Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
A simple video card swap will take care of that. Remember, most PC's from back then, and even today can be upgraded with little effort. ;)
Of course laptop users will be left out just like most iMac, Mac Mini and Mac Book/Pro users.

All true. I had laptops on the brain and not desktops. :)

Aero in Win 7 doesn't really require that aggressive of a GPU to run nicely.
I have an old Dell 1525 (2007 model) laptop that runs OS X 10.6.7 as well as Windows 7 Ultimate and it only has an Intel integrated GPU (GM965 Express).

Accepted. Though, having seen it run on HP Pavillion Dv5??? with Intel integrated, it did seem a bit annoyingly sluggish at points. But it did run. But I haven't seen it run on Intel's predecessor integrated from 2006. But I would imagine it to be even more sluggish.

And to answer the Lion question, many older Intel Macs will not run Lion.
Read the release notes... the devil is in the details.

I wasn't sure myself so I had a look to see which ones can and can't.

Here are the OS X Lion compatible Macs listed by date of introduction and model identifier number:

• Mac mini (Mid 2007, Macmini2,1)

• iMac (Late 2006, iMac5,2)

• Mac Pro (all models)

• MacBook (Late 2006, MacBook2,1)

• MacBook Air (all models)

• 13-inch Macbook Pro (all models)

• 15-inch MacBook Pro (October 2006, MacBookPro2,2)

• 17-inch Macbook Pro (October 2006, MacBookPro2,1)

• Zero Intel Core Solo, Core Duo or PowerPC Macs are compatible.​

Source: http://fairerplatform.com/2011/04/can-my-mac-run-os-x-lion/

Assuming the source is correct, it looks like some 2006 models can run Lion. But only the late model ones can. So almost 5 year old ones. :)
 
Accepted. Though, having seen it run on HP Pavillion Dv5??? with Intel integrated, it did seem a bit annoyingly sluggish at points. But it did run. But I haven't seen it run on Intel's predecessor integrated from 2006. But I would imagine it to be even more sluggish.

Which is exactly related to my comments about comparing similarly priced Apples and PCs. It's disingenuous to compare the capabilities of a 5 year old $2000 Apple laptop and a 5 year old $499 Windows laptop....

My Latitude model was first sold in March 2006, and came with an NVidia Quadro NVS discrete GPU. It runs Aero on Win7 x64 without any hesitation.
 
Its common sense. The people who can most afford a mac often work with windows specific software. If Macs couldn't run windows they would still be using a PC

Absolutely....? So more people using Macs *really* means they're using Windows! Yes, of course. Up is down. Blue skies are red. Why don't you and lilo777 and AidenShaw and Winni and Applescruff just lay down and take your nap.
 
"It seems highly unlikely that a "convert" would want to install the same old Windows OS that they are running away from. Why cripple a Mac? "

Word. I have never heard any home user ( and by that I do not include geeks, who , after all, make up only 1% of all computer users) checking out a Mac in a big box store mutter "I wonder if this will run Excel ?" They are happy to try Numbers. Who cares what the software is as long as you get your job done?

With regards to Mac buyers installing Windows - I never have, never will. I'm on my fifth Mac (since 1991) and it does everything I want it to, from book-keeping to website design, video editing and DVD design and production. I was editing video tape and exporting back to a VCR in 1986, at least a year before I saw any PC user friends doing it.

Scientific usage ? I worked in a large med. school in the UK for 18 years. We started with a Mac Plus and it grew from there. One of our doctors came in on the weekend and installed our own network. The med school IT dept. hated us because we never called them so they coudn't bill us. The lab became a world class communicable diseases research establishment using 90% Macs and attracted a million pound research grant.The secretaries were the only holdouts. Go figure.
When I returned to Canada and started to work at a med. school there in 2005 I was astounded at the number of Mac laptops I saw - easily 40%. I doubt any of the med. students felt hard done by.

