PDA

View Full Version : Apple's Market Share Hitting Highs




MacRumors
Dec 3, 2007, 01:10 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Apple's market share in both the computer and cell phone markets is hitting highs according to Net Applications.

Last month (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=9&qpdt=1&qpct=4&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=84&qpnp=23) the Mac OS had 6.8% market share, compared to 5.39% for November 2006. This represents the highest market share in Apple's steady climb, which appears to be almost directly proportional to a slightly declining Microsoft Windows installed base (Windows declined -1.74%, Mac increased 1.41%).

In addition, Net Applications has issued an interesting report (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=106&qpmr=14&qpdt=1&qpct=0&sample=4) stating that the iPhone has quickly overtaken Microsoft's Windows Mobile as the most used mobile OS on the web.

We've been tracking iPhone usage since its launch. Total web browsing on the iPhone has topped the web browsing on all Windows Mobile devices combined, as this report shows. This report is a listing of the top operating system versions in use. It is not a measure of units sold, but the share of users browsing the internet with the devices. The iPhone has had a dramatic rise in usage share in its short time on the market Is this due to a better user interface? Larger screen?

In contrast to market share numbers by firms like Gartner which combine quarterly results from the industry to give market share of sales, Net Applications market share numbers attempt to represent installed base of internet users. More on how Net Applications gets its numbers (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/)...

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/03/apples-market-share-hitting-highs/)



Eidorian
Dec 3, 2007, 01:12 PM
I can count a lot more members in my MUG on campus. SHEESH!

Leopard like Tiger sweetens the deal. I switched just after Tiger's launch. Spotlight is love.

Adokimus
Dec 3, 2007, 01:13 PM
I reeeeeally need to buy that stock.

ErikAndre
Dec 3, 2007, 01:14 PM
These are great numbers! Granted, there are only a few of them.. still.

It's also a bit humorous to see that MS is changing their marketing strategy for the Zune and Windows Mobile device... almost all similar to Apple... in fact, a lot similar.

Surprise. :rolleyes:

amac4me
Dec 3, 2007, 01:14 PM
Can somebody say SWITCHERS!!!

daddywags214
Dec 3, 2007, 01:15 PM
I'd guess that at least half of my University are Mac users. Once you factor out the millions of POS and cublicle farm computers, and focus on the consumer market, Apple is gaining significantly.

sk8ordie
Dec 3, 2007, 01:16 PM
Buy low sell high ;)

cohibadad
Dec 3, 2007, 01:16 PM
Apple is the new Microsoft!

tcoleman
Dec 3, 2007, 01:16 PM
In contrast to market share numbers by firms like Gartner which combine quarterly results from the industry to give market share of sales...

In other words, the traditional definition of market share? ;)

Adokimus
Dec 3, 2007, 01:17 PM
Buy low sell high ;)

Oh, I get that... I'm just convinced we haven't hit anywhere near the "high"

gkarris
Dec 3, 2007, 01:22 PM
Apple is the new Microsoft!

Apple will always be Apple. Microsoft, Microsoft.

Microsoft is in "cruise" mode now with their majority marketshare. They won't care about loosing a few points. Hardly a blip on the radar for them...

:apple: (II) Forever!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEgn2K-MI6E

unity
Dec 3, 2007, 01:22 PM
In contrast to market share numbers by firms like Gartner which combine quarterly results from the industry to give market share of sales...

In other words, the traditional definition of market share? ;)

Not really. That would be like selling product A which has usable life span of a week. And then product B which lasts a month. If both products sold the same quantity per week it would appear that B has a greater market share since more would be in use when in fact the same quantity was sold.

Thats not too comparable to PC/Mac sales, but the idea is there. I still have a 5 year old PowerBook, using it now. I also have a new iMac. Several friends still have their older Macs in use or they were passed onto other for use.

However, my moms older PCs were recycled and she buys a new one every two years or so to "start clean and get rid of viri" LOL :D Anyway, so there there is a big difference between active market share and a share of the marketplace.

Popeye206
Dec 3, 2007, 01:23 PM
What's interesting is the Web usage numbers... looks like iPhone users actually want to use the web - could it be that it's because they have a great web browser on the iPhone? Has t be something like that... there sure are a lot of WEP browsers out there!

This is good news for Apple... I hope the success does not kill the ride... I like being in the happy and content minority of Mac users. :-)

MacsRgr8
Dec 3, 2007, 01:25 PM
Super!

I would love for it to hit the 10% mark.

BTW... maybe I'm not looking... but is this World Wide, or US only?

Grimace
Dec 3, 2007, 01:26 PM
Next step -- overtaking Windows ME :p

Popeye206
Dec 3, 2007, 01:26 PM
Thats not too comparable to PC/Mac sales, but the idea is there. I still have a 5 year old PowerBook, using it now. I also have a new iMac. Several friends still have their older Macs in use or they were passed onto other for use.

However, my moms older PCs were recycled and she buys a new one every two years or so to "start clean and get rid of viri" LOL :D Anyway, so there there is a big difference between active market share and a share of the marketplace.

Good point! I know before we went on an upgrade spree and a new job, I was using the same Wall Street Powerbook for 7 years! Seems like all the PCs we had died a useful life in about 2 years. So I wonder what the market share is when you consider older Macs still in use today? There must be millions!

lazyrighteye
Dec 3, 2007, 01:27 PM
Interesting: about mobile web usage.
Not surprised, really. Browsing on anything other than an iPhone is near useless. I had a Treo 650 for a couple of years. Never browsed. Ever.

And those talking about stocks - yeah, we're not even remotely close to the high's APPL will see over the next decade. These numbers are just the tip of the iceberg.

neven
Dec 3, 2007, 01:27 PM
In contrast to market share numbers by firms like Gartner which combine quarterly results from the industry to give market share of sales...

In other words, the traditional definition of market share? ;)

That's why they said "in contrast" - I don't think it's useless to measure the numbers of used systems as opposed to the numbers those companies say they sold, since the latter definition is way more open to interpretation (sold so they can sit in IT warehouses and wait to replace their crappy brethren when they die?)

stevearm
Dec 3, 2007, 01:28 PM
I'm not sure comparing 6% to 92% is quite something to shout about but ok...

plumbingandtech
Dec 3, 2007, 01:31 PM
I'm not sure comparing 6% to 92% is quite something to shout about but ok...

A) I'd rather be BMW then GM.

B) No one (sane) here is claiming apple will ever take all of Microsoft's market share away.

Clive At Five
Dec 3, 2007, 01:31 PM
Taking the calculations one step further, 4 out of 5 switchers go to the Mac whilst 1 in 5 go to Linux or other some other OS.

(1.41/1.74 = .81 = 81%)

That's not too bad...

-Clive

stupidregister
Dec 3, 2007, 01:31 PM
However, my moms older PCs were recycled and she buys a new one every two years or so to "start clean and get rid of viri" LOL :D Anyway, so there there is a big difference between active market share and a share of the marketplace.

The plural of virus is viruses, not viri. And why not install a fresh OS?

EagerDragon
Dec 3, 2007, 01:32 PM
Not really. That would be like selling product A which has usable life span of a week. And then product B which lasts a month. If both products sold the same quantity per week it would appear that B has a greater market share since more would be in use when in fact the same quantity was sold.

Thats not too comparable to PC/Mac sales, but the idea is there. I still have a 5 year old PowerBook, using it now. I also have a new iMac. Several friends still have their older Macs in use or they were passed onto other for use.

However, my moms older PCs were recycled and she buys a new one every two years or so to "start clean and get rid of viri" LOL :D Anyway, so there there is a big difference between active market share and a share of the marketplace.

May want to buy her a real computer. You planting virus on her machine to convert her?

MacsRgr8
Dec 3, 2007, 01:33 PM
Next step -- overtaking Windows ME :p

OPENSTEP -- overtaking Windows 2000 :D

xUKHCx
Dec 3, 2007, 01:34 PM
Can somebody say SWITCHERS!!!

Can somebody say NEWBIES!!!

Does the iPhone number also include the iPod Touch because it isn't listed separately but I'd imagine that apple has sold a bucket load of those as well.

