Looking 3-5 years down the road.. I see Apple with a 25%+ market share..

[Mineral]

Anyone else agree?

This whole delay for Longhorn..

The Palladium 1984-ish features of Windows coming soon..

Macs are about to get REALLY fast..

Probably will see two MAJOR OSX updates before Longhorn..

Apple Music Store..

Incredible Notebook sales..



I dunno.. what do you guys think? What could be the "nail in the coffin" for M$'s monopoly?

Personally, I don't care if millions are stupid and ignorant enough to primarily use PC's with Windows.. but eventually the word will get out.

I'd like to see the 80's again.. Apple domination. :cool:

[applemacdude]

i see that too. as long as apple keeps everything on track..the 970's 980's are gonna make macs fast..not fast but FAST. ten will evolve into something extrordianary....products will evolve

[MorganX]

Theoretically possible but I doubt it happens with Apple's current pricing structure. Simply not possible.

Apple will have to cease crippling so-called consumer machines, like, now. Budget PCs are entering a new realm of performance. 1 in 4 purchasers just aren't that dumb.

[alxths]

It's not that easy to gain 20% of the market from a company with $40,000,000,000 in the bank. Microsoft has already shown just how competitive they are willing to be if you consider the enourmas discounts they give to deter large customers from using linux--an OS that I think, has much more to gain from M$'s new plot for world domination than Apple does, with their high prices.

[maradong]

perhaps but unprobable i think
i think it ll be around 10 % or so

[VoodooDaddy]

Originally posted by Mineral
Anyone else agree?

This whole delay for Longhorn..

The Palladium 1984-ish features of Windows coming soon..

Macs are about to get REALLY fast..

Probably will see two MAJOR OSX updates before Longhorn..

Apple Music Store..

Incredible Notebook sales..



I dunno.. what do you guys think? What could be the "nail in the coffin" for M$'s monopoly?

Personally, I don't care if millions are stupid and ignorant enough to primarily use PC's with Windows.. but eventually the word will get out.

I'd like to see the 80's again.. Apple domination. :cool:

Longhorn delay?? Since when?? All I've read is we are looking at late 04, early 05 release which is right on schedule.

The Palladium security stuff will NEVER happen. The RIAA has a hell of a time passing any copyright protection for music, you really think the government will allow M$ to police our computers?

PCs will continue to outpace Mac on the clock.

2 OS X updates? Oh you mean service packs. XP service pack 2 will be out soon, if not already in beta.

Apple Music store?? One word for that, mIRC.

Notebooks?? Ok, the notebooks are very nice but pricey.

Final nail in the coffin?? They have to be in a coffin first.

Personally I don't care if hundreds are stupid and ignorant enough to primarily use Macs.

Apple didn't dominate the 80's, Commodore did. :)



J/k Its all in fun. :D

[vollspacken]

you know what, I see apple at the same market-share (or installed base or whatever you want to measure it...), like right now...

people will accept palladium like they always accepted anything microsoft released... nothing will change

Apple computers will stil be too expensive to be an alternative for windowze users...

and linux will instead gain market share...

I might be completly wrong however... :eek:

I personally believe that all this 970 talk is just a hoax and apple will be stuck with motorola's G4's for ever (hey, they could at least use high speed G3s from IBM...)

JUST MY TWO (EURO-) CENTS...

vSpacken

[ollywilson2003]

Originally posted by vollspacken
I personally believe that all this 970 talk is just a hoax and apple will be stuck with motorola's G4's for ever

vSpacken


NOOOOOOOO!!!!!! Anything but that!!!!!

[748s]

i was just thinkin that 1984 superbowl tvc would be good to put on high rotation for a few months when the next gen mac appears. it's retro but could give the people lookin at the arrival of longhorn/palladium the heebee jeebees. lot of people haven't seen it. that tvc could push the % of macs up.

[firestarter]

Originally posted by 748s
i was just thinkin that 1984 superbowl tvc would be good to put on high rotation for a few months when the next gen mac appears. it's retro but could give the people lookin at the arrival of longhorn/palladium the heebee jeebees. lot of people haven't seen it. that tvc could push the % of macs up.

I don't think so...

The 1984 ad was aimed at attacking IBM (all the suits were basically wearing IBM's standard business uniform). Use the 1984 ad to promote IBM's 970 chip, which could turn out to be Apple's savior? No - I don't think so.

How times change...

[Bengt77]

...I instead see Apple gone in 3 to 5 years. Well, maybe not that soon, but in 10 years it might all be over and the battle lost. Would hate to see that happen, but I don't think it's that unlikely to happen. Besides, 2000 is pretty decent; maybe Longhorn actually will be an excellent OS. Who knows?! I don't, you don't; nobody knows right now. I'm willing to try something new. If it works and can give me just as much fun as my iMac is giving me now, it's good.

Okay, come on people, now go and flame me.

:p

No, seriously though, I really can see Apple's market share decimilised to around 1% or something like that in about 5 years.

[hvfsl]

The only way Apple can get that kind of market share is to let Mac OS be installed on Intel/AMD hardware not built by Apple, therefore allowing people to buy Macs cheaply. Most people in the world can't afford $2000 for a new computer every 2 years so with Apples current prices they cant go beyond about 8% of the market.

