Apple Considering Rebranding Mac OS X Under New 'iOS' Umbrella?

[rkw0211]

Hmmm, clearly there are learning issues in 'the land of the free and home of the brave'

lets try majority again, we'll never crack the other stuff if you can't grasp this.

*deep breath*

http://www.yourdictionary.com/majority

iTunes plus other Digital downloads = c. 35% of the market

where are the MAJORITY of the music sales then?

start simple eh..?

Obviously you failed economics.

iTunes is one store. All other physical outlets could be thousands. That's like comparing Apples to Oranges. I'm going to take a stab and say that if your figures are correct and iTunes indeed has 27% market share, that it is the largest SINGLE store in the U.S. for music. No single stores can top that. That's how you determine majority, not by comparing iTunes to thousands of others combined.

Can you grasp that?

 

[wallaby]

You know, while I'm not a fan of renaming, an iOS layer within OS X may not be such a bad idea.

Think of all the small-functionality programs you use everyday. E-mail, Safari, Calculator, calendar… many of these have proven more popular on iOS devices than on Mac OS X. OS X already has a sort of "layer" OS in it; right now we call it Dashboard. Only Dashboard isn't all that useful, to be honest. Sure, it has a few things that are quicker to access there than your desktop environment, but when was the last time you hit F12? I can't even remember.

Now take Dashboard and replace it with an iOS layer invoked by hitting F12. All of a sudden, all your iOS apps pop up for you to use at the click of a mouse. Now your Farmville, Facebook, Plants vs Zombies, are all available via a quick application launcher of sorts, in a familiar environment.

Not saying it's going to happen, but I think people would come to like it.

 

[AidenShaw]

Obviously you failed economics.

And the rejoinder is that you failed English.

I'm going to take a stab and say that if your figures are correct and iTunes indeed has 27% market share, that it is the largest SINGLE store in the U.S. for music. No single stores can top that. That's how you determine majority, not by comparing iTunes to thousands of others combined.

No. For Itunes to be the "majority" would mean that more than half the music is sold at Itunes. If Itunes sells less than 50%, then by the definition of "majority" Itunes does not sell a majority of the music. If the thousands of other stores total more than 50%, then by the definition of "majority" Itunes could not possibly sell a majority of the music.

"Majority" without qualifiers means "more than 50%", not the "single largest".

BTW, you violated the "no personal insults" forum rule a couple of times in your post. Attack arguments, not people.

 

[Gradivus]

There is some rubbish talked on these threads

"The Mac is dead". Proof: All the development effort is going to mobile these days.

Gosh. Wow. The Mac has been with us for more than a quarter of a century. In that time it has matured. It isn't perfection, but there isn't much scope left for improvement. Upgrades will come, but they'll be fewer and farther apart, and there'll be no more major "Wowee!" upgrades. Apple will continue to sell Macs, and they'll be as great as ever, but they'll not change much over the next decade.

iPhone, iPod and, especially, iPad are different. They're new. Think how they might evolve over the next 25 years. Obviously, that's where Apple will focus their attention.

And read the very first sentence of the statement again. "using iOS as the default naming/branding". No mention of killing off OSX, just changing the name to fall in line with their other products. "We would then have iOS desktop (i.e good old OSX), iOS server (i.e OSX Server) and iOS mobile (i.e. the iPhone OS)".

Please don't type without reading the report properly.

 

[MorphingDragon]

"The Mac is dead". Proof: All the development effort is going to mobile these days.

Therefore you're wrong because your proof is not valid.

 

[rkw0211]

And the rejoinder is that you failed English.




No. For Itunes to be the "majority" would mean that more than half the music is sold at Itunes. If Itunes sells less than 50%, then by the definition of "majority" Itunes does not sell a majority of the music. If the thousands of other stores total more than 50%, then by the definition of "majority" Itunes could not possibly sell a majority of the music.

"Majority" without qualifiers means "more than 50%", not the "single largest".

BTW, you violated the "no personal insults" forum rule a couple of times in your post. Attack arguments, not people.

Insults only come after they come to me.

You still didn't even read the post.

iTunes=1 store.

All other physical outlets=Millions of stores.

You can't compare iTunes to thousands of other stores and say it doesn't have majority market share because you are combining the market share of stores all over the country. iTunes is just one store.

For example,
According to this website, http://www.tomsguide.com/us/verizon-at-t-cellphone,news-1419.htmlthe following facts are true:

There are 272 million Cell Phone subscribers in the U.S.

AT&T has 70 million subscribers

Verizon has 65 million subscribers

Sprint has 48 million subscribers

T-Mobile has 28 million subscribers

By these facts, as well as per the article, AT&T is the largest cell phone carrier in the United States. It has majority market share. However, it only has 25% market share out of the entire subscriber population in the United States. This doesn't matter because there aren't any companies with a larger subscriber base. This is the same case in iTunes. iTunes doesn't have majority of all music sales, but it is (as far as I know) the largest individual company. Especially when you consider that it's only available to those with an iPod. THAT'S majority market share.

Comprende?