Evangelion
Dec 3, 2007, 01:34 PM
A) I'd rather be BMW then GM.

GM does not have 94% market-share.

al256
Dec 3, 2007, 01:38 PM
Sigh... I've always been a Mac user (since days of my Performa 6200) and at first I was happy to hear about new people coming to the Mac. Now, I don't like it so much. More people I know having problems and blaming Apple. More incompetent people on the forms here. Crowded Apple stores that don't have that casual feeling (or free water). I miss the days of yore when finding a fellow Mac user was like finding a brother. We're losing our ability to give our Mac culture to these new switchers and will soon be over run by them. I guess we'll at least have our native apps and our demands will be listened to but so much of what we enjoy will be gone. :/

BenRoethig
Dec 3, 2007, 01:39 PM
Can somebody say SWITCHERS!!!

And I hope we keep them for their next computer as well.

irun5k
Dec 3, 2007, 01:39 PM
As an iPhone user, I am not surprised by statistics about mobile browsing. The fact that everyone has an unlimited data plan combined with an excellent browser, screen, and input device makes it a no-brainer.

The iPhone is really the first device of its kind that I would say strongly resembles browsing the web on a laptop or desktop. I attribute this largely to the multi-touch capability that makes the screen seem even larger than it actually is. As a result I use it to browse the web because "I can, and it is enjoyable" which happens a lot more frequently than "only as a last resort" which would be the case on other mobile platforms.

irun5k
Dec 3, 2007, 01:44 PM
ability to give our Mac culture to these new switchers and will soon be over run by them. I guess we'll at least have our native apps and our demands will be listened to but so much of what we enjoy will be gone. :/

My friend, there is a frontier out there that even after many years remains largely unconquered by the casual user. May I introduce you to Linux, which I think would be a great cult for you to join to regain the status you desire.

The only drawback is they won't give you free bottled water either. In fact you are going to have to figure out how to configure the equipment that manufacturers the bottles, and then secure your own source of potable water which will almost certainly not be in a convenient location.

unity
Dec 3, 2007, 01:45 PM
The only drawback is they won't give you free bottled water either. In fact you are going to have to figure out how to configure the equipment that manufacturers the bottles, and then secure your own source of potable water which will almost certainly not be in a convenient location.

Owww, thats good :D

longofest
Dec 3, 2007, 01:46 PM
Can somebody say NEWBIES!!!

Does the iPhone number also include the iPod Touch because it isn't listed separately but I'd imagine that apple has sold a bucket load of those as well.

Perhaps/probably. I think the iPod Touch browser reports itself as an iPhone, but I'm not certain about that.

Clive At Five
Dec 3, 2007, 01:47 PM
My friend, there is a frontier out there that even after many years remains largely unconquered by the casual user. May I introduce you to Linux, which I think would be a great cult for you to join to regain the status you desire.

The only drawback is they won't give you free bottled water either. In fact you are going to have to figure out how to configure the equipment that manufacturers the bottles, and then secure your own source of potable water which will almost certainly not be in a convenient location.

Sounds like fun???

All the bulls**t is exactly why I haven't switched to Linux. I'm certain I'd be capable of it, it's just that I don't have to time to eff around with my computer 23 hours a day.

-Clive

unity
Dec 3, 2007, 01:48 PM
The plural of virus is viruses, not viri. And why not install a fresh OS?

Oops, your right. Why no new OS? Simple, she is a complete novice. Has no clue how to install virus protection and for sure no clue how to install a new OS. She would rather buy a new one than take the existing one in.

I would help, but after a "recovering" her computers about 4 times a year I said no more, get a Mac!

dernhelm
Dec 3, 2007, 01:48 PM
I'm not sure comparing 6% to 92% is quite something to shout about but ok...

Maybe not, but gaining 1.4% of the total PC market in the US, when you were only 5.4% before makes for a near 26% growth in marketshare.

In an industry as big as the PC market, that IS a big deal no matter who you are.

chr1s60
Dec 3, 2007, 01:50 PM
It is good to see more and more people switching to Apple products. After my entire life on Windows, I switched to Mac a little over two years ago and since then have brought over a few more users from Windows. If people continue to do this, I think Apple can be at about 10% in another two years, maybe a little sooner. I also think the iPhone has helped Apple. Many PC users bought the iPhone as their first ever Apple product and after some time with it some people may want to switch over. Either way, any progress is good.

xUKHCx
Dec 3, 2007, 01:51 PM
Perhaps/probably. I think the iPod Touch browser reports itself as an iPhone, but I'm not certain about that.

Indeed that is what I was thinking.

It is still very impressive as Windows Mobile has been around for ages and iPhone/Touch are very new to the market.

Detektiv-Pinky
Dec 3, 2007, 01:51 PM
Sigh... I've always been a Mac user (since days of my Performa 6200) and at first I was happy to hear about new people coming to the Mac. Now, I don't like it so much. More people I know having problems and blaming Apple. More incompetent people on the forms here. Crowded Apple stores that don't have that casual feeling (or free water). I miss the days of yore when finding a fellow Mac user was like finding a brother. We're losing our ability to give our Mac culture to these new switchers and will soon be over run by them. I guess we'll at least have our native apps and our demands will be listened to but so much of what we enjoy will be gone. :/

Could you specify what you mean by 'what we enjoy will be gone'?
Enjoy looking down on these poor souls that need to use Windows? Loosing theses automatic reflexes that this OS is the only true thing and SOOO secure?

I guess this will change now, when people start getting the message that more people can afford and are using Macs now. And the track record for Apple in terms of OS-security is not all that impressive...

plumbingandtech
Dec 3, 2007, 01:58 PM
GM does not have 94% market-share.

Then insert some industry where we have a small exiting company with 6% vs. a big slow sloth of an unexciting company.

Eraserhead
Dec 3, 2007, 02:01 PM
Perhaps/probably. I think the iPod Touch browser reports itself as an iPhone, but I'm not certain about that.

I just hit my website with my iPod Touch, its reporting:


"Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/3B48b Safari/419.3"


So its different from the iPhone.

Although MS Bashing is very old, this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5oGaZIKYvo) really appeals from this thread. (apologies if already posted)

macidiot
Dec 3, 2007, 02:15 PM
When I first got the iPhone I used browsing all the time.

Now, I rarely use it.

The phone itself is great for browsing, except STILL no flash support?!?!?

But the main problem is ATT's horrendous service. Funny, when the phone first rolled out, service seemed quite good (went right along with ATT loudly proclaiming it upgraded it's network). However, service has now declined to where it was before the rollout. If not worse.

As usual, ATT is the unenabler here. Guess they are too busy breaking privacy laws...

And I rarely use wi-fi. Combination of only willing to use trusted networks and actually wanting battery life.

gkarris
Dec 3, 2007, 02:19 PM
Perhaps/probably. I think the iPod Touch browser reports itself as an iPhone, but I'm not certain about that.

That would be funny too, more and more people using a "music device" to mobilly surf the web rather than a "smartphone"...

happydude
Dec 3, 2007, 02:19 PM
iphone rev. 2 with 3G, 16GB HD, and [hopefully] GPS is all it will take and i'm on the iphone bandwagon adding to all these mobile surfing numbers!!

lazyrighteye
Dec 3, 2007, 02:20 PM
Sigh... I've always been a Mac user (since days of my Performa 6200) and at first I was happy to hear about new people coming to the Mac. Now, I don't like it so much. More people I know having problems and blaming Apple. More incompetent people on the forms here. Crowded Apple stores that don't have that casual feeling (or free water). I miss the days of yore when finding a fellow Mac user was like finding a brother. We're losing our ability to give our Mac culture to these new switchers and will soon be over run by them. I guess we'll at least have our native apps and our demands will be listened to but so much of what we enjoy will be gone. :/

I feel your pain, but such is life.
Adapt or die, brother. ;)

happydude
Dec 3, 2007, 02:22 PM
As usual, ATT is the unenabler here. Guess they are too busy breaking privacy laws...


yeah, too bad Qwest is the only major carrier that seems not to running around throwing our personal data at whichever bush appointee asks for it first (or second or third or fourth or . . . ). would be nice to have a little competition of networks the iphone works on. darn that silly little exclusivity agreement!!

jragosta
Dec 3, 2007, 02:23 PM
These are great numbers! Granted, there are only a few of them.. still.