[iJon]

i do not see this happening, i see roughly 10 if anything, but i doubt that too.

iJon

[VoodooDaddy]

Originally posted by hvfsl
The only way Apple can get that kind of market share is to let Mac OS be installed on Intel/AMD hardware not built by Apple, therefore allowing people to buy Macs cheaply. Most people in the world can't afford $2000 for a new computer every 2 years so with Apples current prices they cant go beyond about 8% of the market.

now here is an idea I can get behind. Ive posed this question several times to different ppl and the response was:

"well it Mac os runs so good because it runs on proprietary hardware whereas Windows has to run on thousands of configurations."

Well, get out a Mac os that can run on pc hardware and surely it will be as good as Windows wont it???

[Wyrm]

No, and here's why:

The biggest market for computers is business.

Apple will not be adopted for mainstream businesses because in order to do this, businesses would have to rely on a single, expensive vendor to provide their computing platform who has pretty much ZERO reputation with business except some niche markets. Without that, no way they will even approach 10%. I would be surprised if they can pass 5%. I think Dell has just shy of 20%, and they are the biggest PC seller in the world.

Now before everyone gets in a snot, remember that 5% of the market is HUGE! That means that 1 Mac is sold for every 4-5 Dell computers. Very impressive. At 25% it is like 1 to 1. Bwaa haa haa haa.... not going to happen.

I recommend Apple to many people at work as a computer that just works, but many of them still end up buying an x86 device because it's easier to find, cheaper, there's more choice, and they are used to it from work.

I must admit, I would have NEVER considered buying a Mac before OSX, (ok well, I used to run PPC Linux before OSX, but I knew it was coming) but then I'm a *Nix guy.

Apple's future is looking bright, but I think it is a question of can Apple maintain a slice of the pie, or is it going away, rather than expand it's PC market 5 fold. If Apple will increase profit and revenue it will probably be from things like the iPod, Music store, and software, than their core PC business.

My 2 yen

-Wyrm

[Tim Flynn]

First, anything can happen :) or :(

To gain market share, Apple & IBM need to keep cranking up the hardware. Get and keep ahead of the x86 world. Improve support for multiple processors. Don't restrict the licensing with multiple processors.
And ... this may sound a little strange, but Apple needs to support (superficially at least) Windows. If Apple wants to push Cocoa as the main development method, developers need to be able to port to Windows. Write app for OS X, some windows support a given.

To gain market share you need (at least) three things: good OS, good hardware, good apps.

I'm from the Windows and *nix world. In my opinion, *nix for the desktop IS OS X.

[jxyama]

Coming from a physics graduate school... Apple can do really well in the "higher" higher education (i.e. graduate level) in the future. A lot of scientists who are used to using Linux/Unix will look at OS X as a very viable option, especially for notebooks. Instead of having a dual boot Linux/Win notebook, they can just get a Mac. (Linux for work, Win for presentations.)

It may not increase the marketshare much, but it's definitely a market.

[gernb]

what's amazing is that if each one of us took it upon ourselves to convince a person we know who doesn't use a mac to buy one, we could effectively double apple's marketshare.

call it proselytizing if you must.

but maybe there's a certain amount of responsibility on us to help people see the advantage of using a mac.

[Bengt77]

Originally posted by gernb
what's amazing is that if each one of us took it upon ourselves to convince a person we know who doesn't use a mac to buy one, we could effectively double apple's marketshare.

I've actually done that several times. Well, to be exact, twice. That's not exactly several, but still.

Dussss...

:cool:

[Jesus on OSX]

This is just wishful thinking and won't happen, unless Steve decides to release "Marklar (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,496270,00.asp)" - x86 OSX. That won't happen unless Apple plunges into dire financial need and loses their market niche.

Apple is a luxury that has both style and substance to back it up. If you're willing to pay extra $1000 dollars for your notebook, it's for a reason. Apple is not for everyone. Stop trying to imagine a world where every person would use Macs. If Apple had a 30% market share, I can guarantee you that OSX would be just as frustrating as Windows, loaded with all kinds of useless stuff to enable wide array of devices and applications to work on it.

Macs are intended for the following groups:

a) Rich or sophisticated users
b) Computer users who want to get work done and skip the drama
c) People who do not enjoy slavery and bondage
d) Grown-ups who do not wish to babysit their computer and treat it as their retarded stepchild.


I have no issue with Apple having less than 3%. As long as the corporation makes money and keeps inovating at the current pace, Microsoft could keep it's 90% figure.

[Mineral]

My best friend uses a PC running WinXP and it crashes on him like every 15 minutes.. and all he's doing is surfing the net and talking on AIM. It's such a POS that he hates PC's with a passion now, and is planning to get a Mac for graduation soon, just because he sees how amazing mine is. So.. there's ONE convert ;)

[boxcar]

Hey, i'm about to convert, and would have earlier if i didn't stop in here to get the latest information and speculation. Now, like us all, i'm just waiting to see what happens at WWDC. If nothing happens point me to the pbooks and i'll be a mac convert.