Cost of Ownership - my 2001 graphite iMac was handed on to my brother in 2004 and lasted until 2009. My 2004 sunflower iMac died in 2009 from a power surge. They may have been derided as "expensive" in their day but quality build pays for itself in the end.
My 77 year old father bought, in spite of my pleas, an Asus laptop for $850 because a MacBook was "too expensive". Of course by the time the salesman sold him, a lamb to the slaughter, an extended warranty and a subscription to McAfee it was the same price. It was crammed with useless demos but nothing practical and no email software. He ended up using netmail and thought that was just the way things were.
The Asus lasted 2 years and died.
 
Yeah, with 90% market share, those 'box-makers' really are struggling... :confused:

Don't be so confused. There's nothing to be confused about.

Re-visit the state of the industry two years from now and you'll see some major differences in that figure.
 
Word. I have never heard any home user ( and by that I do not include geeks, who , after all, make up only 1% of all computer users) checking out a Mac in a big box store mutter "I wonder if this will run Excel ?" They are happy to try Numbers. Who cares what the software is as long as you get your job done?

Yet there are those who will run the Mac version of Excel. Also many home users who buy Windows to run in Bootcamp or a VM to use software that is compatible with their old software and/or work software.

Metrics aside, it does happen and naturally given that there exists a fair amount of windows software that has no viable alternative in OS X.

With regards to Mac buyers installing Windows - I never have, never will. I'm on my fifth Mac (since 1991) and it does everything I want it to, from book-keeping to website design, video editing and DVD design and production. I was editing video tape and exporting back to a VCR in 1986, at least a year before I saw any PC user friends doing it.

Yes, indeed a Mac can do that and much, much more. But for what it can't do, there's both Windows and Linux that can on a Mac. It's a wonderful computing platform that allows choice. Why begrudge that?

Scientific usage ? I worked in a large med. school in the UK for 18 years. We started with a Mac Plus and it grew from there. One of our doctors came in on the weekend and installed our own network. The med school IT dept. hated us because we never called them so they coudn't bill us. The lab became a world class communicable diseases research establishment using 90% Macs and attracted a million pound research grant.The secretaries were the only holdouts. Go figure.
When I returned to Canada and started to work at a med. school there in 2005 I was astounded at the number of Mac laptops I saw - easily 40%. I doubt any of the med. students felt hard done by.

That's excellent. But then there exists a number of organizations that run both on respective hardware or both OSs on a Mac. Which is quite cost effective to do either via VM or Bootcamp.



Why is it that running Windows on a Mac seems almost taboo to some? It's a plus and testament to Mac's robustness that it can. And it serves to disspell the notion that a Mac is just for "artsy" types. A Mac can be for everyone to use and enjoy - however they decide to use it.
 
Don't get too giddy Apple fangirls.

Looking at the bigger picture for every one Mac, there are 6 PCs, it would be more but you guys are lucky Microsoft is putting more attention to XBOX 360 and Bill Gates is not the COO/CEO anymore.

Isn't the worldwide ratio "for every Apple sold, 19 PCs are sold"?

And those 19 PCs sold generate less profits then the 1 Apple sold.

Do the math. If Apple has 10.7 % of the market, then for every 9 computers sold, 1 is a Mac - in round numbers. 1/9 = 11.11 %. If you round down, then make it 1 out of 10.

Then the statement for every one Mac, there are 6 PCs should be for every one Mac, there are 9 PCs.
 
So many Americans being ripped off, build your own computer and if you care put OS X on it.

Why am I going to screw around for hours getting the right hardware, getting it all to work together and then praying that a hacked piece of software works?

My time is worth considerably more than the cost of my MacBook.

(Or more technically accurate would be to say that my time is worth more than the difference between a Dell and an Apple).

Thanks for sharing though.
 
Do the math. If Apple has 10.7 % of the market, then for every 9 computers sold, 1 is a Mac - in round numbers. 1/9 = 11.11 %. If you round down, then make it 1 out of 10.