Huh? They're tracking 160 million hits per month. That's PLENTY of numbers.

Of course, it doesn't say whether the web sites they've chosen are representative, but criticizing them on the basis of numbers doesn't make sense.

lazyrighteye
Dec 3, 2007, 02:24 PM
As an iPhone user, I am not surprised by statistics about mobile browsing. The fact that everyone has an unlimited data plan combined with an excellent browser, screen, and input device makes it a no-brainer.

The iPhone is really the first device of its kind that I would say strongly resembles browsing the web on a laptop or desktop. I attribute this largely to the multi-touch capability that makes the screen seem even larger than it actually is. As a result I use it to browse the web because "I can, and it is enjoyable" which happens a lot more frequently than "only as a last resort" which would be the case on other mobile platforms.

Very well said...
Happily can vs. last resort.

caoxiang
Dec 3, 2007, 02:25 PM
What a shame!

dwman
Dec 3, 2007, 02:25 PM
iphone rev. 2 with 3G, 16GB HD, and [hopefully] GPS is all it will take and i'm on the iphone bandwagon adding to all these mobile surfing numbers!!

Pretty close. Put it on VZ instead of AT&T and I'm sold.

Schtumple
Dec 3, 2007, 02:25 PM
Be nice to see it get up to 10%, do you think Microsoft would sue apple for invading on their market space at that point?

Quillz
Dec 3, 2007, 02:25 PM
Sounds like fun???

All the bulls**t is exactly why I haven't switched to Linux. I'm certain I'd be capable of it, it's just that I don't have to time to eff around with my computer 23 hours a day.

-Clive
It's not 1991 anymore. Most modern Linux distros, like Ubuntu and Fedora, are as easy to use as OS X. Maybe even easier, with the package managers doing all the work of installation and configuring.

lazyrighteye
Dec 3, 2007, 02:26 PM
My friend, there is a frontier out there that even after many years remains largely unconquered by the casual user. May I introduce you to Linux, which I think would be a great cult for you to join to regain the status you desire.

The only drawback is they won't give you free bottled water either. In fact you are going to have to figure out how to configure the equipment that manufacturers the bottles, and then secure your own source of potable water which will almost certainly not be in a convenient location.

Tears! :D

Quillz
Dec 3, 2007, 02:26 PM
Be nice to see it get up to 10%, do you think Microsoft would sue apple for invading on their market space at that point?
Why would they sue? Competition isn't illegal, and no one "owns" market share, it's something that gets acquired over time.

jragosta
Dec 3, 2007, 02:27 PM
Good point! I know before we went on an upgrade spree and a new job, I was using the same Wall Street Powerbook for 7 years! Seems like all the PCs we had died a useful life in about 2 years. So I wonder what the market share is when you consider older Macs still in use today?

The market share is the number reported above - the average lifetime of the systems has no impact on market share.

The number you're searching for is installed base. If Macs have a longer average life than Windows computers (which seems to be pretty well supported by evidence), then the Mac's percentage of installed base will be greater than its market share.

Unfortunately, I haven't seen any installed base numbers that I trust.

macidiot
Dec 3, 2007, 02:27 PM
Apple will always be Apple. Microsoft, Microsoft.

Microsoft is in "cruise" mode now with their majority marketshare. They won't care about loosing a few points. Hardly a blip on the radar for them...

:apple: (II) Forever!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEgn2K-MI6E

Well that and the fact that Microsoft is more interested in emerging markets like India and China. The growth there more than offsets a couple percentage points loss in the US, which is basically a stagnant market.

macidiot
Dec 3, 2007, 02:32 PM
I'm not sure comparing 6% to 92% is quite something to shout about but ok...

no, but ~30% increase yoy is...

network23
Dec 3, 2007, 02:34 PM
I've had my iPhone since July and still use the web features constantly!

Not that they have to, but more and more sites are making tailored web interfaces for the iPhone. The main benefit of that being much quicker load times over Edge.

Just today I discovered that Amazon has a beta interface. It didn't quite make it all the way through to a purchase, but I was able to enter in a new credit card number (hmm, adding credit card data using my cell. Am I stupid or brave?) and I got much further than I expected to.

Pandaboots
Dec 3, 2007, 02:34 PM
Alright! cha ching! I bought Apple 7 years ago for an adjusted for split price of $25/share. That amounts to a 700% return on my investment. I read an article recently stating that Apple has been the only company to meet or exceed it's price target for the past 13 consecutive quarters. 1 year targets have been posted anywhere from $209 - $225, so Apple isn't done yet. Now, these estimates are based on "known" things...projected sales of macs, ipods, iphones, etc. What makes Apples stock explode are better than expected sales and most importantly, the "secret" surprise announcements that make the world go "wow!, I love that, I need that". With the upcoming Macworld rumors of a subnotebook, I think consumers are ready for something exciting with computer hardware and assuming it's priced right, people will gobble it up. More importantly would be Apple's announcement of movie rentals and a re-designed :apple:TV. Seeing how media distribution is such a hot topic and a garbled mess atm, imagine if Apple reworks the :apple:TV to include a DVR, and possible Blu-Ray/HD DVD player. (I hope at least for a DVR to essentially shoot the bird at NBC.) This would in turn amount to more people buying Apple products and more people switching to Macs as a result. Damn maybe I should buy more shares myself....:eek:

dr_lha
Dec 3, 2007, 02:39 PM
And I rarely use wi-fi. Combination of only willing to use trusted networks and actually wanting battery life.
I find the battery life on the iPhone is much better when I'm using WiFi instead of EDGE personally.

Rubber Ducky
Dec 3, 2007, 02:42 PM
Last month (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=9&qpdt=1&qpct=4&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=84&qpnp=23) the Mac OS had 6.8% market share, compared to 5.39% for November 2006. This represents the highest market share in Apple's steady climb, which appears to be almost directly proportional to a slightly declining Microsoft Windows installed base (Windows declined -1.74%, Mac increased 1.41%).
Get a grip. Apple increased its market share by nearly 21%, not 1.41%. 6.8% is about 21% bigger than 5.39%.

bluefiberoptics
Dec 3, 2007, 02:43 PM
It's not 1991 anymore. Most modern Linux distros, like Ubuntu and Fedora, are as easy to use as OS X. Maybe even easier, with the package managers doing all the work of installation and configuring.

I will give you that Linux distros are way easier than they have been in the past. In fact, I like Ubuntu. However, OS X feels more polished and easy to use.

macidiot
Dec 3, 2007, 02:46 PM
I find the battery life on the iPhone is much better when I'm using WiFi instead of EDGE personally.

Could be because edge is so slow it spends a lot more time connected. I often get time outs on edge... I've seen it take 5-10 minutes to load a page. And I'm talking about Yahoo...

And wifi is a lot worse on battery with active scanning enabled. And manually turning wi-fi on and off each and every time I want to browse is a case study in wasted time.

Upshot, a lot less browsing for me.

Dagless
Dec 3, 2007, 03:03 PM
I'm not sure comparing 6% to 92% is quite something to shout about but ok...

I think its more about the increase in OSX sales and decrease in Windows.
And when you think that 6% have bought an Apple computer, where 92% are running anything. It's very good for Apple. I'd never have thought Apple would have this high a share considering you have to be using it on an Apple computer (without hacking).

wankey
Dec 3, 2007, 03:09 PM
That number is still really really miniscule. It's like in 100 people, a windows guy switched over the mac to form a 7 man group. The other 93 people are still using windows.

I doubt these numbers are correct though 'cause I've seen a lot more people using macs at school than ever. Especially the sea of white dotted with black when I got to one of my humanities electives.

ClassicMac247
Dec 3, 2007, 03:15 PM
this is really good news

LeviG
Dec 3, 2007, 03:19 PM
not quite sure what to make of the iphone versus windows mobile comparisons. Anybody who uses windows mobile will most likely have ditched pocket internet explorer and gone looking for a better one. I'd like to see how they determine windows mobile devices as their information is a little lacking to me. Another thing is they seem to be missing java and symbian devices which are mainly mobile phones so this could mean that windows mobile based phones could be neglected too, skewing the results somewhat.