[hvfsl]

Well if Apple wont release Mac OS for X86, they can at least lower the prices of Macs or do what M$ does, get lots of money from one division (windows) and use that money to sell something at a lose so everyone will buy it (Xbox).

[Foxer]

Originally posted by VoodooDaddy
Apple didn't dominate the 80's, Commodore did. :)


Oh, I hope you were kidding... I knew like one Dude with a Commodore Vic 20. Hell, I knew more people with Odessey.

Apple at 25%? I wish it were so, but I don't see it happening. On advantage is that the increase in production might lead to lower hardware prices. It might just as easily lead to lower quality control, too.

Keep in mind, MS doesn't make PC's. They can sell office to all of us, too. They own virtual PC now, so they can even keep selling us windows itself. They sell us mice and games as well. If the market begins shifting towards mac, MS will simply shift its focus accordingly. Now whether or not more attention given to mac's by Redmond is a good thing or not...


I've said it before and I'll say it again, Apple needs to increase it's public awareness. Most people jsut don't think of Apple when they consider a new machine. Apple needs to tell that 1) they still exist, 2) whatever you want to do on that PC, you can probably do on a Mac, 3) they're are a number of useful things that can be done on Mac much more easily than on a PC and 4) mac's are easy and reliable. If that means buyer more ad time than 1-800-Call-ATT or 10-10-321 so be it. Spend money to make money.

That being said, I don't think Apple will disappear in the next five years either - they do make money in a market where few are making money.

[jayscheuerle]

Heck yes!!

... oh wait, I thougth you said 2.5%.

Apple will be lucky to climb to 5%. What they really need to do is quit thinking of themselves as a computer manufacturer and more as an appliance manufacturer.

Don't get hung up on the numbers, just run a good business and make good products. People will own Macs along with PCs because they are better at different things...

- j

[Freg3000]

I wish we could just get back to 5%. :(

[dkeninitz]

I think you're living in la-la land:)

Apple has been steadily losing, rather than gaining market share and it's apparent current strategy of focusing on the audio/video/graphics and personal entertainment markets (a la iTunes, the iPod and AppleMusic) signal to me that they'll be lucky to have a half-percent share in 5 years. Most of this has been covered, but here are my reasons:

-- Pricing. Apple products are priced well beyond what both corporate IT buyers and average home users will spend. For example, Apple's idea of a budget laptop - an iBook w/ "yesterday's" processor (the G3), a 14" screen, 40gb HD and 256mb RAM is $1,499. A comparable Dell 600M w/ 1.3ghz Pentium, 14" screen, 40gb HD, 384mb RAM, extra battery, and two-years of on-site service is $1,517, (and that inclues WordPerfect office). So with Dell you get an extra battery, more memory, a much better warranty, and an office suite for the same price as the Mac. OS X may be nice, but the average home user is happy with Windows XP or even ME - do you really think they care about OS X? (business users have a different OSX issue - compatibility).Similar pricing differences exist across the entire Mac line w/ respect to Dell, IBM, HP, Toshiba and Compaq.

-- Compatibility. How do you get to 25% market share without making significant inroads into the corporate world? How many IT shops are going to support both the Mac OS and Windows across a broad spectrum of users (as opposed to doing it for a few specialized groups within a company). How are they going to give Mac users access to programs like Visio and Access that are used every day in the corporate world - set them up with Virtual PC?

-- Service -- Apple's service simply doesn't match what corporate users get from Dell, IBM, etc. While companies will use internal people for repairs, they'll hardly be willing to wait 3-4 days to receive critical parts (as I just did a week ago). For a home user, the contrast is stark. Take my iBook - Dell notebook comparison above. You'd pay an extra $250 to get three year MAIL-IN support for the iBook, bringing the total price to $1,750. For $1,647, you can have the Dell with 4-YEAR ON-SITE service (plus the extra RAM, battery, etc.). And Apple doesn't offer 24/7 telephone support like many of its PC competitors.

IMO, Apple markets itself as an elite (some would say novelty) product. By definition, it's not mainstream, and it hasn't shown any signs of changing its ways.

I bought my first and only Mac a few months ago, a 15" TiBook 1ghz (I've used PC's for 20 years, and continue to use them). It's a slick machine, and so is OS X. But after considering what I paid for it, the difficulty I've had finding software comparable to what I have on my PC's, and the less-than-stellar service I've gotten from Apple, I now consider it a fun and cool novelty; not a reliable workhorse for actually getting stuff done.

So I'm curious; just how is Apple going to get to a 25% market share?

[CubeHacker]

Its really a shame, but I think to most typical computer users out there, Apple is a laughing joke. A few months ago I announced that my next computer would be an Apple. My friends looked at me wide eyed and shouted "Dear god, WHY?!" I am not joking! Go to any typical computer forum online and start talking about macs, and I bet you that all you will get is ridicule and bashing. Criticize these people all you want, call them idiotic windows users, but when you think about it, its these typical computer users that we all want to switch to increase Apple's market share.

Apple really needs to do something to change their image. These days, everyone laughts at Apples high prices and subpar speeds. You can get a 2.4ghz Dell for like $600 these days WITH a monitor which will run circles around any Apple computer 3x its price. Windows is getting more and more stable with each new release. Do you think the average Joe is going to pay three times the price just to be able to use OSX (and they have no idea what that is anyway). The days of $3000+ computers are long gone, and Apple needs to get with the times. It really doesn't matter how highly Apple sees themselves, but if they don't change fast, they won't be around for long.

