Archived thread 1026266 from Mac OSX. Markdown source: Mac_OSX/thread_1026266_Mac_Dooming_Itself.md
Right now mac has very few people using it (compared to windows), I believe it is because of the fact that their prices hit the roof, if apple wanted to become number one, all they have to do is start selling systems for between $400-$1,000, and they would be bought out so fast, that the world would stop!
DISCUSS...
Well in the last year they have grown from 5% of desktops to 10%. While Linux still struggles to get to 1%. So I would say they are doing something right.
You have a point. My school's bookstore sell's mac notebooks for 2 grand, and their processor speed is the same as my 700 dollar notebook.
while their prices may bite them in the *** someday right now they are doing just fine for themselves
jrusso2 said: Well in the last year they have grown from 5% of desktops to 10%. While Linux still struggles to get to 1%. So I would say they are doing something right.
*cough* marketing *cough*
kevin11951 said: *cough* marketing *cough*
No all you have to do is read through this forum. Start with the woman who just bought a new Dell With Linux but it ready to throw it out the Window cause she can't get her wireless to work.
kevin11951 said: *cough* marketing *cough*
Yes. A major weakness of Linux.
Giant Speck said: Yes. A major weakness of Linux.
not a major weakness... the only weakness!
Giant Speck said: Yes. A major weakness of Linux.
Tru'dat
kevin11951 said: not a major weakness... the only weakness!
Maybe in a perfect world.
If Apple wanted to do that, they very well could. They introduced the Mac Mini for $500 and I guess it didn't sell too well. The low-price desktop computer market is already flooded and very competitive. They know who their core market is -- high end, high quality computer buyers -- and they are doing (increasingly) well in that market.
apples doing just fine, theyre ganna hit the roof in a couple years at their current pricing scheme cause only so many people are gullible enough to pay the mac tax, then theyll have to make a decesion to continue charging 500$+ extra for the same hardware (fanboy: blah blah its better blah. me: its the same hardware since they use intel now, you can find other laptops and desktops with the same equipment for a better price)
phaed said: If Apple wanted to do that, they very well could. They introduced the Mac Mini for $500 and I guess it didn't sell too well. The low-price desktop computer market is already flooded and very competitive. They know who their core market is -- high end, high quality computer buyers -- and they are doing (increasingly) well in that market.
Thats what I was thinking.
RiceMonster said: Thats what I was thinking.
Aye
Also, you can't just compare Mac and PC hardware directly and claim that there's a "Mac Tax." Mac software running on Mac hardware has different performance than Linux or Windows software running on PC hardware. You have to look at the overall performance/price ratio.
kevin11951 said: not a major weakness... the only weakness!
Yeh, lemme just fire up ol' LotRO and... oh, I can't. But hey, at least I can play TF2 at something over "slideshow"... nope. Hmmm, seems like you forgot gaming. :P
kevin11951 said: Right now mac has very few people using it (compared to windows), I believe it is because of the fact that their prices hit the roof, if apple wanted to become number one, all they have to do is start selling systems for between $400-$1,000, and they would be bought out so fast, that the world would stop!
DISCUSS...
Not every company is in a race to the bottom to be "number one".
Consider any Superior good or Veblen good, for example.
There are many metrics for success.
@ OP:
No, it's three different things you're talking about (or inferring) here.
Microsoft continues to hemorrhage customers because of issues with Vista. Apple continues to gain market share based on gaining traction and credibility with individuals and businesses. Linux continues to increase it's share because of it's established credibility, people finding there actually are alternatives to Windows, and that those alternatives are viable.
Apple is in it's own unique position. They are the only PC maker who is able to have (and hold on to) the very significant profit margins they are. Part of the reason they're doing well is that they don't present themselves as "being like everyone else", and because of the psychology associated with pricing. Apple doesn't sell anything for bargain-basement pricing, and I doubt they likely ever will. It's not that they couldn't sell even a $400 laptop or $200 desktop system fully capable of running Mac OS X, both things which arguably would get them more sales. It's that they wish to differentiate themselves by price-pointing their products such that people feel like they've actually bought better than that plastic Sony, Dell, Toshiba, Lenovo or Gateway laptop they also saw on the shelf.