I personally use opera and have used minimo (firefox based) in the past because pocket ie is absolutely useless.

chr1s60
Dec 3, 2007, 03:20 PM
That number is still really really miniscule. It's like in 100 people, a windows guy switched over the mac to form a 7 man group. The other 93 people are still using windows.

I doubt these numbers are correct though 'cause I've seen a lot more people using macs at school than ever. Especially the sea of white dotted with black when I got to one of my humanities electives.

The number itself is small, but every new user is good. Sure there are those 93 on Windows still, but when their friend that switched convinces them to switch the number becomes 92 and so on. Even at one less per 100 per year, it is still an improvement and will eventually become a larger number. It is also good that younger people tend to lean towards Mac, this means more lifetime customers.

I personally never want it to be close to 50-50. I prefer Mac being the minority and would like for it to eventually be something like 70% Windows and 25% Mac. If Mac becomes as big or bigger than Windows, I don't think the company would be the same.

Analog Kid
Dec 3, 2007, 03:20 PM
A couple thoughts on the numbers themselves:

--This will undercount Windows, Linux, and SunOS because servers won't be hitting many web sites. That doesn't diminish the year over year increases, but should be born in mind when comparing with other stats.

--Anybody have any ideas why "other" took a sudden drop? It was happily ratcheting up then fell off...

BTW... maybe I'm not looking... but is this World Wide, or US only?

I can't tell for sure without paying, but if you go to Operating Systems on the left, you get the same numbers but there's a link for "GeoFilter" that lets you select by country. It defaults to "all", but I can't confirm that's what the graphs are actually showing.

Based on their methodology, I'd guess it's world wide, but heavily biased towards the US. Meaning I'd suspect that most of the sites they're monitoring are US sites and therefore are biased towards US traffic.

irun5k
Dec 3, 2007, 03:25 PM
It's not 1991 anymore. Most modern Linux distros, like Ubuntu and Fedora, are as easy to use as OS X. Maybe even easier, with the package managers doing all the work of installation and configuring.

I justed tried the latest Ubuntu on my late model Dell laptop. I had to write a custom script to write out my X config file at boot time to support a secondary display when I was plugged into the LCD at my desk.

Every time I think they're getting close, I try the latest release and find something else like this. They have come a long way, that is for sure- but will they ever "get there"... or will they always be just a few steps behind?

geerlingguy
Dec 3, 2007, 03:26 PM
I'm happy for Apple. This is great news, and helps me in my quest to continue making new converts to the Apple faithful. At my Seminary, I came in as the only Mac user on campus four years ago. We now have 26 Mac users (of a total population of about 110), with 4 more Macs in the library! And most of the Mac users have had such an improvement in their computer experience with the Mac that they're working on converting family and friends... it's a ripple effect—pay it forward, eh?

Go :apple:!

Marx55
Dec 3, 2007, 03:27 PM
TO ADMINS:

Marketshare? Which marketshare? US? Worldwide? It is not the same. Thanks.

PNW
Dec 3, 2007, 03:30 PM
The only drawback is they won't give you free bottled water either. In fact you are going to have to figure out how to configure the equipment that manufacturers the bottles, and then secure your own source of potable water which will almost certainly not be in a convenient location.

Sounds like fun???

All the bulls**t is exactly why I haven't switched to Linux. I'm certain I'd be capable of it, it's just that I don't have to time to eff around with my computer 23 hours a day.

-Clive

Oh it's not that bad. It's more like 4-8 hours of effing around to get it configured (assuming you want you computer to do useful things like play media) if you've done your homework and bought compatible hardware (also some hardware is more compatible than others). Then it's anywhere from 0 -23 hours after each software update (swearing + beer makes it go faster). In all seriousness I run Linux (Suse 10.3) and like it. Once it's configured it's as solid and stable as OS X, but getting it configured can be a real PIA and updates can cause unintended problems (which is why our 'family' computer is a mini).

The old airline joke cribbed from (http://www.desktoplinux.com/articles/AT3304051309.html) is still fairly relevant (though I'd add that the Mac flight is perfectly pleasant).


* Windows Airlines -- The terminal is pretty and colorful, with friendly stewards, easy baggage check and boarding, and a smooth take-off. After about 10 minutes in the air, the plane explodes with no warning whatsoever.

* Mac Airlines -- All the stewards, stewardesses, captains, baggage handlers and ticket agents look the same, act the same, and talk the same. Every time you ask questions about details, you are told you don't need to know, don't want to know, and would you please return to your seat and watch the movie.

* Linux Airlines -- Disgruntled employees of all the other OS airlines decide to start their own airline. They build the planes, ticket counters, and pave the runways themselves. They charge a small fee to cover the cost of printing the ticket, but you can also download and print the ticket yourself. When you board the plane, you are given a seat, four bolts, a wrench and a copy of the seat-HOWTO.html. Once settled, the fully adjustable seat is very comfortable, the plane leaves and arrives on time without a single problem, the in-flight meal is wonderful. You try to tell customers of the other airlines about the great trip, but all they can say is, 'You had to do what with the seat?'




As to the Topic. This shouldn't come as surprise to anyone. Vista is awful and is such a resource hog that by the time you've bought the hardware that it requires to run smoothly you could get a better performing Mac for less.

geerlingguy
Dec 3, 2007, 03:33 PM
It's not 1991 anymore. Most modern Linux distros, like Ubuntu and Fedora, are as easy to use as OS X. Maybe even easier, with the package managers doing all the work of installation and configuring.

I'm calling BS on this.

Try calling your Grandpa or Mom and talking her through the process of either (A) changing a network setting or (b) reinstalling the OS over the phone. It's possible (even if it's difficult) to do it using OS X. It's impossible (unless your grandpa or mom is a computer geek) with Linux. Any distro. Period.

And end users also need that extra UI polish present in OS X or Windows. If you installed Linux on any typical Mac or PC user's computer, you'd have to spend hours helping them understand the fact that Microsoft Word won't run on their computer any more.

Linux may be as easy or easier for you, especially if you're a computer nut, but it's not objectively easier.

Eric Lewis
Dec 3, 2007, 03:34 PM
based on this rate?

HOW LONG UNTIL APPLE WINS?


64 YEARS!

YES>>>>APPLE>>.WILL WIN IN 64 YEARS

network23
Dec 3, 2007, 03:39 PM
not quite sure what to make of the iphone versus windows mobile comparisons. Anybody who uses windows mobile will most likely have ditched pocket internet explorer and gone looking for a better one. I'd like to see how they determine windows mobile devices as their information is a little lacking to me.

I would suspect it's the same way they determine who is using Safari on the iPhone. It's all in the identifier string each browser sends out, which I would guess no matter what browser you are using on your windows mobile device, would still identify the fact that it's a windows mobile device.

PNW
Dec 3, 2007, 03:42 PM
nd end users also need that extra UI polish present in OS X or Windows. If you installed Linux on any typical Mac or PC user's computer, you'd have to spend hours helping them understand the fact that Microsoft Word won't run on their computer any more.

Microsoft Word won't run on my Mac either?

twoodcc
Dec 3, 2007, 03:44 PM
well this is great news for Apple.

i know i'm happy with my iPhone

FelixDerKater
Dec 3, 2007, 03:46 PM
While it is nice to see the improvement in numbers for Apple, I think it is more indicative of the lack of necessity to upgrade existing hardware on the PC side. Lots of users with PPC Macs are seeing the need to upgrade, but Pentium IV PCs from around the same time are still functional, so there isn't the same volume of sales.

WillMak
Dec 3, 2007, 03:48 PM
While it is nice to see the improvement in numbers for Apple, I think it is more indicative of the lack of necessity to upgrade existing hardware on the PC side. Lots of users with PPC Macs are seeing the need to upgrade, but Pentium IV PCs from around the same time are still functional, so there isn't the same volume of sales.

Very true. Pentium IV with 1 gig of ram and winXP is still very very fast for basic use!

geerlingguy
Dec 3, 2007, 04:19 PM
Microsoft Word won't run on my Mac either?