[tazo]

Originally posted by Mineral
Anyone else agree?

This whole delay for Longhorn..

The Palladium 1984-ish features of Windows coming soon..

Macs are about to get REALLY fast..

Probably will see two MAJOR OSX updates before Longhorn..

Apple Music Store..

Incredible Notebook sales..


I agree with all that you said, although when you say that macs are about to get really fast, do u mean compared to current models? Anyway, I read an extremely informative article on Palladium

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html

and the things I read just made me think of Communist China under Mao and the book 1984 (A VERY GOOD book, albeit a bit depressing, the movie is not so good) . What Microsoft is planning to do in the next few years is very scary and frightening to the informed consumer, the majority of the people on this board. It bothers me deeply to think about how much privacy, freedom, we will lose once the "world" accepts Palladium.

I encourage everyone who uses a pc, ever, to read that article I linked to at the top.

tazo

[748s]

Originally posted by firestarter
I don't think so...

The 1984 ad was aimed at attacking IBM (all the suits were basically wearing IBM's standard business uniform). Use the 1984 ad to promote IBM's 970 chip, which could turn out to be Apple's savior? No - I don't think so.

How times change...

times do change. people seeing it for the first time will be relating it to microsoft. the big brother character looks like an odd bill gates. the current auience will not have a clue it is so old and it was aimed at ibm.

[VoodooDaddy]

Originally posted by Foxer
Oh, I hope you were kidding... I knew like one Dude with a Commodore Vic 20. Hell, I knew more people with Odessey.



I was kidding, sorta...didnt you see the :) Commodore did have millions in installed user base by the mid 80's.

I did know ALOT of ppl (including myself) that used Commodore, be it Vic 20, c64, 128, Amiga (owned by Commodore)

[pfranzen]

I run a company that has 4 businesses under it. About 2 years ago we put a Mac into one of those companies and found it to be great. We have since switched over all except 2 machines to Mac. We have no compatibility issues what so ever. I have to run our banking software through VirtualPC but thats a small sacrifice.

On the plus side we have much much less downtime and our staff can't open weird exe files anymore. Viruses worry us alot less. We have set up several wireless networks with NO trouble.

I have to say that before OSX we would never have concidered buying. The nex xservers are great...so easy to configure...

All senior management will be upgraded to 15.4" when they come out...

I hink apples marketshare will grow but not to 25%...

Have a nice one :)

[patrick0brien]

Originally posted by pfranzen
I run a company that has 4 businesses under it...We have since switched over all except 2 machines to Mac

-pfranzen

Where do you work and can I have a job?

Any room for an ex-Big Fiver..? :D

[pfranzen]

mind moving to London?

:D

[patrick0brien]

Originally posted by pfranzen
mind moving to London?

:D

-pfranzen

Not at all (I wouldn't have been a good Big Fiver if I wasn't willing to move around a bit), but we'd need to discuss.

Uh, oh. Getting serious here. Let's take this private so this thread can get back on topic.

Some humor directed at North Americans:
"I'd love to go to England, but I'd need to get a metric watch."

"..As in Helsinki Sweden."
"Finland!"

[billyboy]

Originally posted by patrick0brien
-
Some humor directed at North Americans:
"I'd love to go to England, but I'd need to get a metric watch."

"..As in Helsinki Sweden."
"Finland!"

And you'll have to learn to spell humor with a U!

Back to topic, i can identify exactly with pfranzen, investing more up front than he probably wanted to on a system that he is sure will do everything he wants - well and less expensively in the long term.

I was in the building game and used to get lots of kit from the continent that never saw the light of British day till years later. People used to laugh in my face at some of the stuff I introduced, but they laughed on the other side of their faces when they saw how much quicker and happier and better my blokes worked once they had got over their "fear" of being different.

Apple need to push like mad to spread the word of their differentness, but have to accept that the majority of the corporate world will continue to buy cheaper machines today. However, businesses like Pfrentzen's can only benefit as the corporate sheep competitors laugh at him for bucking the trend whereby mega MHZ software dripping PC is somehow an incredibly smart business move. He will be able to sell his hardware when PCs are being given away to save on dumping costs, his reduced downtime will be money in the bank, and a happy work force is a profitable workforce.

As education in business rises, so the number crunching cost cutters might eventually see the wisdom of going for a different IT package

Just my 2 centimos worth.

[LVzardoz]

Originally posted by mac-blog
Hey, the BeOS was a great OS that you could download for free and people still continued to use what ever was originally on their system. Mac OS X is great, but it would not be that different from either the BeOS or Rhapsody.

Intel kills good operatings systems. Long live alterative hardware/software platforms!

BeOS had poor hardware and driver support and didn't have the critical mass that OS X has.

OS X also appeals to Linux folks, having much better usability and with a robust Unix core.

The combination of inexpensive, more powerful hardware offered by x86 coupled with a superior OS would catch the attention of most influential tech writers. Maybe only the tech savvy and smarter folks would make the switch immediately from Wintel to MacTel, but the eventual surge could be enormous.