Like it or not, it's a strategy that works.
phaed said: Also, you can't just compare Mac and PC hardware directly and claim that there's a "Mac Tax." Mac software running on Mac hardware has different performance than Linux or Windows software running on PC hardware. You have to look at the overall performance/price ratio.
its the same hardware, intel chips, intel processors, and intel/nvidia/ati chipsets, silcon image storage controllers, its all the exact same, when it was ppc you had a point but now its not, the mac tax is what youre paying to use osx, and its not worth it
bufsabre666 said: its the same hardware, intel chips, intel processors, and intel/nvidia/ati chipsets, silcon image storage controllers, its all the exact same, when it was ppc you had a point but now its not, the mac tax is what youre paying to use osx, and its not worth it
Even when it was a PPC, it still contained Intel/Nvidia/ATi chipsets, an Intel IDE controller, a Foxconn motherboard, and was all designed to Intel specifications (including the AGP and RAM busses).
People go on about mac working out of the box, which it does. But apple is about marketing. pure and simple. Their hardware is not about variety or customer orientation, they use a few parts in each area and customise their drivers to run perfectly with their parts of choice.
Windows and linux don't have that luxury. We have to work on everything and windows and Linux pays the price for that.
With apple you pay through the nose for whatever they are willing to give. nothing more.
But doomed ? Nah. a fool is easily parted with his money.
In a time of world-wide recession, I can see Apple failing quite a bit, due to their sky-high prices.
Prepare for a surge of new Linux users. :popcorn:
Show me another glass/aluminium laptop with the same build quality as the MacBook.
It is like comparing me (or bufsabre666) to Mark Shuttleworth. We are basically the same hardware, a heart, a bunch of muscles, a state of the art brain etc. but we are still not the same human beings, he have been into space, started the all o'mighty Ubuntu and I (and bufsabre666), what have we achieved? Nothing in comparison...
Apples and oranges...
I think that Apple has invented the perfect perpetual discussion machine.
Though I find it does get a bit boring from time to time, the same stuff has been said over & over, so many times in this forum... :P
Why does so many people stick with Windows? -They do not know something else exists!
however......those market shares suck anyway, it might be fun, it might be cool, but people should stick with what OS that fits their needs! I my case it is Arch Linux, in my brothers case it is Windows, in my Sisters case it is Xandros.
However the Mac operating system should be free! If you look deep into Mac OS X heart you find nothing else but UNIX/BSD. Mac OS X is a fork of FreeBSD.
If you are thinking about Apple? They are selling the most popular Phone and Mp3 player in the world, so they are doing fine!
phaed said: If Apple wanted to do that, they very well could. They introduced the Mac Mini for $500 and I guess it didn't sell too well. The low-price desktop computer market is already flooded and very competitive. They know who their core market is -- high end, high quality computer buyers -- and they are doing (increasingly) well in that market.
The reason the Mini doesnt do as well as they would like is because its underpowered. I could spend $500 on a full tower and get 2x the performance easily. The $500 tower could alo later be upgraded, the mini cant because its just laptop hardware in a squate case. They are really pissing off alot of their "pro" users by not updating their pro apps. The fact that they are phasing FW out of the Macbooks means that pro's need to buy the MBP if they want to use their DV camera. Pro's make a good bit of money, but that doesnt mean they want to spend it all willy nilly.
bufsabre666 said: its the same hardware, intel chips, intel processors, and intel/nvidia/ati chipsets, silcon image storage controllers, its all the exact same, when it was ppc you had a point but now its not, the mac tax is what youre paying to use osx, and its not worth it
Frak said: Even when it was a PPC, it still contained Intel/Nvidia/ATi chipsets, an Intel IDE controller, a Foxconn motherboard, and was all designed to Intel specifications (including the AGP and RAM busses).
This is true. The only thing they changed when the went to Intel cpus is just the cpu. The only difference between a G5 mac and a Intel mac is the processor.
Grant A. said: In a time of world-wide recession, I can see Apple failing quite a bit, due to their sky-high prices.
Prepare for a surge of new Linux users. :popcorn: I dont think apple will notice a fall during the recession. The recession really only effects the middle/lower class and they arent the people who are buying macs anyway. The rich will stay rich and the poor will stay poor. That is until Obama comes in and money and world peace falls out of his ***. But thats a different debate for a different thread :P
this thead is flame bait. Apple have had of their best years . Their market share is the highest its been.