Well, with the Mac, things change a bit b/c of Parallels/VMWare and/or Boot Camp. But most users use either Mac OS X or Windows, all the time. And they don't want to have to restart into Mac OS X or into Windows to use Microsoft Word. Anyways, this is only one example.

There are many other reasons why Linux can't go mainstream: my basic gripe is that all the window managers feel so much like they're tacked onto a command line OS, rather than the default way to use the system. End users don't typically understand the command line, and they shouldn't have to. The reason for this is that Linux excels at only one thing: servers and workstations for highly specialized tasks. Linux was never meant to be a mainstream desktop OS, and I think it's good that way; more efforts are focused on making Linux a great, free server OS.

Eric5h5
Dec 3, 2007, 04:25 PM
so much of what we enjoy will be gone. :/

"We"? Speak for yourself. I have a Mac because it's the best platform, not because of how many or how few other people use it.

Microsoft Word won't run on my Mac either?

Why not? What's wrong with your Mac?

--Eric

notjustjay
Dec 3, 2007, 04:38 PM
That would be funny too, more and more people using a "music device" to mobilly surf the web rather than a "smartphone"...

Well, it's truth. I bought my Touch a week and a half ago and I only unwrapped the headphones that came with it two days ago. "Oh yeah! It plays music too!"

The majority of the time my Touch is surfing the web, visiting Gmail or Facebook, and (hacked) apps like weather and Google Maps. Wait till I get the Mail app going... it's going to be great.

notjustjay
Dec 3, 2007, 04:46 PM
Oh it's not that bad. It's more like 4-8 hours of effing around to get it configured (assuming you want you computer to do useful things like play media) if you've done your homework and bought compatible hardware (also some hardware is more compatible than others). Then it's anywhere from 0 -23 hours after each software update (swearing + beer makes it go faster). In all seriousness I run Linux (Suse 10.3) and like it. Once it's configured it's as solid and stable as OS X, but getting it configured can be a real PIA and updates can cause unintended problems (which is why our 'family' computer is a mini).

The airline joke made me laugh. Haven't seen that in years (and Linux Airlines was far more crude when I'd last seen it).

I have a friend who swears by Linux for his household even though it drives him and his household crazy. For some reason he's blind to it. We're all trying to convince him to get a Mac (or at least a Windows PC! Sheesh!) but no luck yet. I'll ask him how his weekend went and he'll basically recite what you've written in your post -- he got a new video card, spent hours reading Anandtech forums trying to find the best driver, couldn't get it to go, botched the install, re-installed his distro, tried a new window manager, finally got his all-in-one printing... if only he could find a working scanner driver...

I honestly don't see why he puts up with it. It's not even like he needs the flexibility or stability of Linux, he's not running a server or custom software. You could argue he doesn't want to spend his time removing viruses or spyware, but the entire weekends spent tinkering with drivers is no worse...

mdriftmeyer
Dec 3, 2007, 05:04 PM
My friend, there is a frontier out there that even after many years remains largely unconquered by the casual user. May I introduce you to Linux, which I think would be a great cult for you to join to regain the status you desire.

The only drawback is they won't give you free bottled water either. In fact you are going to have to figure out how to configure the equipment that manufacturers the bottles, and then secure your own source of potable water which will almost certainly not be in a convenient location.

That's a dead analogy.

Whether it's OpenSUSE, Debian 4.x.x, Ubuntu/Kubuntu, Fedora, CentOS, the configuring is done for the systems.

Package management is sound.

Like OS X, tools that include Apache 2, PHP, other development tools and what not aren't configured to be thee solution for you.

On all those systems, they give example configurations for you to choose from and to implement.

When they get to the level of "It Just Works" you'd better have a new analogy to draw upon.

The Just Works slogan is what we expect from OS X and when it doesn't "Just Work" ala OS X Leopard's bug ridden Installer Apple does what they should do: FIX IT.

I've used NeXTSTEP since '94, worked at NeXT and Apple, used OS X since before it was OS X, and have used Linux daily since 2000.

The beauty of OS X resides in it's Cocoa Frameworks and Development Vision.

Getting rid of the past Carbon kludge is what is helping Apple expand and be able to back up that It Just Works.

Until I start seeing Universities teaching Cocoa/ObjC classes in their Curriculum I don't expect to see OS X crack above 10% market share.

PNW
Dec 3, 2007, 05:05 PM
Well, with the Mac, things change a bit b/c of Parallels/VMWare and/or Boot Camp. But most users use either Mac OS X or Windows, all the time. And they don't want to have to restart into Mac OS X or into Windows to use Microsoft Word. Anyways, this is only one example.

There are many other reasons why Linux can't go mainstream: my basic gripe is that all the window managers feel so much like they're tacked onto a command line OS, rather than the default way to use the system. End users don't typically understand the command line, and they shouldn't have to. The reason for this is that Linux excels at only one thing: servers and workstations for highly specialized tasks. Linux was never meant to be a mainstream desktop OS, and I think it's good that way; more efforts are focused on making Linux a great, free server OS.

Yeah but my Linux box dual boots XP and runs XP through VM Ware. I can also edit any *.doc file in plenty of Linux apps just as easily as I can edit it in Pages on my mini. You really should take a fresh look at the Linux desktop these days. Many distros (Suse, and Ubuntu as examples I'm most familiar with) have fully integrated highly polished GUIs. When it comes to the day to day running of desktop you don't need to know that the command line exists. I've also found that I can do ~90% of management without opening a terminal. You are correct that if Linux wants to be a viable desktop for the masses that number needs to approach 100%. Where you are wrong is that a fully configured Linux box is just as viable of an alternative as a Mac for anyone wanting to move away from Windows. The fundamental difference is anyone can go down to the Apple Store and pick up a Mac where as it will take someone who knows what they are doing a few hours to get the Linux box set up. After that both are going to require a learning curve. After all there is no "start" menu in OS X, but you can have one or not in Linux (ditto for a dock).

PNW
Dec 3, 2007, 05:08 PM
Why not? What's wrong with your Mac?

--Eric

Nothing I have iWork what do I need with M$ Word? :D

tommyz23
Dec 3, 2007, 05:26 PM
These numbers could be flawed. I didn't see how they came up with the information. Remember many of the Apple computers out there are running Windows, is that included in the data?

I mostly use Windows on my Macbook and rarely go into the Mac partition.

weg
Dec 3, 2007, 05:31 PM
Get a grip. Apple increased its market share by nearly 21%, not 1.41%. 6.8% is about 21% bigger than 5.39%.

Right. Having one girlfriend, getting a second one would be an increase of 100%. If, on the other hand, a sheik who has a harem of 100 wifes marries another one, that amounts to an increase of only 1%. Still, he'd have more than 50 times more girls than I do.

Prof.
Dec 3, 2007, 05:34 PM
Take THAT Microsoft. :D:D:D

MacinDoc
Dec 3, 2007, 05:35 PM
These numbers could be flawed. I didn't see how they came up with the information. Remember many of the Apple computers out there are running Windows, is that included in the data?

I mostly use Windows on my Macbook and rarely go into the Mac partition.
The statistics estimate the percentage of people who are using a browser under a particular OS. So, because more Mac owners use windows than PC owners run OS X, the statistics do underestimate the number of people using Macs to browse the web.

Nonetheless, the 26% (not 21% as someone else posted) year over year growth in people using OS X to browse the net correlates well with Apple's sales figures showing about a 25-30% year-over year growth. So we can expect these numbers to be about 8.57% for OS X usage if the current trend continues.

gnasher729
Dec 3, 2007, 05:36 PM
I'm not sure comparing 6% to 92% is quite something to shout about but ok...

That's operating systems.

Apple sells a lot more computers than Microsoft.
Apple sells a lot more music players than Microsoft.
Apple sells a lot more music than Microsoft.
Apple just has overtaken Microsoft in the mobile OS market.
Microsoft sells a lot more game computers - but Apple has been about $3bn more profitable in that market (Apple: $0. Microsoft: -$3bn).

weg
Dec 3, 2007, 05:37 PM
he got a new video card, spent hours reading Anandtech forums trying to find the best driver

_Can_ you even buy a new video card for the Mac??? If Linux and Windows would support only a single hardware configuration, both systems would be just as stable and easy to install as OS X.

weg
Dec 3, 2007, 05:45 PM
Apple just has overtaken Microsoft in the mobile OS market.