But let's face it, Steve Jobs lacks the balls to seriously challenge Microsoft. He's quite content to be the "well, I'm still better than you" niche market also-ran rather than take the risks necessary to really compete with Microsoft and appeal to the mass market.

[MacWhispers]

It's getting to the point, for me, that the whole continuing discussion of Apple's market share is just laughable... and specious.

Who is the Voice Of Authority who decided that Apple's "market" was limited to desktop PCs? Whoever originally foisted that little slice of nonsense on all of us should lean back now and enjoy one serious belly laugh at our expense. Apple is not a "desktop PC" company, anymore than Sony is a desktop PC company.

Measuring the success or failure of Apple Computer Inc. by its desktop PC hardware market share is just plain silly.

[LVzardoz]

Originally posted by MacWhispers
Apple is not a "desktop PC" company, anymore than Sony is a desktop PC company.

Measuring the success or failure of Apple Computer Inc. by its desktop PC hardware market share is just plain silly. Well, maybe they should get out of the Desktop hardware market altogether and stick to their strengths which lie elsewhere.

[masmit]

Desktop (and laptop) hardware is precisely where Apples strength (and profitability) lies. This market share stuff is a bit irrelevant, really, since as long as they sell enough in absolute terms, ie. actual machines, as opposed to a percentage of a market, they'll be in business and can continue.

The Ghz stuff is also is beside the point. Most desktop machines of any make are used for what? 3D rendering? Mostly not.

The fact is that, whether you or I agree with them, Apple sell their computers as a premium product, and charge a premium price, like BMW or Lexus. And to continue the car analogy, many people choose comfort, reliability or looks over speed. In fact, most people, probably.

I agree with those who have pointed out that to get 25%, Apple would have to sell to Corporations, which won't happen, much, though not because Corporations don't like buying from and depending on a single vendor (where do they get nearly all their software?), but through simple inertia, and the fact that most of their IT people know WinTel, were trained on WinTel, and and have heard that Mac systems need less looking after than WinTel systems. ;)

As long as enough of us continue to choose Macs when we buy computers, we will get the machines we prefer, and Apple will stay in business.

5%, 10%, perhaps. So what. They do OK on 3%.


Cheers, Mark

[LVzardoz]

Originally posted by masmit
Desktop (and laptop) hardware is precisely where Apples strength (and profitability) lies.

The Ghz stuff is also is beside the point. Most desktop machines of any make are used for what? 3D rendering? Mostly not.

The fact is that, whether you or I agree with them, Apple sell their computers as a premium product, and charge a premium price, like BMW or Lexus.
Yes, Apple can play it safe instead of competing in the real world against a tough opponent. For lowest corporate risk, desktop hardware is Apple's center of profitability however I don't think it is their strength as a product developer, rather Apple is best at design, innovative ideas and operating software.

To many of us, the GHz is very much the point. Regardless of how the majority of desktop machines are used, the Mac should be known as a hardware leader, not part of the "trailing edge".

Advanced users who use computers for professional audio, music and video processing shouldn't be CPU-penalized and told that they should pay many times more for inferior CPU performance just because the Mac is more "elegant". That is elitist crap that unfortunately lets Apple get away with its less than competitive attitude. I don't see BMW or Lexus using an underpowered Ford or Hyundai motor. Regardless of the "image", nobody would buy one if they did.

I never even considered a Mac before it had the Unix-based OS X. To me, the robustness of Unix and the features and ease of use of Apple's new operating system are Apple's strengths to those who are not already Mac users.

Linux (in it's usual role as a server) is still more stable than OS X, but Linux is not even close to being a good choice for a desktop OS for the average user.

Apple's OS X could be "the" desktop OS of choice for the masses if Apple chose to release Marklar (OS X for the x86 platform) but Steve Jobs, for all his quirkiness and bravado won't risk true competition again with Microsoft. It's just a lot safer for his ego to remain the elitist high-margin panderer to the dwindling 3% of rabid and fanatical admirers still clinging to past glory.

[MacWhispers]

Hmmm... it's good to know that I am one of "...the dwindling 3% of rabid and fanatical admirers still clinging to past glory." I had never quite looked at myself that way.

I sort of thought I was a careful, analytical guy who evaluates my computer choices against the standards that best define my own particular needs: low hassle, no system level tinkering, no hardware tinkering, no programming or coding, all usage through the GUI, an emphasis on dependable, robust operation and ease of configuration, a dead-stable reliability in running multiple applications simultaneously, little emphasis on absolute processing speed, preference for a true desktop-centered GUI metaphor, no-brain implementation of networking (including wireless), and a smoothly integrated and cross-functional selection of key small business and graphics applications that run, do what I need, and just don't crash or freeze. By that standard, I continue to choose Macintosh as my computing platform preference.

I am proudly a computer "user." This means I just simply never, ever want to see the guts of my hardware or software, or be asked (or required) by my computer to go crawling down into its convoluted belly to extract or adjust some arcane functional detail.

Just like I enjoy just hopping into my car each morning, cranking the key around, having it instantly start and just obey my commands... without ever opening the hood or knowing or caring what is under that hood... I want my computing experience to be a turn it on, do what I need to do, never see the machine behind the monitor screen experience.