Then the statement for every one Mac, there are 6 PCs should be for every one Mac, there are 9 PCs.

With "in the U.S PC Market." placed on the end. :)
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

@gnasher My reasoning for saying the price drop for the OS shows how overpriced the hardware is, is simple. Part of Apple's draw for many people is the OS. it certainly isn't the internal components anymore as they are the same as in PCs which are significantly cheaper than their Apple counterparts. Now that the OS is so cheap why is the hardware still the same price? You can't really answer that question logically.

Logic isn't your strength, right? $30 is not what you pay for Lion. $30 is what Apple's highly esteemed customers who handed over a huge change of money for excellent hardware (and to quote lilo777, lots of people think it's the best hardware available to run Windows on) and an excellent operating system named Snow Leopard are paying to upgrade to Lion.

According to your "logic", a car manufacturer who sells a car with three years free service and 100,000 miles warranty admits that the car is rubbish, because they charge nothing for service and repairs.
 
Yeah, with 90% market share, those 'box-makers' really are struggling... :confused:

Trouble is that they aren't really making much money from it as they are all stuck in the race to the bottom. There are some very interesting stats around:

Have a look at the average price of a PC sold. It is unbelievably low.

Have a look at how many of the mid priced PC&Macs are sold and who sells the most.

And finally, have a look at which manufacturer makes the most high priced PCs.

Logic isn't your strength, right? $30 is not what you pay for Lion. $30 is what Apple's highly esteemed customers who handed over a huge change of money for excellent hardware (and to quote lilo777, lots of people think it's the best hardware available to run Windows on) and an excellent operating system named Snow Leopard are paying to upgrade to Lion.

According to your "logic", a car manufacturer who sells a car with three years free service and 100,000 miles warranty admits that the car is rubbish, because they charge nothing for service and repairs.

$30 is nothing. Anyone even thinking about not spending $30 because it's "expensive" needs to seek help.

People hand over $129 to MS for the latest OS and bitch less.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
there exists a fair amount of windows software that has no viable alternative in OS X.

Yep,but somehow I've managed to bumble :D along in my own way for the past 20 years accomplishing things 30 years ago I wouldn't have dreamed of. I don't think I'm too badly off without Windows. I have to use it at work, and I don't need it in my private life.
Most of that windows software is pretty specialised , and real Mac alternatives are coming along every week.

It's a wonderful computing platform that allows choice. Why begrudge that?

Indeed.
Ennyhoo, thanks for the civil reply to a nooby...
 
Yet there are those who will run the Mac version of Excel. Also many home users who buy Windows to run in Bootcamp or a VM to use software that is compatible with their old software and/or work software.

You're deluded if you think "many" home users run Bootcamp or a VM. Or for that matter, if they even know what Bootcamp or a VM are. Geeks do. Geeks are at tiny percentage of reality.
 
You're deluded if you think "many" home users run Bootcamp or a VM. Or for that matter, if they even know what Bootcamp or a VM are. Geeks do. Geeks are at tiny percentage of reality.

I must say, this is one testy forum. About as testy as some of the religious or political forums.

Deluded? By saying I'm deluded you're indirectly insulting Apple clientele. As if Apple clientele are a stupidly ignorant homogenous bunch with nothing more than money to burn. Yes, I know there exists Windows advocates that would like to paint Mac consumers as such. But the fact is, many of Parallels Desktop 6 customers are in fact non-business retail consumers... as an example. And many Apple consumers do know what Bootcamp is. After all, the fact the a Mac can run Windows is advertized on Apple's website in several areas including "why you'll love a Mac."

Would it hurt to be a little more civil on this site?

All I said was "many." How is that cause for contention and insults? Many is simply more than a few, is it not? :rolleyes:
 
good to see them past Toshiba in the ranks.