Not quite true. Windows Mobile has a market share of about 17% (very small compared to the market share of Symbian). The iPhone probably hasn't even reached 1%, yet, but we'll have to wait for reliable studies. Just because more iPhone owners are browsing the web with their phone doesn't mean that there are more iphones out there than Windows mobile phones. And, once the novelty of the new gadget has worn off, people will stop browsing the web with the iPhone that much...

gnasher729
Dec 3, 2007, 05:46 PM
based on this rate?

HOW LONG UNTIL APPLE WINS?


64 YEARS!

YES>>>>APPLE>>.WILL WIN IN 64 YEARS

My font may be smaller than yours, but at 26% annual growth, Apple will overtake Microsoft in nine years.

Prof.
Dec 3, 2007, 05:52 PM
Will Apple EVER surpass Windows/Microsoft???

What are your honest opinions???

I hope Apple kicks Microsoft's @$$

:apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple:
Apple FTFW
:apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple:

seedster2
Dec 3, 2007, 05:58 PM
While it is nice to see the improvement in numbers for Apple, I think it is more indicative of the lack of necessity to upgrade existing hardware on the PC side. Lots of users with PPC Macs are seeing the need to upgrade, but Pentium IV PCs from around the same time are still functional, so there isn't the same volume of sales.

Yep, I agree

These numbers are somewhat blurry considering the differences in trends for upgrading between Mac and PC users.

I'm happy with the progress. Hopefully their QC will improve with their growth.

Eric5h5
Dec 3, 2007, 06:01 PM
_Can_ you even buy a new video card for the Mac?

Sure, as long as it's a Mac Pro.

--Eric

BornAgainMac
Dec 3, 2007, 06:05 PM
Microsoft Word won't run on my Mac either?

1) Turn on your Mac
2) Install Microsoft Word
3) Click on the Word icon

SiliconAddict
Dec 3, 2007, 06:06 PM
Meh....I know 3 people who have bought Mac's who are running XP, and one Vista, exclusively on it. I seriously question some of those numbers. Just because someone owns a Mac doesn't automaticly mean they are running Windows. Yes I'm betting in 90% of sales that IS the case but definitely not 100%.

maccompaq
Dec 3, 2007, 06:07 PM
Buy low sell high ;)

Say what?

I bought 6000 shares at $35. At what price should I sell?

Prof.
Dec 3, 2007, 06:09 PM
Say what?

I bought 6000 shares at $35. At what price should I sell?
Sell them when you retire. THEN sell;)

(provided Apple doesn't kick the bucket in the near future)

ChrisA
Dec 3, 2007, 06:16 PM
If Linux and Windows would support only a single hardware configuration, both systems would be just as stable and easy to install as OS X.

What do you mean. Mac OS is hardly the leader in "stability". It is slightly better than older versions of MS Windows but that is hardly saying much.

Linux supports far more hardware than does Mac OS X and even while supporting all this hardware is MUCH more stable than Mac OS X.

Solaris is a better example. Solaris also supports a wide range of hardware, not quite as much as Linux but lots more then Mac OS X. (Sun sells a wider range of computers than Apple.) Solaris is likely the word leader in stability being at least 10X better than Linux. Solaris has some nice features like the ability to boot with one or more failed CPUs, RAM or disks and that "lights out" sysadmin feature. I think Sun is claiming "five nines" of reliability.

That old argument that Mac needs to remain on limited hardware for stability just is not right because we can point to systems that are more stable and run on more hardware.

compuguy1088
Dec 3, 2007, 06:24 PM
based on this rate?

HOW LONG UNTIL APPLE WINS?


64 YEARS!

YES>>>>APPLE>>.WILL WIN IN 64 YEARS

How did you get that prediction? It sounds more like a random guess....

maccompaq
Dec 3, 2007, 06:30 PM
Sell them when you retire. THEN sell;)

(provided Apple doesn't kick the bucket in the near future)

Originally, I had set a sell price of $100, but then decided to hold on. Good thing. Now I am thinking of selling at $200.

chameleon81
Dec 3, 2007, 06:36 PM
This is just USA what about the rest of the planet?

PNW
Dec 3, 2007, 07:22 PM
_Can_ you even buy a new video card for the Mac??? If Linux and Windows would support only a single hardware configuration, both systems would be just as stable and easy to install as OS X.

Where's the fun in that? The whole reason I want to run Linux is flexibility and the ability to tinker under the hood. (plus it runs really well on old cheap (now) hardware). When I start getting board with my desktop interface, I can spend an hour monkeying around with themes (all via GUIs) and it feels like I have a whole new box. With the Mac I have to wait for Apple to release a new OS then convince the wife it's worth the $.

Seriously though you'll be a lot happier in Linux if you find out what hardware is easily supported before you buy. Nvidia does a great job of supporting their cards in Linux (including a GUI for managing multiple monitors).

cameronjpu
Dec 3, 2007, 07:50 PM
Meh....I know 3 people who have bought Mac's who are running XP, and one Vista, exclusively on it. I seriously question some of those numbers. Just because someone owns a Mac doesn't automaticly mean they are running Windows. Yes I'm betting in 90% of sales that IS the case but definitely not 100%.

What now?

Out of 100 Mac owners, I bet 99 are running a Mac OS. I support these people for my livelihood, and I have yet to even get a question about running XP on a Mac, much less an actual running system. People who run XP on a Mac have WAY more money than sense. My customers for the most part have more money than sense, but they're not that dumb :)

cameronjpu
Dec 3, 2007, 07:53 PM
Originally, I had set a sell price of $100, but then decided to hold on. Good thing. Now I am thinking of selling at $200.

Just imagine how rich you would be if, instead of buying at $25, you had waited a year and bought at $5 :) You must have a very patient wife to let you hold on to it after that 80% or so drop!

macidiot
Dec 3, 2007, 08:00 PM
Say what?

I bought 6000 shares at $35. At what price should I sell?

250 or so.

Assuming Apple doesn't create some new segment like the iPod. If it does, Hold on or add more... it could hit 400.

And good job at letting everyone know how much money you have... ;)

maccompaq
Dec 3, 2007, 08:02 PM
Just imagine how rich you would be if, instead of buying at $25, you had waited a year and bought at $5 :) You must have a very patient wife to let you hold on to it after that 80% or so drop!
Actually, my wife does not get involved in my stock transactions. She does not know what I buy, sell or hold. Good thing, because she is a spender.

I can tell you that it was a heart stopping experience to see the stock price drop so much.

eric55lv
Dec 3, 2007, 08:24 PM
thats what Microsoft gets there just bulling Apple

notjustjay
Dec 3, 2007, 08:25 PM
Actually, my wife does not get involved in my stock transactions. She does not know what I buy, sell or hold. Good thing, because she is a spender.

In high school, 14 years ago now, I had two friends who were Mac fanboys to the extreme. I'm pretty darn sure both of them bought Apple stock with every spare penny they could scrape up. At the time I thought it was geeky and sad, and I laughed at them.

They're the ones laughing now.. (assuming they kept the shares!)

cameronjpu
Dec 3, 2007, 08:35 PM
In high school, 14 years ago now, I had two friends who were Mac fanboys to the extreme. I'm pretty darn sure both of them bought Apple stock with every spare penny they could scrape up. At the time I thought it was geeky and sad, and I laughed at them.

They're the ones laughing now.. (assuming they kept the shares!)

In jr high school, about 15 years ago, I bought AOL, MSFT and INTC. Oh, and Iomega. I was just a very lucky nerd. That luck went poof in 2000 when I used the proceeds from those great picks to "diversify" into stocks that lost even more than those 3 greats did :(

Virgil-TB2
Dec 3, 2007, 09:20 PM
What do you mean. Mac OS is hardly the leader in "stability". It is slightly better than older versions of MS Windows but that is hardly saying much.