I am not a network admin, repairman, systems analyst, or even a "computer hobbyist." I am a user, and the tool I choose to use is the one that just gets the job done in the most pleasant, least involved, lowest hassle manner.

Even *one* incident of having the computer choke and sputter, or spit up some bizarre, semi-intelligible box wiht a demand for me to reach into its guts is one time too many. When that happens on one of my Windows machines at my company, I just reach for the phone and call a technician to some over a fix it.

It doesn't happen with my Macs, running OS X 10.2.6. The machines just start, run, do what needs done, and do it in a very unobtrusive manner.

I'm not an idiot: I can use every feature in Photoshop 7, for instance, as well as tie my own shoes, and brush my own teeth. I just, again, have zero interest in fiddling with the functionality of a computer.

There are no hacks, no strange third-party utilities, and no offbeat freeware installed on any of my machines. We never move files or folders from where the OS chooses to place them. When we upgrade through Software Updater, everything just works, and usually works better; nothing "breaks."

I appreciate the view of people who get some sort of ego boost from havign computer technical skills, and who do enjoy being able to futz around with the software and hardware guts of their machines. And, it seems, there is a much larger than typical segment of those people who regularly visit the several online Mac communities.

Believe me, most real Mac (and Windows) users do *not* know a darned thing about what's under the hood, have no desire to learn, no desire to monkey around with those things, and really just want to turn on their computer and deal with nothing beyond quietly using the application software installed on the machine.

By that standard... not some sort of pigheaded inertia... I have made the informed decision to use my Macs. Only in applications where Mac software is not availabel for a required task do I use a Windows machine.

Thanks for "listening.":)

[jayscheuerle]

All those things are nice and mostly true about the Mac platform, but the Wintel World has been fast closing the gap. What we are seeing today is the quality of Wintel hardware and software is rising faster than the cost of Apple's offerings is lowering. Parity is being lost and the more practical and less invested of Apple's userbase have been considering a move to Wintel. Much of Apple's image is based on fading myths, be they megahertz, reliability or stability.

Most PC users don't see Apple as the BMW of computers. That's how Apple users like to see themselves. On a nice day, we'd be branded as a $35,000 "Beetle" or "Mini-Cooper". Really cute and well engineered, but not worth the money in terms of tangibles. People who purchase based on intangibles have mouths ringed with the scars of countless fish hooks.

All that, and I still like my Apple.... - j

[MacWhispers]

There we go with that "fading myth" stuff, again.

I have to track technology and make usage decisions in real-time, based on today's information... not "myths." Being a hands-on guy, I look for myself, instead of listening to whatever the prevailing common knowledge might be saying. That said, I use and understand state of the art Windows and Mac OS systems... I haven't been tucking my head away in self imposed oblivion; I have both types of computer merrily humming away in my business.

Again, from the perspective of a non-technical "user-only," there is simply no comparison between to clutter-free intuitive operation of a current XP system and an OS X system.

The other day, I had to install and configure FedEx's shipping software on a new XP machine, and get both the thermal label printer and a laser printer working properly to print labels and international document sets. It took, literally, two days of sustained efforts, involving me, my sharpest Windows advisor, the tech line staff at both printer manufacturers, and the FedEx support people. I am neither lying or exagerating.

I have since had dozens of Windows experts start to launch into any number of "yes, buts..." to explain what I should have done, could have done, didn't do... But, again, my point is that I am a businessman who needs a tool that just works: stick it in, plug it in, punch the button, and it works. Every time. I don't want excuses or explanations.

If Apple can maintain the overall integrity of its platform that is now there, so that it remains an "it just works" proposition, the'll keep my business. The moment some oterh platform can provide a better user experience, with more reliable operation, wiht less hassle, I will change platforms.

Windows XP is currently not that platform.

[mj_1903]

When an application crashes in XP, it doesn't display a simple dialog saying the program has crashed. Instead it brings up a garbled dialog asking me to e-mail microsoft to tell them why the product failed and all that jazz. I don't want my computer to be the waves pounding my workflow boat around. Instead I want my computer to be calm and allow me to sail around the pond doing what I want to do.

I can't stand wizards, I can't stand 'helpful' dialogs. I want my machine to do what I want when I want it and with no fuss.

I just installed airport in my PowerMac. Everyone who has knows how easy it is to do. I then installed a PCI card in my PC (no built in wireless in a brand new gateway) to handle the wireless. 2 hrs later I had an IP via DHCP (this is Window XP). The internet finally worked...finally.

I will take a 2 min installation anyday over a 2hr one.

Microsoft continue to dig themselves a hole. Longhorn is not how most people want their computer to function. Most people find Win 95/Win 3.1 more productive than a crazy convulated toolbar/menu driven method of computer manipulation. The Mac OS X Dock is the logical extension of the desktop metaphor. The start menu is not. Its an interface mess with Time, Taskbar's, Menu's and other items slapped into a tiny form. Make each element be itself, rather than making the all in wonder...is that not what the miserably wretched Windows Media Player 9 does? Compare iTunes 4 and Quicktime to WMP in terms of usability. Are you lost in WMP? I presume so.

