Power challenge of Apple's new Mac

I still don't understand why increasing market share is such a big goal to achieve. If a company works well as it is, why trying to enlarge? They work profitable and this is what counts.

Originally posted by Veldek
I still don't understand why increasing market share is such a big goal to achieve. If a company works well as it is, why trying to enlarge? They work profitable and this is what counts.

Click to expand...

They are a business, the goal of every business is to grow, get larger market share, and make bigger profits, that's how the world works If everyone sat still and was happy with what they had, we wouldn't have evloved to where we are today...wherever that is

But this would imply that as Apple loses market share, if you believe the analysts, though they work profitable, they will be gone soon. Do you really think so?

Apple still has a significantly higher market share than Mercedes, and nobody has said that Mercedes is going out of business soon.

What's more, market share statistics can be skewed several ways:
1. Sales only in the U.S.
2. Sales worldwide
3. Sales to repeat buyers
4. Sales only through retail outlets
5. Sales only through mail order outlets
6. Sales over a certain period of time
7. Existing usage base which happens to be as high as 10% according to Fortune magazine. The reason the sales is not as high a percentage is that Macs last longer. It is a double edged sword, build a better machine, and less people will buy from you frequently enough to make your marketshare numbers appear as high as you want them to be for developers to believe in the platform.

At least with emulation, all but the most complex 3-d PC games will play on the Mac. With PCs you don't have emulation to take you past Mac OS 8.1 on a PC.

That's what I wanted to say: Apple doesn't need to increase market share.

i find it interesting that the specs they posted were for the smallest system at a single 1.6ghz processor.

IMO what a naff nothing article. It is said that the claims by Steve Jobs should be taken with a pinch of salt because there was no indication of what was being compared to what. I am sure I did not imagine the real world tests, pitching a new Mac against the fastest PC on the market to render a graphic in Photoshop?

Reading the tech specs on the entry level G5 were less than inspiring and as ever give no indication of what the numbers mean when working in a Mac.



The rest was just a dull nothing piece of not quite Apple bashing.

Yes, the 1.6GHz system isn't the fastest in the world. I don't think Steve-o was claiming it to be. Those biatches.

PC Magazine can challenge however they want. There is always going to be an aspect of the Mac that won't be as fast as a PC, and vice versa. I guess it all depends on the tests they use.

This was my favorite part:

But his statement about being the first 64-bit machine has to be taken in context.

"Of course it isn't shipping yet. It's not shipping for a couple of months. So they're not first-to-market today as Steve said," said Mr Stam.

"AMD may likely decide to come out in August instead of September with their new desktop Athlon 64. It's bragging rights is what it is, and that's what Steve is great at."

Click to expand...

Good at bragging rights, eh?

Maybe that's because he usually HAS SOMETHING WORTHY OF BRAGGING ABOUT!?!?