaches as well.

Sometimes I think the best policy is have completely open systems, then smack the person repeatedly when they mess up their computer. ;)

Anyhow, I've enjoyed reading the posts that you both have made.Imaging and deployment is much less of a pain in OS X. You just don't have to deal with the driver and application situation that you do over in Windows.

Even with the plethora of Macs that I have, I rarely need to make model specific images. The Aluminum iMac and MacBook Pro Santa Rosa are the only outstanding models right now.

contoursvt
Oct 14, 2007, 01:38 AM
-better design meaning what? Looks cooler? I have yet to see another respectable brand with keys that rub into the screen and leave a permanent imprint.

-there are thinner notebooks available than the Macbook Pro - may not be exactly the same spec but if someone wants THIN then they have better options elsewhere

-weighs much less? without much searching, I found an Asus with the same size screen with similar dimensions thats within 0.3 lbs of the Macbook Pro.

-Better battery life how? You realize these are all based on Core 2 Duo and battery life will be similar to other notebooks with the same number of cells. Infact you can get extended batteries for the others with 9 and 12 cells. These will give a longer runtime.

-Slot loading DVD may look cool until some little kid jams a penny or something into it when you're not looking

-Low noise but high CPU temps compared to other notebooks. I'd rather not have a notebook hitting 85C + on the cpu temps

-I have yet to see a notebook within the last 3 or 4 years that has a problem with sleeping or coming out of sleep. Heck even my old PIII 450Mhz HP did this fine with XP SP2 so maybe you borrowed some mystery notebook in sad shape and based it on that.

-My Asus 12" notebook was purchased 3.5 years ago and its got the same XP on there with no slow downs or 'mystery' problems. As far as AV. I dont run any on my notebook or desktop. I exercise basic common sense when it comes to security and I dont surf for P0rn or install P2P apps on any of my computers. This is probably 99.9% of all cases where people get viruses. If I was not someone who had a clue and needed AV, I'd go with AVG free edition. Its fast and light weight and works without any big performance impact.

-Backlight keyboard - this one is kinda cool at night but I dont think its critical because there is light coming off the LCD which illuminates the keys anyway so I'm not sure if its more of a wow factor than anything else.


...I could go on with your other points but I'm sleepy. I use both OSX and Windows and all the Windows bashing regarding its stability is getting real old. It was old years go. Its not 1998 anymore.


MacBook Pro:
- has a better design
- weights much less than the competition
- is thinner than the competition
- has better battery life
- has ambient light sensor
- does not need anti-virus, etc. (windoze machine require it, which takes a hit on CPU, as much as 10%)
- cannot be infected into a spam botnet (most spams, as much as 90% of spam are sent from infected windoze machines)
- actually sleeps / hibernates when you close the lid
- does not slow down inexplicably a few months after a clean install
- does not have noisy fans on the bottom blowing hot air
- makes minimal noise compared to other laptops
- has a smaller power supply and better cord management (1/2 the size of others)
- has slot loading dvd drive
- has integrated microphone that actually works
- has standard set of keyboard for all laptops across the line
- has Mac OS X
- requires minimal support (saves you time, is your time worthless?)


The upfront cost might be more, but due to the longer usable life and lower support costs, it actually costs less to own a Mac. That's without mention the usability issues with windoze machines.

sushi
Oct 14, 2007, 05:55 AM
A virtual machines creation and duplication are just as easy in Windows. Boot Camp Assistant isn't anything special either. A lot of new users believe there's some special magic behind it.

Then again backing up in Windows is a pain even with enterprise software.
You proved my point! :)

Making images/backups on PCs are a pain. With the Mac is was so easy for the Bootcamp (native) installation.

Sure virtual machines are much easier on both platforms. Just seemed a bit easier on the Mac than the PC. Then again, personally I have not done a backup of a virtual machine on the Windows side for a couple of years so things may be easier now.

Yes, enterprise solutions don't always work well. And they can be a pain to maintain.

Imaging and deployment is much less of a pain in OS X. You just don't have to deal with the driver and application situation that you do over in Windows.