Ease of use and KISS are today's standards. Computers are not meant to get harder every generation!

My 2 cents.

[jayscheuerle]

Originally posted by mj_1903
I want my machine to do what I want when I want it and with no fuss.


So do these people. (http://discussions.info.apple.com/WebX?13@54.KAUha3gbkOd.2@.ef998ff)

:D

[MacWhispers]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
So do these people. (http://discussions.info.apple.com/WebX?13@54.KAUha3gbkOd.2@.ef998ff)

:D

These problems are why I forbid any of my machines to have (a) hacks of any kind, (b) user interface mods of any kind, (c) relocation of files or folders away from the locations selected natively by the OS, or (d) installation of system or application software onto hardware configurations not explicitly supported by the software manufacturer.

It's just amzing how stable and functional Mac OS X 10.2 becomes if you just obey those four simple rules.

If you'll query the folks posting all of their hideous problems on the Apple message boards, you'll find an incredible number of violations of these four rules.

Is the Apple OS perfect? No freaking way. Is it more perfect than the present version of Windows XP?... yes, notably more perfect.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacWhispers
Is the Apple OS perfect? No freaking way. Is it more perfect than the present version of Windows XP?... yes, notably more perfect. oh, i doubt that pretty strongly. XP, if you run it on all normal, recent, popular hardware, with only approved apps, no interface mods... sure, it will look crappy, but it will be every bit as stable as our OS X in optimum cases. OS stability shouldn't be defined by such rigid standards. they're supposed to be flexible. i violate your rules aplenty, and i have no problems, by and large.

if i had to take half the fun out of a computer just to use it, why would i get one? i'd still be on the XP box i got.

[beatle888]

people are happy with there windowz pc's. at least all the people i know that use pc's dont really care about apple. their content. im not saying apple isnt better, i use macs. all im saying is pc owner i know is satisfied.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by beatle888
people are happy with there windowz pc's. at least all the people i know that use pc's dont really care about apple. their content. im not saying apple isnt better, i use macs. all im saying is pc owner i know is satisfied. i think they are only satisfied, though, because they don't realize how much better it could be.

[patrick0brien]

-Shadowfax

Very true. They don't know, what they don't know.

Ignorance - to them - is bliss. They deal, and assume that computing is just like that.

This is why we Mac users get such a jazz out of seeing their astonishment to our "slow" "overpriced" hardware.

[rfgecko33]

Maybe I am some sort of computer idiot savant, or just damn lucky, but I have never had all of these problems with Windows XP that everyone is describing. For example:

B]"My best friend uses a PC running WinXP and it crashes on him like every 15 minutes.. and all he's doing is surfing the net and talking on AIM."[/B]

Ya know, OSX isn't magic. If your friend has this much trouble with XP, he's going to have problems with OSX.

I would say that my XP Desktop machine runs every bit well as my Jaguar Ibook. It actually ran better than the Ibook with 10.1

Meanwhile, back at the point of the thread:

If Apple actually wants to increase their market share they need to start advertising like it. Right now, they are advertising Macs to Mac users. Take those stupid switch commercials. Please :)
Do you really think that crap is going to convince Joe Lunchbox to get a Mac? All it did was join in on the Windows bashing that so many Mac enthusiasts love. Blue screen of death..blue screen of death..the camera wouldn't work...my paper on hemp as a natural resource disappeared...blah blah freakin blah. I've never had a blue screen of death in XP and why didn't the chick with the camera tell her Dad to read his ***** manual? Geez. And here's an idea, how about showing the product in the commercial.

It seems to me that Apple has painted itself into a corner with this image they have created. They have made themselves out to be this uber-hip elitist brand. That's all well and good if your desire is to be a niche supplier with 3% of the market. But if they want to actually compete they are going to have to go against the Wallmarts and Circuit Cities of the world. The eMac is not what a compooter is to John and Jane potential convert. There should be an entry level mid tower. 800 MHz G4 with keyboard and mouse that they could use their existing monitor with for $600. And if Steve Jobs wouldn't mind talking to a cow, it couldn't hurt.

Finally, while in practicality the megahertz myth is just that, perception carries a whole lot of weight in the computer market. A huge segment of buyers are always going to think that 3GHz must be a lot faster that 1.42GHz. Apple needs to find a way to address that. While it is not my favorite solution, they may want to consider the Cyrix/AMD practice of "Performance Rating". Call the 1.42GHz G4 a G4 2500.

Groovy

[GregA]

okay, I'm a little bored and should go to bed... but some stuff I read on IBMs OS/400s and iSeries got me thinking. Plus a totally unsubstatiated rumour about IBM working with Apple on cocoa & some office apps.

It goes like this...

IBM is about to start offering some low end PPC970 servers. Always, IBM has done lots of OS development and I don't think they'd go near OSX for their big machines - but IBMs OS/400s can load multiple OSes. They run AIX & Linux side by side, they could easily add OSX Servers at no risk, on some VERY serious hardware.

The unsubstatiated rumour was cocoa development - Cocoa on AIX and IBM's Linux. Could IBM be interested in bringing some of the Mac's (cocoa) offerings to their platforms? Or maybe looking for a shared code base for the Lotus desktop apps?