Toshiba was the first computer my parents bought 13 years ago or so and wow what a pos. Always had problems from the get go. good times
 


Really? That's all you've got? A grammar mistake? You automatically lose. Not trolling, just stating the facts. Pricing will ALWAYS be Apple's downfall.


“There is nothing in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and he who considers price only is that man's lawful prey.”
-- John Ruskin

Apples are less than 5% of worldwide sales, so my 19:1 ratio is correct.

It's not correct for this discussion thread which is based on a story and graph centered around U.S. computer sales.
 

Attachments

  • free-beer-fals-advertising-300x279.png
    free-beer-fals-advertising-300x279.png
    106.6 KB · Views: 250
Last edited by a moderator:
Why try to belittle Apple for low market share outside the U.S.? In fact, Apple market share in Europe is similar to that in the U.S. Share in Aisa stinks for several reasons, such as:
-- Asians buy very cheap products, so Acer and HP sell very well in India and China. Asian upwardly-mobile types love Apple and do buy Apple products.
-- Windows 7 Ultimate DVD sells for $1.00 in China. Same goes for all Windows-compatible software such as Adobe CS5.5, MS Office, Adobe Premier, AutoCAD, and on and on. Mac OS 10.6 sells for $50.00 if it can be found at all (Apple does not permit pirating). Bill Gates said in an interview that he isn't worried about the prating of Windows in Asia. He is using pirating to build a 99% mass of devotees, and will attack the pirates later after everyone is in his camp.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/07/23/100134488/

If Apple really wants to sell computers in Asia, they have only one choice: Feed thousands of copies of OS X and other Mac-compatible software into the pirating stream and wait for the public to notice. When Asians can buy OS X for $1.00, they will buy Apple computers.
 
Last edited:
It's not correct for this discussion thread which is based on a story and graph centered around U.S. computer sales.

Actually, I think that it's quite germane to this discussion if there's a greater than 2 to 1 difference between Apple's US market share and its worldwide market share. Also, if you bothered to follow the links to the source stories - they focus on the worldwide numbers, then break out the US numbers.

It was the MacRumours editors that sensationalized the headline with "soars" and "10.7%". I guess that a headline of "Apple still not in the top 5 worldwide" wouldn't have gotten the page hits that put gas in the Porsche.

The world is a lot bigger than the 48 states in America.

Otherwise, there could be a story claiming that Apple has 95% market share because some college bookstore is selling Apples 19 to 1 over Windows systems. Once you take the global market numbers and start slicing and dicing them with highly localized data, you are on a slippery slope.


On the off-topic:

attachment.php

If the guys behind the bar are topless, please PM me the address! Although, with the white stuff in the picture, I'll hope that it's around Tahoe and not in Sarah Palin land.

Free beer and topless guys tending bar screams for a road-trip! Show me the treasure-trails.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely....? So more people using Macs *really* means they're using Windows! Yes, of course. Up is down. Blue skies are red. Why don't you and lilo777 and AidenShaw and Winni and Applescruff just lay down and take your nap.

While I don't really disagree with you, Mac sales did begin to take off once Apple switched to an Intel processor, which meant that Windows could run natively and not emulated. Then MS came out with Vista, which was such a poor product that Windows users began to look to the Mac as an alternate. Finally, the iPhone halo effect gave the Mac a boost due to Windows users looking at the Mac in a new light. None of those things, in themselves, meant that Macs began to be used as Windows machines, However previous Windows users always knew they could reboot into Windows mode if they needed to; the move to the Mac wasn't irrevokable.

In the same way, old Mac users were comfortable moving to OSX knowing they could switch back to OS9 if they had a program that wasn't OSX ready. I enjoyed that option even though I only switched back to OS9 one time, I knew I was not making an irrevokable move to OSX.

So, whether one is going from Windows to OSX or OS9 to OSX, it is easier to put your money down, knowing you have an option you may never use.