Linux supports far more hardware than does Mac OS X and even while supporting all this hardware is MUCH more stable than Mac OS X. ...Sorry, but this is just not true at all. At the very best this is a wild exaggeration.

Generally speaking, when people talk about the stability of an OS they talk about positive stability. A system that without maintenance will generally return to a stable state.

Linux can be very stable indeed, but it is quite definitely a negative stability. The system has to be constantly tweaked or maintained to achieve that stability.

The average non technical user can completely destabilise a Linux based system in a heartbeat and it will never return to a stable state without massive intervention.

mossback
Dec 3, 2007, 09:50 PM
Count me among the switchers from Windows. After over sixteen years with PC's I had had it. The Mac really is better. I had suspected it for a while and even tried to ignore it but finally came to my senses. It's actually amazing how much nicer Leopard is compared to XP and especially Vista.

The iPod and iPhone have really opened many more peoples eyes to the kind of quality and products Apple is making. I think the percentage of Mac users will absolutely continue to grow. It may even be exponential growth in a few years from now.

MacinDoc
Dec 3, 2007, 10:37 PM
How did you get that prediction? It sounds more like a random guess....
Actually, at 26% growth:
8.57% in 2008
10.80% in 2009
13.60% in 2010
17.14% in 2011
21.60% in 2012
27.21% in 2013
34.28% in 2014
43.20% in 2015
54.43% in 2016.

So his numbers are correct; at this rate, Mac OS would overtake Windows in 9 years. The question is, will Mac OS continue to grow at this astronomical rate? You could argue either way, that the majority of potential switchers have already done so, or you could argue that as the Mac becomes more popular (and possibly even less expensive), it will attract more developers, and as a result, more switchers, until OS X becomes the new standard. Personally, I think the truth lies somewhere in between, with the rate of new adopters gradually declining as OS X approaches a 25% market share.

cohibadad
Dec 3, 2007, 11:39 PM
Wow. Linux browsing numbers are tiny. Barely edged Windows ME.

egsaxy
Dec 3, 2007, 11:58 PM
great news. now lets break the 10 percent mark or even 15. it will happen in the next 5 years. buy your apple stock now and hold. on a side note anything more than 25 percent for apple and it will become microsoft/ ibm, a relatively slow moving and adapting creature. i can see the headlines now. for tiger to tired: how apple inc slowly died.

Confidemus
Dec 4, 2007, 12:50 AM
Hi,

is there any figure or number which counts the decisions for a platform? For example: A legal entity like a large company decides as one legal entity to opt for windows and then they get a volume licence and install 100.000 Windows OSs. That counts 100.000. But there is only one legal entity and one decision.
So for me that would only count 1. At least that would mean, that this legal entity with an installed base of 100.000 Windows clients, 2.500 Windows servers, 100 sun workstations, 50 Mac (marketing;-), some different IBM machines (hosts) and others would only count 1 for every platform.

Best, Confidemus

Analog Kid
Dec 4, 2007, 01:56 AM
absurdly large text
Is there a way I can turn off inline formatting when I view my threads? That's just annoying...

Analog Kid
Dec 4, 2007, 02:04 AM
Just looked at their stats for browsers: Safari for Windows has 0.04% share!

Hi,

is there any figure or number which counts the decisions for a platform? For example: A legal entity like a large company decides as one legal entity to opt for windows and then they get a volume licence and install 100.000 Windows OSs. That counts 100.000. But there is only one legal entity and one decision.
So for me that would only count 1. At least that would mean, that this legal entity with an installed base of 100.000 Windows clients, 2.500 Windows servers, 100 sun workstations, 50 Mac (marketing;-), some different IBM machines (hosts) and others would only count 1 for every platform.

Best, ConfidemusWhat would that give you? Market share numbers like these are a clue to developers, manufacturers, resellers and IT what the trends are and what to prepare for. I guess the "entity" count gives you some measure of how many people have yet to be convinced, but it wouldn't be very precise. No one person in an organization is going to make the call whether to buy Macs or Dells. The users do have some influence, in aggregate, and a decision like that would require all kinds of approvals.

chameleon81
Dec 4, 2007, 03:17 AM
As I mentioned these are numbers in US and there are other computer users in the world. Ration would be at most 0.5% for today :)

Analog Kid
Dec 4, 2007, 03:27 AM
As I mentioned these are numbers in US and there are other computer users in the world. Ration would be at most 0.5% for today :)
What tells you these are US numbers? The numbers appear to be world wide, with a bias towards the US because the sites being tracked are mostly, but not completely, US sites.

chewietobbacca
Dec 4, 2007, 03:29 AM
As I mentioned these are numbers in US and there are other computer users in the world. Ration would be at most 0.5% for today :)

Yes i think a lot of the numbers are flawed. Mac OS's have definitely been increasing but I think a lot of the methodology is very flawed.

People need to realize that in world business, Windows is still the standard and will continue to be. Yes the Mac OS is making ground in the consumer market, but how many people install BootCamp and dual boot it with a Windows partition anyways?

And so long as the Mac OS is limited by the lack of hardware options, developers will continue to use Windows simply because they can develop to a larger audience. Yes, it might be less stable than the Mac OS, and may require more driver development and other things because of the infinite number of hardware configurations, but those are also the people willing to pay for those products. And besides, the Mac OS has increasingly been moving towards compatibility with Windows software (starting with the move to x86 etc.) and in time the line might be blurred and it wouldn't matter at all.

Papajohn56
Dec 4, 2007, 04:14 AM
It's not 1991 anymore. Most modern Linux distros, like Ubuntu and Fedora, are as easy to use as OS X. Maybe even easier, with the package managers doing all the work of installation and configuring.

Except the whole thing of drivers.

chameleon81
Dec 4, 2007, 08:50 AM
What tells you these are US numbers? The numbers appear to be world wide, with a bias towards the US because the sites being tracked are mostly, but not completely, US sites.
Because majority of apple users are in US - this is what I believe -
Not every country has a clear data about consumer product sales.

PNW
Dec 4, 2007, 09:33 AM
Except the whole thing of drivers.

Right, because Macs play so well with unsupported hardware.

As with any OS you should make sure the hardware is supported before you buy it. With Linux that requires a little more than looking on the box. The fact that people seem to think they can buy any piece of hardware and get it to work with Linux shows just how much driver support it actually has.

Analog Kid
Dec 4, 2007, 02:18 PM
Because majority of apple users are in US - this is what I believe -
Not every country has a clear data about consumer product sales.
A good start would be reading the methodology for collecting the data. Another place to look would be at Apple's numbers (http://images.apple.com/pr/pdf/q407data_sum.pdf).

Less than half of the units sold are in the US. More than any other region, yes, but not a majority.

jacekwo
Dec 5, 2007, 09:56 AM
Be careful with the stock. I have owned it for the past two years or so. Recently I just had to get out (Granted I sold high) but it was just too much. Its a stock that isn't driven by numbers. The stock runs on news. Yes, the numbers do help, but they change little. The only time that there is anything numbers related driving the stock is when the smash earnings. Its very volatile and not a stock for short term nor weak of hear.

All that being said, over the past two years, its made me a nice chunk of change. I got in right after the split, so at around 40... It does have the potential to make any wallet just a tad fatter.

maccompaq
Dec 5, 2007, 10:33 AM
Be careful with the stock. I have owned it for the past two years or so. Recently I just had to get out (Granted I sold high) but it was just too much. Its a stock that isn't driven by numbers. The stock runs on news. Yes, the numbers do help, but they change little. The only time that there is anything numbers related driving the stock is when the smash earnings. Its very volatile and not a stock for short term nor weak of hear.

All that being said, over the past two years, its made me a nice chunk of change. I got in right after the split, so at around 40... It does have the potential to make any wallet just a tad fatter.
I have been buying and holding as well as buying and trading Apple stock for over 10 years. I have made a fortune on the buy and hold, but I have also made good money on the buy and sell. You are right about the stock driven by news, and it is great to recognize that for buying and selling. I consider Apple one of the safest stocks, because of their constant innovation.

John Musbach
Dec 6, 2007, 12:42 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Apple's market share in both the computer and cell phone markets is hitting highs according to Net Applications.