Even with the plethora of Macs that I have, I rarely need to make model specific images. The Aluminum iMac and MacBook Pro Santa Rosa are the only outstanding models right now.
Sure, it has always been this way on the Mac. Even back in the Mac OS 9 and earlier days. If you installed for all Macs, you could use that system build on any Mac. However, if you did an install for a specific machine then you were limited to that machine unless you DL/added the Enabler for that particular machine.

Eidorian
Oct 14, 2007, 11:14 AM
You proved my point! :)

Making images/backups on PCs are a pain. With the Mac is was so easy for the Bootcamp (native) installation.

Sure virtual machines are much easier on both platforms. Just seemed a bit easier on the Mac than the PC. Then again, personally I have not done a backup of a virtual machine on the Windows side for a couple of years so things may be easier now.

Yes, enterprise solutions don't always work well. And they can be a pain to maintain.In all honesty, I believe it's Windows handles a file that's in use.

Digital Skunk
Oct 14, 2007, 01:31 PM
Windows bashing regarding its stability is getting real old. It was old years go. Its not 1998 anymore.

The same could be said about any argument. I could care less about how Apple's computers look, but the industry has awarded them more than any other company in terms of design and appeal.

I could care less about thin notebooks and all-in-ones, but the industry, the ones who do care, still give Apple all the attention. The MacBook Pro may not be the thinnest, but it is thinner than the comparatively spec'd machines.

PC manufacturers do a much better job at making machines IMHO, Microsoft is finally getting the software piece of it down, but they slipped up with the Vista editions below Ultimate. Not having 64 bit across the board in this decade is a mistake.

Everyone that asks me why Apple gets the same answer from me. The software. Not just Mac OS X, but all of them. From consumer to professional it all works together. There isn't a single app in the Apple lineup that isn't connected in some way to the other apps and the OS. And Apple makes my job easier, something Windows can't do for me and most users. Some choose Apple because they are cool looking, or because they feel it's the best looking machine in the world, or because they had a bad experience with Windows even though they took all the precautions.

Most reasons can be shot down by user error or drinking the Apple cool-aid, but when it comes to full integrated applications that work with each other flawlessly and without hiccups and out of the box, Apple is the champ.

In my perfect world, I would be buying HP desktops and Alienware laptops running Mac OS X, but Jobs has me by the chain, he won't let his best asset out to the world, so I am happy with my pro (mid-range) MacBook Pro laptops and Pro (over priced and outdated) Mac Pros

Evangelion
Oct 15, 2007, 03:26 AM
Imaging and deployment is much less of a pain in OS X. You just don't have to deal with the driver and application situation that you do over in Windows.

Yep, you are absolutely right there. But that only applies if you run 100% Mac-shop. If you don't, then you invariably add complexity to the system. We currently have automated imaging-processes for our machines which are about as easy as they are on Macs. If we introduced Macs to the workplace, we would have to implement a separate, yet similar scheme for Macs. Then we would have to implement a scheme for updating those machine. No, running "Software Update" is NOT the solution! And so forth. We would be adding duplication and complexity to the system.

Point is that running certain OS and certain hardware is simple. If you run several different kinds of hardware on several different kinds of OS'es, you add complexity. And complexity is bad. It adds points of failure. What you need to do is to pick one, and stick to it. Don't go halfway, if you decide to use something, then move over 100%. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but still.

And, like I said, Apple can't give us the flexibility or longevity. We couldn't get MBP's without DVD-burners for example. We couldn't rely on getting certain model of machine for long period of time, so we would have to constantly test and evaluate machines as Apple introduces them. And when we decided to use certain model, we would find out six months later that that model is no longer available. And could we get machines from Apple that was preloaded with our customized image? Our current supplier does that, would Apple do it?

Sure, there are lots of successful Mac-only-shops. But in order to do that, company must make some compromises. Yes, they need to do no matter what they decide to use. It just boils down to what compromises you are willing to make. If you are willing to make the compromises that Mac-only-shop requires, then go for it! But not all companies are willing to do that, while they are willing to make the compromises Windows-shop requires. And there's nothing wrong with that.