"It seems highly unlikely that a "convert" would want to install the same old Windows OS that they are running away from. Why cripple a Mac? "

Sure, it's a creaky MS OS, but it's one that a "convert" knows well. When you buy a new pair of shoes, no matter how much you like them, you bring the old pair home with you "just in case." Whether Windows gets installed on the Mac or remains in the desk drawer, it's around somewhere "just in case."

Word. I have never heard any home user ( and by that I do not include geeks, who , after all, make up only 1% of all computer users) checking out a Mac in a big box store mutter "I wonder if this will run Excel ?" They are happy to try Numbers. Who cares what the software is as long as you get your job done?

MS Word and Excel still trump their equivalent iWork apps for many home users. Often because they need to open, read, or edit work documents from home. Additionally, many people are comfortable with using them at work and don't feel a need to learn something new.

For those "converts" who don't feel a need to buy and use Office for Mac, then you are right. It's enough for some people that they are changing the OS, they can still be comfortable with their known applications.

Since this discussion is about Macs, I will diverge for a moment and say that currently only iWorks is available on the iDevices. Either MS will have to make Office available for the iDevices or the Apple iWorks may get some serious traction as an acceptable alternate for more people.

I'm curious to see how this all plays out over the next several years.

With regards to Mac buyers installing Windows - I never have, never will. I'm on my fifth Mac (since 1991) and it does everything I want it to, from book-keeping to website design, video editing and DVD design and production. I was editing video tape and exporting back to a VCR in 1986, at least a year before I saw any PC user friends doing it.

Scientific usage ? I worked in a large med. school in the UK for 18 years. We started with a Mac Plus and it grew from there. One of our doctors came in on the weekend and installed our own network. The med school IT dept. hated us because we never called them so they coudn't bill us. The lab became a world class communicable diseases research establishment using 90% Macs and attracted a million pound research grant.The secretaries were the only holdouts. Go figure.
When I returned to Canada and started to work at a med. school there in 2005 I was astounded at the number of Mac laptops I saw - easily 40%. I doubt any of the med. students felt hard done by.

Cost of Ownership - my 2001 graphite iMac was handed on to my brother in 2004 and lasted until 2009. My 2004 sunflower iMac died in 2009 from a power surge. They may have been derided as "expensive" in their day but quality build pays for itself in the end.
My 77 year old father bought, in spite of my pleas, an Asus laptop for $850 because a MacBook was "too expensive". Of course by the time the salesman sold him, a lamb to the slaughter, an extended warranty and a subscription to McAfee it was the same price. It was crammed with useless demos but nothing practical and no email software. He ended up using netmail and thought that was just the way things were.
The Asus lasted 2 years and died.

The rest of your post is spot on. I'm very happy to see Apple being taken much more seriously since 2007. It was a long time coming!
 
Last edited:
If Apple really wants to sell computers in Asia, they have only one choice: Feed thousands of copies of OS X and other Mac-compatible software into the pirating stream and wait for the public to notice. When Asians can buy OS X for $1.00, they will buy Apple computers.

Your conclusion is faulty. MS sells an OS only. Apple sells a complete solution; OS and hardware. No one will appreciate the whole solution playing only with the OS.

Besides, Apple knows that the iDevices (and the MBA) is where the growth market for them resides and is doing everything they can to build that business. The other Macs may be swept along in the mix, but putting any effort there (U.S. or elsewhere) is just not going to be worthwhile and dilutes their core portability message.
 
If Apple really wants to sell computers in Asia, they have only one choice: Feed thousands of copies of OS X and other Mac-compatible software into the pirating stream and wait for the public to notice. When Asians can buy OS X for $1.00, they will buy Apple computers.

Well, so the only way asian's buy anything is they steal it? As a Apple stockholder, if the only way Apple can be big in Asia is give its products away, I'm not really interested in them being big there. Hopefully as the Asian market matures, they'll either start enforcing the intellectual property laws or come to recognize the value of the product there.

I think Apple is doing ok with iPhones, iPods, and iPads there. So apparently this "must steal products" mentality only counts for computers.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.