In a perfect world, those specific business apps and most AAA games would be available in MacOS, with all its occasional hiccups, Mac's are a joy to use and IMHO best in class desktop machines.
Yup. That is why many who have a choice and really use the machine to make a living pick them over Windows.
Now, we dont install Windows on a Mac because sadism,
Are you sure about that? I swear I saw a story on CNN about a paid Dom who used it as torture for her customers. (It may have been
The Enquirer. Hard to remember.)
but because unlike the smartphone/tablet/watch market, Macs are not the dominant player in the desktop market.
Well, gamers build/buy Windows systems because Apple/Intel dropped the ball on GPU performance for entry level systems and Windows machines were so cheap, that even macOS users who were also gamers, just got a second machine for gaming. That created a game market death spiral.
Business apps are different and fit into several categories.
- Apps that need high end, high performance, workstations (eCAD, mCAD, etc.). In these markets Apple sometimes has competitive machines, but not consistently enough to make it worth supporting.
- Very specialized apps for commodity users (i.e. unlike the previous group whose users are very skilled and need lots of training, these are low/lower skill jobs - or the skill is disconnected from the computer with much less training). Applications like call centers, data entry, office practice management, salon management, etc. where the need is lots of cheap systems. Again, Apple has sporadically competed in this space with the iMac and the Mac mini.
- Enterprise Apps. These are developed in house often by junior or lower skill developers (or overpriced consultants). Many of these were windows only because that was all the developers knew and/or the companies did not think Macs were important.
The ARM transition will only make this worse, unless two things happen IMHO, first and more important, Apple chips consistently outperform Intel/AMD -by a significant margin- thus becoming a synonym of performance, secondly, ala iPhone SE, having a cheaper entry price laptop so they become the go to desktop computing machine. I think Apple its well on its way to deliver number one.
Here is where we disagree. While I agree if they do what you suggest, it will help, that is not the only way it can work.
For the first category, Apple needs a consistent, competitively-priced, high end presence to get people to port, but all they need to be viable is a great Citrix/Teradici/whatever client and a machine that can support it well. Many of these expensive, specialized apps have moved to either a SaaS model, or just a shared datacenter/cloud hosted system approach. If Apple succeeds on the former, some people may port, but overall, this is likely to be less important moving forward.
For the second category, many of these application are moving to the web, so anything that can support that can be used. Again, this means that if, as you said, Apple competes with and iPhone SE type entry-level machine, they can do well. On the other side, many of these apps have moved to the iPad (how many people have walked into a restaurant and seen an iPad at the host station and iPads in cases for managers/hosts walking around the restaurant?). These new Apple Silicon Macs will make it possible to have a Mac as the back office machine, running the same application in a window, but other business apps like
Word/Excel/Powerpoint.
The last category is likely to be even more affected by this transition. Many of these enterprise apps are now web-based, but those that are not are way more likely to have iOS apps as an option. This unified structure makes it possible to just use the iOS/iPadOS version, to start, slowly encouraging better catalyst and/or SwiftUI apps with better macOS support as we move forward.
For all these approaches to work, they do not have to be ahead, they just have to be reasonable. However, if they are ahead, they could actually grow market share.