Mac OS-X / Vista Gain Share

Growth by percentage... Dell was head and shoulders above apple in terms of growing their business.

That's like saying Apple sold 100 computers Q2 last year, and then sold 150 computers Q2 this year. That's a 50% growth! Profit!

 

Which means what, exactly? That 15 years ago M$ made some very smart business decisions while Apple didn't? No one here is disputing that. In fact, no one here is disputing the fact that M$ holds the lions share of the market.

What's up for discussion, however, is the future of that market. yes, M$ will continue to be a powerful influence in businesses for a long time. Apple's gains in market share, however, clearly indicate that the public is fed up with an inferior product from a monopolistic company, and are willing to switch to an OS that is unfamiliar but arguably comes with tools and software that better suits their lifestyles.

So, let me ask you - what happens to Microsoft if Apple keeps increasing their share every year by such a large percentage? We've had several years in a row now where their share percentage has grown by 30% or more from the previous year... Volume doesn't matter one bit in business - only ROI, and Apple is making a killing for their shareholders.

 

Apple seems to have an influence far beyond what their 'puny' sales figures would indicate. In sport, this would be called playing above their weight.

 

That is very true. It has always been the case, and one can only hope that it will remain like that.

 

Right now, that's a pretty meaningless "what if" question. You simply can't extrapolate growth rates.

For a company, growing 50% from 6% to 9% market share is nice and often easy.
Growing 50% from 20% to 30% market share is already a whole lot harder, and you have to fight hard.
Growing 50% from 40% to 60% market share simply is a tremendous, exceptional achievement.

Apple won't be able to sustain that kind of growth in computer sales into those numbers unless they drastically change their entire business model. And nothing indicates that they are up to this.

 

Unfortunately in the computer business today, you do. Because companies are so heavily invested in Microsoft (Window's PC's, Window's software, IS departments that are exclusively Windows and have been for 15 years, etc) the cost of switching to a different OS is prohibitively high. And as stated before, businesses make up more than half the computer market...

We aren't talking about two companies that both make screw drivers and are stealing share from each other - a screw driver is a screw driver, and if you know how to use one you know how to use them all equally as well. Computer OS's are different. They come with different semantics, different metaphors, different ways of doing things. Switching between them isn't easy and isn't cheep. A screw driver from a different company will still work on all the screws the old one worked on. A different OS requires you to buy all new software, because the old stuff won't run on the new OS. The fact that so many individuals are switch to Mac only proves how much better their product is today than Microsoft's - when you can't stop your competitors from growing and stealing share from you with such a high cost of change, you have some serious problems down the road.

 

The only reason that Vista sells at all is because it's all that is sold on new machines. True, you can still get XP but it's getting more difficult all the time. I wouldn't let a little thing like a puny cost difference limit me to only one OS, and I love my Mac more than any windows box I've ever had. The price "premium" between, say, a Macbook and a decent Windows laptop is only two hundred dollars, by the way.

 

Now, lets actually get two computers that are actually comparable - you left off a lot of stuff or used inferior stuff for some of the other components that don't come with the HP.

HP dv5t: $1,776.99Operating systemUpgrade to Genuine Windows Vista Ultimate with Service Pack 1 (64-bit)editProcessorIntel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo Processor P8600 (2.4 GHz)editDisplay15.4" diagonal WSXGA+ High-Definition HP BrightView Widescreen Display (1680 x 1050)editMemoryFREE Upgrade to 2GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm) from 1GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm)editGraphics card512MB NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GTeditPersonalizationHP Imprint Finish (Mesh) + Microphone + WebcameditNetworkingIntel(R) WiFi Link 5100AGN and Bluetooth(TM)editModem PortNo High speed 56K modem porteditHard drive250GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive with HP ProtectSmart Hard Drive ProtectioneditPrimary CD/DVD driveLightScribe SuperMulti 8X DVD+/-RW with Double Layer SupporteditTV & entertainment experienceNo TV Tuner w/remote controleditPrimary batteryHigh Capacity 6 Cell Lithium Ion BatteryeditBack-up & media managementRoxio Backup MyPC(TM)editProductivity softwareMicrosoft(R) Office Home and Student 2007editPremium CD/DVD burner softwaremuvee autoProducer PremiumeditAccessoriesMobile Stereo Earbud Headphones (1 pair)editKeyboardHP Color Matching Keyboardedit
























































Additional software (basically to offset what you get with iLife): $355
Adobe PhotoShop Album
Adobe's Premier Elements
Mixcraft
Magix Movie Edit Pro
Nero 8

With OSX, you get the equivalent (in terms of usage, thats all) of Vista ultimate. With MacBooks, you get wireless N and bluetooth built in. You get DVD burning software that is much better than what comes with Vista as well. You get a set of earbuds. You get the bigger battery equivalent from HP. You get automatic backup software. You get a higher screen resolution. You get iLife. When all the costs are added up to make the HP equivalent to the Mac, the HP costs 2,132.