Last month (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=9&qpdt=1&qpct=4&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=84&qpnp=23) the Mac OS had 6.8% market share, compared to 5.39% for November 2006. This represents the highest market share in Apple's steady climb, which appears to be almost directly proportional to a slightly declining Microsoft Windows installed base (Windows declined -1.74%, Mac increased 1.41%).

In addition, Net Applications has issued an interesting report (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=106&qpmr=14&qpdt=1&qpct=0&sample=4) stating that the iPhone has quickly overtaken Microsoft's Windows Mobile as the most used mobile OS on the web.



In contrast to market share numbers by firms like Gartner which combine quarterly results from the industry to give market share of sales, Net Applications market share numbers attempt to represent installed base of internet users. More on how Net Applications gets its numbers (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/)...

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/03/apples-market-share-hitting-highs/)

This is great news. With Microsoft continuing to be slow releasing new products and failing to deliver on promises such as many of the originally hyped vista features and vista ultimate extras I think many Microsoft users are becoming disappointed with Microsoft and are starting to look at alternatives...the mac being one of the most appealing. Not only that but the iPhone and iPod sales certainly are helping too. The sales combined provide a great outlook for Apple now and in the future. Way to go Apple! :)

MikeTheC
Dec 7, 2007, 10:31 AM
In my experience, and no doubt as you can tell by my avatar, I feel a mixed approach is best. Neither Apple nor the GNU/FSF/OSS camps have all of the answers. I am ethically drawn towards Linux, and in a lot of respects I feel it is the technical equal (or even better) of Mac OS X; however there still are things that Mac OS X does better, or at least does in a way which suits me better.

However, I also would not so capriciously as has been done here upthread dismiss Linux nor it's hardware support.

dr_lha
Dec 7, 2007, 10:44 AM
In my experience, and no doubt as you can tell by my avatar, I feel a mixed approach is best. Neither Apple nor the GNU/FSF/OSS camps have all of the answers. I am ethically drawn towards Linux, and in a lot of respects I feel it is the technical equal (or even better) of Mac OS X; however there still are things that Mac OS X does better, or at least does in a way which suits me better.

Out of interest (and I am a long term Linux user myself, so this isn't just a fanboyism here) what about Linux do you feel is technically better than Mac OS X?

I don't really see the benefit of a mixed Linux/Mac approach on a desktop, because all the software I want to use that is Linux based, runs on Mac OS X no problem for me. My first Mac was actually set up dual boot Linux/Mac OS X but I found that after 3 months I never actually booted into Linux any more. For me Mac OS X is a full replacement for Linux and at least a partial replacement for Windows (for Office at least).

MikeTheC
Dec 7, 2007, 11:51 AM
Out of interest (and I am a long term Linux user myself, so this isn't just a fanboyism here) what about Linux do you feel is technically better than Mac OS X?
I don't know how competent I am to comment on it's internals, though I suspect it's probably more robust in terms of memory management, multi-tasking, and security (remember SELinux?). It certainly seems to be more robust in terms of administration, and naturally fully exposes it's internals to anyone to tweak as they see fit for their own needs. This is beyond the scope of what Apple generally intends with Mac OS X / Aqua. Whether it's a good thing or not is really often more a matter of holy religious wars. In most cases, I think it comes down to personal preference.

I do like the fact that you can choose amongst several different environments (KDE, Gnome, XFCE, etc.) and I also like the fact that the GNU/Linux community's only real "agenda" is user empowerment, and that they hold no allegiance to any commercial interest. Two highly trivial examples of this that I can name right off the top of my head are: 1. The ability to skip through whatever menus and materials are on a DVD (because VLC, MPlayer, and other OSS media players) do not bow down to the various "flags" set into the components of a video DVD; and 2. The ability to transfer music of both supported formats on to and off of an iPod, and to use this same iPod on any number of different computers that one desires.

I don't really see the benefit of a mixed Linux/Mac approach on a desktop <snip!>
You're implying dual-booting on a single machine, sir, and suggesting that's what I meant. I did not. I'm talking about using Mac OS X and Linux within a "single shop" (in my case, within my home). Until recently I had two "workstation" Macs, and the other person in my home has (still) one "workstation" Mac. All of these computers are PPC-based Macs. Now, with the recent sale of my PowerBook G4, we are down to two "workstation" Macs. The other Mac is a vintage 1997 PowerMac G3/300 Desktop that is used as both a web server and a file server.

Now, all of our "workstation" computers run Mac OS X, since Linux (especially for PPC) is not quite as viable, given lack of support and lack of interest in further development of an aging hardware set for which Apple really never fully disclosed all the technical details. It'd have been nice if they would have, but since they didn't -- and now especially in light of the fact that PPC is a dying architecture anyhow -- Linux for PPC will continue to be an ever-increasingly "red-headed stepchild". Besides, my areas of interest and focus include image manipulation and graphic design (aka "desktop publishing") and, I'm sorry, but those are not areas of usability sufficiently represented in Linux. Gimp, Scribus, Inkscape, none of them are "ready for prime time", none of them are realistically viable in a true professional production environment. That's not a condemnation of the software itself, nor the development teams, all of which has made, from a technical standpoint, an amazing amount of progress. And who knows, maybe in 2-3 years they might even begin to compete with Adobe's suite of apps. But the point is that they do not now.

Now, my ten year old workstation-repurposed-as-server PowerMac is running Debian Etch, the latest versions of Apache, Samba, Gnome, and unlike what would otherwise be the case I can even surf the web on it with the latest release of Firefox.

Hopefully this answers your response and anyone else's questions.

dr_lha
Dec 7, 2007, 01:07 PM
I don't know how competent I am to comment on it's internals, though I suspect it's probably more robust in terms of memory management, multi-tasking, and security (remember SELinux?).

I'll give you SELinux, the others I'm not so certain that Linux has any technical edge over Mac OS X on. Mac OS X certainly has for example, better SMP support than Linux.

It certainly seems to be more robust in terms of administration, and naturally fully exposes it's internals to anyone to tweak as they see fit for their own needs.
The same is true for Mac OS X. The kernel is open source, and admistrative interfaces are tweakable in much the same way as in linux. The main difference is that you don't need to understand the complex details to use Mac OS X, whereas on Linux you're often told to start diving into a random text file if something doesn't work.


I do like the fact that you can choose amongst several different environments (KDE, Gnome, XFCE, etc.) and I also like the fact that the GNU/Linux community's only real "agenda" is user empowerment, and that they hold no allegiance to any commercial interest.
Of course the huge downside is inconsistent apps, ugly interfaces and poorly developed UI interactions and lack of innovation (almost all the new cool features of KDE4 for example are directly ripped off from Mac OS X and Vista).


Two highly trivial examples of this that I can name right off the top of my head are: 1. The ability to skip through whatever menus and materials are on a DVD (because VLC, MPlayer, and other OSS media players) do not bow down to the various "flags" set into the components of a video DVD; and 2. The ability to transfer music of both supported formats on to and off of an iPod, and to use this same iPod on any number of different computers that one desires.

I think you got off track here. I wasn't talking about OSS vs Closed Source. I was talking Mac OS X vs Linux. The applications you talk about above are all available for Mac OS X. Also Mac OS X is a mixture of open and closed source interfaces so its not as black and white as for example "Windows vs Linux".

Now, my ten year old workstation-repurposed-as-server PowerMac is running Debian Etch, the latest versions of Apache, Samba, Gnome, and unlike what would otherwise be the case I can even surf the web on it with the latest release of Firefox.
I'd agree that Linux is a great fit for making usable machines out of old hardware, especially servers. That's a specific niche where Linux is certainly a good fit I'll agree.

maccompaq
Dec 7, 2007, 01:58 PM
Here we go again! Apple stock just hit another all time high today of $193.70, and the trading day is not done yet. Update: the market high was $194.99. I just cannot believe that it is going so high before the Quarterly Earnings announcement.

Just wait to see how high the stock goes during and just after MWSF. Then after Apple's huge earnings are announced the end of January, the stock should go up again by a bunch.

DianeL19
Dec 8, 2007, 02:13 PM
I want a Mac Mini Pro.