And by the way, I reported your friend for violation of TOS in at least two of his posts since we're playing that game.

I'm done arguing with you two. The only point you are still arguing is my stupidity, which you are failing horribly at.

 

[KnightWRX]

You can't compare iTunes to thousands of other stores and say it doesn't have majority market share because you are combining the market share of stores all over the country. iTunes is just one store.

Yes you can. iTunes has the biggest market share, but it doesn't have a majority market share. Majority is 50% + 1. End of story.

Think shares. If you had 27% shares in a company, are you a majority share holder ? Because there could be thousand of other shareholders, but you're just one shareholder.

You still wouldn't be a majority shareholder.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Obviously you failed economics.

iTunes is one store. All other physical outlets could be thousands. That's like comparing Apples to Oranges. I'm going to take a stab and say that if your figures are correct and iTunes indeed has 27% market share, that it is the largest SINGLE store in the U.S. for music. No single stores can top that. That's how you determine majority, not by comparing iTunes to thousands of others combined.

Can you grasp that?

Why do you feel the need to insult people to make your point? iTunes cannot be directly compared to a "single" store since it exists on the Internet and therefore is the equivalent of many thousands of stores owned by the same company. A single music outlet may serve 10,000 people or so. iTunes is capable of serving music to the entire country (let alone the international sales). So I'm afraid it is a bit of an Apples to Oranges comparison. In other words, trying to compare an online store to a physical store doesn't even make sense since they are two entirely different music distribution methods. Calling iTunes a "single" store is literally meaningless and yet that seems to be your ENTIRE POINT. That leaves me thinking so what?

Even so, "majority" normally means "greater than 50%" (although to contrast this just to argue against KnightWRX, there is a 2nd definition whereby it can mean the largest portion of a whole if no one is more than 50%, not that this matters in terms of something like anti-trust law) and Apple does not have a majority of the entire music sales industry by any means. They are a big player relative to other companies, but not even CLOSE to a monopoly. Even if they were a monopoly, it would be a legal one since there is literally NOTHING or NO ONE stopping others from selling music. If the consumer creates a virtual monopoly by CHOICE it is legal and not remotely anti-trust in nature. This is contrary to Apple's hardware market where the only choice is to buy a Windows based machine since no one else is allowed to sell hardware that runs OSX. THAT is where I believe there is an anti-trust violation that the federal system continues to ignore since if I want OSX, I have NO choices but to buy the hardware from Apple (unless I hack). But music, no way. I can easily buy an MP3 from Amazon instead or go buy a CD at Best Buy and it's the SAME PRODUCT. No one is forcing me to buy music from Apple.

 

[archipellago]

Obviously you failed economics.

iTunes is one store. All other physical outlets could be thousands. That's like comparing Apples to Oranges. I'm going to take a stab and say that if your figures are correct and iTunes indeed has 27% market share, that it is the largest SINGLE store in the U.S. for music. No single stores can top that. That's how you determine majority, not by comparing iTunes to thousands of others combined.

Can you grasp that?

clearly you have been made to look a bit silly by the other posters and I won't argue with you any more as you remind me of Patrick from SpongeBob

suffice to say...

I hope you 'comprehend' what a majority now is and also just remember that we went down this route because of your original 99.9% claim about iTunes and no one but you has focused on single stores, for me it was always

digital vs physical...

and thats now been proven.

 

[charlituna]

dominant not majority

that's the key word. That's the word that the law will use to decide if someone is abusing a monopoly.

Dominance. Which legally means having an extreme level of share, thus power, within the applicable market.

for Itunes this would be digitally distributed music, movies, audiobooks etc. Those are the markets.

Music, supposedly itunes has a 27% share of sales. That means that 73% belongs to other folks. and itunes is apparently only about 5% over the next in live. That's not dominance.

Dominance is Microsoft's 90% (versus next runner up Apple which has like 8%) of the personal computer operating system market.

etc.

So whether you call 'majority' the most or 50%+1 is really moot. Cause the most might still not be enough to be illegally strong

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

So whether you call 'majority' the most or 50%+1 is really moot. Cause the most might still not be enough to be illegally strong

There's no such thing as "illegally strong". Anti-trust law clearly states that for a monopoly to be illegal, it has to be using its market power in an anti-competitive manner. If a monopoly has gotten to that status because it is the overwhelming choice by consumers, it is perfectly legal. Thus, if iTunes had almost 100% of the music sales and it was because people WANTED to buy from iTunes (not because they were forced to or Apple used some kind of anti-competitive action to get there) then it would still be legal. Free choice means the ability for consumers to CHOOSE a monopoly (or close to it) if that's what they desire. Companies like Microsoft and Intel don't get into trouble BECAUSE of their market share, but rather because they ABUSE their market share to try and squelch any competition (e.g. Microsoft would punish anyone who tried to sell an OS other than Windows with their computer by charging full price instead of OEM rates OR they would demand a fee per computer even if that computer didn't have Windows on it. That is abusing market dominance alright. If they hadn't done any of those things, they wouldn't have gotten in trouble in the first place).