I'd like to play for a moment with the idea that IBM has decided it's time to break Microsoft's monopoly. The MS-OS has the mindshare, as does MS-Office.
So they start with a better Office product - They decide it must have perfect file compatibility, functionality, and it must run EVERYWHERE - it's the only way that it could gain popularity.

Then an OS desktop replacement. It has to be very easy to run, preferably work on old hardware, work great on new hardware, have lots of applications already available, and seemlessly work with Windows machines.

Apple has a lot to offer IBM.

The Mac OS desktop on IBM machines could be licensed - but how about the MacOS being on every 'terminal' of an OS/400? I guess IBM would have to make lots of virtual OS/Xes on the server, or Apple could make remote desktops part of OS (Or both). And an old (or new) PC can be a terminal to the OS/400.

And now cocoa - could IBM use cocoa to write applications once and run them everywhere? Rewriting their own compilers to work with cocoa, so developers could compile apps for many platforms.

Would these changes also benefit the small office? I don't know. But it would be interesting to see the cross platform development effects, and remote desktops.

I figure both Apple and IBM would gain from these changes. They involve a lot of IBM hardware and Apple OSes, and Apple hardware too. Could rewrite things. And boost Apple's market share.

And now back to my regular dreaming.

[dkeninitz]

Do you really think that crap is going to convince Joe Lunchbox to get a Mac? All it did was join in on the Windows bashing that so many Mac enthusiasts love. Blue screen of death..blue screen of death..

I've wondered about this myself. I've been using XP on a half-dozen machines since it was first introduced - both the Home and Professional versions -- and the only time I've seen this happen is when my kids are running one of their 1 gigabyte-resource hog-games on XP Pro (which is probably a bad platform for them).

I HAVE had individual apps crash under XP, but the system almost always remains stable after closing the offending app.

OTOH, I've had OS X programs crash with at least the same frequency as with XP, and I'm not running anything particularly demanding or out of the ordinary as far as I know. I'm running the latest version of OS X (think it's 10.2.6) on a 1ghz TiBook w/ 1 gig of RAM.

And I've discovered that OS X appears to have its own blue screen of death. I've found that after certain crashes where the operating system seems to have recovered, when I go to shut down the machine it freezes, with the circular arrow thingy giving the appearance something is happening when it's not (I've left it on for as long as an hour just to see).

Frankly, I haven't found OS X to be any more stable than XP, though I do like not having to fool around with the registry - it's certainly easier to get rid of programs on OS X than on XP.

I doubt the average Joe Lunchbox "switcher" would be impressed with the supposed stability of OS X over XP, and he's definitely not likely to care about the "elegance" of the interface.

[masmit]

Originally posted by LVzardoz

Advanced users who use computers for professional audio, music and video processing shouldn't be CPU-penalized and told that they should pay many times more for inferior CPU performance just because the Mac is more "elegant". That is elitist crap that unfortunately lets Apple get away with its less than competitive attitude. I don't see BMW or Lexus using an underpowered Ford or Hyundai motor. Regardless of the "image", nobody would buy one if they did.

I'm a music professional running a medium sized ProTools rig. Like many professional systems, it doesn't depend much on the speed of the host computer, most of the hard work being done by proprietary extra DSP hardware. In terms of the cost of the system, the price of the host computer is an irrelevance. A friend who uses a similar system (Soundscape) on a PC, found it worthwhile to get a specially designed 'music' PC that cost the same as a Mac, anyway.

To continue the motoring analogy, I'll bet BMWs biggest sellers are the low end of their range, (Minis and 3 series) which would be both slower and more expensive than some of Ford and Chryslers models. I don't particularly endorse the 'premium' product idea, BTW, I just like the machines, however Apple choose to present them.

In any case, I really fail to see how a company with 3% of the market could ever hope to compete with one that has 95%. In fact, I'd think it very foolish of them to even try. Could Morgan or TVR hope to take on Ford? However good their product? Apple have found (or ended up) with a niche market, and though it makes sense for them to try to grow that market, focussing on price (remember the debacle of non-apple clones?) won't do it. I don't doubt that they are doing what they can to up the speed of their computers, and in marketing terms they probably need to, but switching to intel would just open them up to a disastrous loss of hardware sales, turning them rapidly into another BE.

Cheers, Mark

'Opinions are like *ssholes, everyone's got one', and that's mine:)

[macdong]

Originally posted by pfranzen
I run a company that has 4 businesses under it. About 2 years ago we put a Mac into one of those companies and found it to be great. We have since switched over all except 2 machines to Mac. We have no compatibility issues what so ever. I have to run our banking software through VirtualPC but thats a small sacrifice.

On the plus side we have much much less downtime and our staff can't open weird exe files anymore. Viruses worry us alot less. We have set up several wireless networks with NO trouble.

I have to say that before OSX we would never have concidered buying. The nex xservers are great...so easy to configure...

All senior management will be upgraded to 15.4" when they come out...

I hink apples marketshare will grow but not to 25%...

Have a nice one :)

Gee, i want to work in your company :D
Got any internship position for a student Cocoa programmer? ;)