Macbook: $2128

iWork '08 preinstalled
Accessory Kit
MacBook Pro 15-inch Widescreen Display
2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
250GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
Backlit Keyboard (English) / User's Guide
SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
2GB 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB

Feel free to argue various points on that, i know you will. Heck, even throw out all that additional software that attempts to make up for the missing iLife on the HP. We still aren't talking the $1000 difference like you claimed for equivalent machines.

 

yeah, really, Macbook starts at $1099 and a good Lenovo can be had for around $900. Sure, you can get the el cheapo box that's more your speed for $600 or $700 but I'd never settle for the cheapest. Comparing an HP to a Mac is like comparing a Chevrolet to a Toyota and the Macbook Pro that you're referring to is top of the line and then you're comparing the Chevy to the BMW and I doubt that HP even makes a laptop that even comes close to the Macbook Pro.

 

+1, although I'd say more like comparing an Aveo to a Prius

To match the specs on a $2799 17" MBP, a Dell XPS M1730 costs $2799. And thats with the Dell being much chunkier, missing a lot of software (iLife = Integrated photo management, photo editing, movie editing, music composition, podcast production, DVD authoring, website authoring), appears to lack DL burning support and is about 4 pounds heavier!

To match the $1498 Black MacBook, the Dell M1330 runs up to $1698. The Dell is slightly lighter, but thicker, and does give you an extra gig of RAM, but is missing software (iLife = Integrated photo management, photo editing, movie editing, music composition, podcast production, DVD authoring, website authoring) and DL burning.

To match the $1099 White Macbook, the Dell M1330 runs $1498. The Dell does give you an extra gig of RAM, which would cost you $21 to upgrade the Mac to match. It also gives you another 40G of drive space, matching that would add another $50, so lets say $1170 vs. $1498. Again, slightly fatter, slightly lighter, but is missing software (iLife = Integrated photo management, photo editing, movie editing, music composition, podcast production, DVD authoring, website authoring).

The whole expensive Mac thing is pretty much a Myth at this point. Macs used to be more expensive because they were one of the last computer manufacturers to stop making machines in US and go to Asia (along with more proprietary (ADB, NuBUS) and higher grade (SCSI) hardware). Now they are built in Asia (but still designed in US unlike many) using largely standard components, they just appear more expensive because they don't play in the bottom end market, for many of the same reasons that Honda and Toyota don't play in the US <$10k car market. The main difference between Apple and the rest at this point (IMHO as an engineer) is superior OS, HW design, quality control, and customer service.

FWIW, I use Dell, Sun, HP, IBM/Lenovo and Gateway running Solaris, Linux, XP, Win2k here at work. I use Macs at home and have for 20 years. I can do anything at home I can do at work, its just generally easier to do on a Mac. The last thing I want to do at home is deal with all the same frustrations I deal with at work all day. I will say my main Dell Win2k box (optiplex) at work has been pretty stable, just not friendly or low maintenance. Most of our Dell/Gateway/IBM boxes have had a 3-5 year lifespan, and by that point you are glad to be rid of them. My 10 y/o Powermac 7500 was still running and on the internet a few months ago when I finally sold it at a yard sale. I had a few 13 year old 7100s that were still running that went to the scrap yard last year because they were just taking up space. My 6 y/o iBook is still running as our home theater controller and secondary portable web surfer. My 4 y/o eMac is running in the bottom of my desk as a print server, backup server, video server, and web server. Our newish 17" MBP is fast, light, beautiful and just works for anything from surfing to excel to ripping editing and burning DVDs. Thanks to the BSD Unix base, I can get in and hack anything I want in terminal. If I'm not happy with the Apple version of a built in subsystem, I can often download the Unix/Linus source code, recompile and run the open source version. Had to do that a while back with dhcpd and tftp to support some extra settings for booting a diskless Linux media player over the network. On the HW side, I've changed out logic boards in Power books, built powerbooks from ebay parts for next to nothing, overclocked my old powermac, installed third party wireless cards, hard drives, and optical drives in iBooks, put hard drives, wireless, bluetooth and optical drives in our all-in-one eMac, and replaced the lcd panel (not just swapping a new top clamshell, the panel with in the top clamshell) in our 17" MBP (don't ask ). People knock the Macs for being trendy fluff based on the outward appearance and easy to use nature of the interface. They're only fluff until you open up the hood and see whats going on in there. Then its kind of like a TCH. V6 import sedan performance, econobox consumption

IMHO its the best of both worlds. Easy, predictable interface and handy tools on the top, Linux like hackability and customization when I'm in the mood, all on a rock solid OS running on top quality hardware. Its no wonder IT guys hate Macs. They'd all be out of work

Rob

 

Once again, what starts out as a reasonable thread, this time comparing sales figures of Vista and Mac OS has denigrated to a few rabid Mac addicts screaming their lungs out about how dare anyone suggest Macs cost more than comparative hardware on the PC side. People claim we Prius drivers might be a bit smug, but compare smugness of a Prius driver to that of a Mac addict is like comparing a gopher mound to Mt Everest! I swear that Steve Jobs could take a hunk of piss elm, call it an "iBoard" he could sell it for $100 a board foot and there would be Mac heads that will swear it's the best lumber on the face of the earth. Now from someone who has been working with computer hardware for 40 years I think I may know just a tad. The first microprocessor I worked with was an Intel 4004, the first microprocessor based computer I built used a Motorola 6800 processor, and yes it meant soldering individual IC's onto circuit boards. The first Apple product I used was an Apple II. I've worked on and with PC's from the first IBM from the early 80's. My point in this rant is that from a quality standpoint, there is no difference between a PC and a Mac. They are of course different and people have different tastes and preferences, that's fine, but to say comparing a Mac to a PC is like comparing a BMW of Toyota to a Chevy is just plain ludicrous! I built my own PC with components of my choosing and I'll match my PC on a quality basis to any of your Macs any day! A couple of you jumped all over one poster who did a price comparison between similar HP and Mac laptops, well, I have a bit of news for you Mac people, do you know where the mainboard of your Mac book is made? THE SAME FACTORY THAT MAKES HP MAINBOARDS! A fact that was confirmed to me by both HP and Apple support people.
Well, enough for this rant, but please Mac people, enough of the sanctimonious conceit over your computers. Lest I bring up the flaming Macs, or virus laden iPods...

 

I think you missed a good number of points. Most PC manufacturers build a wide variety of machines, at a wide variety of price points. You can buy a Dell laptop at $500, or at $3000. They're probably built in the same factory too. The difference is not as simple as clock rate or any other on paper specs. The higher end machine uses much higher quality components, has a better design, better QC, and as a result will be more reliable and usable with better performance for a longer period of time. The point was, comparing a Mac to a bottom end or even mid range PC doesn't make much sense. Mac for the most part only builds machines that are comparable to the higher end products from other manufacturers. From that perspective the comparison is pretty valid. You can't compare an Aveo to a Prius. You can compare a Prius to a Malibu. When you do you find that you get similar features, similar size, and similar performance for a similar price. In the Prius you just happen to get half the fuel consumption and much lower emissions. By the same token, when you compare a Mac to a PC of similar specs and quality, the mac costs the same. It just happens to deliver a simpler user experience that would suit most people better, they just don't know it because of all the status quo BS out there. Same could be said for the Prius.

Your home built PC probably is as good as mac at a better price if you used quality components carefully selected to work well together. Most people don't have the time, energy, or background to do that, and buying an off the shelf PC that would match the quality and performance of your home build would cost a lot more. Same or more than a mac as it turns out. I bought a rebuilt Prius for $15k for the same reason. That doesn't really have any relevance to the discussion of the Prius' cost/benefit to the general public.

Prius owners get annoyed when people who don't know what they are talking about come in and tell them how they would have been better off buying a $12k Chevy. Mac guys get annoyed when someone who doesn't know what they're talking about comes in and tells them they would have been better off buying a $500 Acer.

Case study: My coworker finally decided to take my advice and bought a 20" iMac for $1500 to process RAW photos from his Nikon D200. He has been happily working away on it for 2 years now with 0 drama. His wife, who is also an engineer is on her 3rd $500 Costco PC in the same time period. About every six months, her machine degrades to the point where it is unusable and its easier to buy a new one than trying to fix it. They've both spent the same amount of money over the same time period, but guess who has had the better experience? His biggest complaint is that their 9 y/o daughter quickly figured out that his machine is much easier to use and always works. Now he has trouble getting her off it so he can use it. FWIW his wife designs microprocessors for a living

BTW my 25 y/o Apple IIe still runs.

Rob

 

I pretty well agree with most everything you say here, except for the ease of use, IN MY CASE ANYWAY, I find the Mac GUI very frustraiting to use, but again that is me, heck I still use the DOS interface whenever possible But yes you are right on when you point out that Dell, HP etc. make both consumer grade crap as well as industrial powerhouses where Apple makes generally higher end products. Allthough if compair any given Apple with its counterpart in the PC realm (based on total product quality), Apple will still be somewhat higher in price, this, I believe, is due to the fact that no one else makes an Apple clone, if the do, Apple sues the pants off them. When Apple came out with the original Mac, and IBM the PC, Apple kept (and largely to this day) a closed archetecture where IBM essentially therw their design into the public domain. The end result was clones from nearly everyone, competition then determined market price. Prior to this there were dozens of "pc" designs (your Apple II) being one of them), all with their own OS etc. But thank you for a reasoned response.

 

I love Vista. However, in my case I bought a Mac Pro because of the dirt poor treatment I got from Dell and the fact that I can now run Vista on my Mac