Nah, this is benign. The PS3 vs. XBox thread is flamebait. :popcorn:
KiwiNZ said: this thead is flame bait. Apple have had of their best years . Their market share is the highest its been.
I thinkn this could be taken as a legitimate question. If the economy in the US completely tanks, Apple could be hurt a lot while smaller companies that offer cheaper computers may be able to survive.
KiwiNZ said: this thead is flame bait. Apple have had of their best years . Their market share is the highest its been.
i wrote it, no its not, its legit...
Greyed said: Nah, this is benign. The PS3 vs. XBox thread is flamebait. :popcorn:
NoSmokingBandit said: I thinkn this could be taken as a legitimate question. If the economy in the US completely tanks, Apple could be hurt a lot while smaller companies that offer cheaper computers may be able to survive.
thank you
kevin11951 said: i wrote it, no its not, its legit...
Its your opinion.
If the US economy worsens they will of course be affected , but the US is only one of Apples markets.
Apple has good reserves, is lean and has a good customer base. They offer well priced quality and are considered good value for money . ( Refer the PC Authority.com.au recent results )
All this makes a good recipe to survive.
They are NOT dooming themselves , evidenced by their fiscal results for 2009 and what they have in the pipeline.
Market share means nothing if it is not accompanied by profit. For instance, while Apple's share of total notebook sales might be around 10 percent I've read recently that they earn 1 in every 3 dollars on the North American market. Apple has 20 billion dollars in cash right and pretty much every fiscal quarter has been a smashing success in recent years.
Apple is one of the best-positioned companies, financially speaking. The fact that they carry only short-term debt (and very short at that) means every dollar they make goes to the company and not creditors. They have basically the three hottest products in the tech sector - computer, phone and portable media player. They also make tons of profit every quarter. Frankly, any company in the world would be doing good to be able to make any one of these claims, let alone all three.
Thanks to Steve Jobs, Apple "got back to where they once belonged" as the song goes, and focuses very tightly on those things which are part of their core capabilities. Moreover, they keep taking customers away from Microsoft by the handful (though Microsoft still has harbors and harbors and harbors of freighters-full of customers). Steve is the A # 1 reason why Apple is in the position it's now in, plain and simple. Were it not for Mr. Jobs, they would have long since lost their relevance and place in the tech industry, and probably faded into non-existence.
And like him or not, Steve is the kind of guy every company should want as their CEO. Even Sir Howard Stringer, CEO of Sony, has internally just about admitted as much. In certain respects, I think there are useful lessons to be taken away by all the captains of the F/OSS movement, particularly with respect to focus, direction, and marketing.
If you are going to bet one way or another, bet with, not against, Steve Jobs just about every time.
Grant A. said: In a time of world-wide recession, I can see Apple failing quite a bit, due to their sky-high prices.
Prepare for a surge of new Linux users. :popcorn:
ahhh crap im sorry but i like the population the way it is
Another thought...
If Apple is "dooming" itself, then can you explain the statistic that they are #1 in notebook sales?
Clearly *somebody* is buying their hardware.
On a tangentially-related note, they're going totally DRM-free (which should be of great interest to folks on UF and also elsewhere in the community) with 80 percent of their songs initially, and 100% by the end of the first quarter of the year.
You know, I think we give Apple enough crap on UF and other boards. It's about time to give them a little credit when and where credit is due.
MikeTheC said: If Apple is "dooming" itself, then can you explain the statistic that they are #1 in notebook sales?
Could I get a link to that statistic?
Looks like Apple is about #7 or so in Notebooks.
http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2008/06/13/apple-ranks-7th-in-notebook-sales-worldwide
jrusso2 said: Looks like Apple is about #7 or so in Notebooks.
http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2008/06/13/apple-ranks-7th-in-notebook-sales-worldwide I was thinking HP was leading. They lead last year as well.
Whoo! Toshiba came in fourth!
well yes if they continue to sell there products for the current price in this economy they probably will be affected more than other companies as people look for cheaper alternatives. but you got to believe the profit margins on macs are huge compared to pcs so they don't have to sell as much.
Go watch the Phill Shiller keynote. I mean, unless that's a complete lie.
Apple is selling the Mac Mini, an very affordable computer for an basic-user level. It's enought to browse Internet, instant messaging, watch HD movies, listen and organize your music, photos, edit videos, etc, etc. And very soon it will be upgraded. Also it's in the top 5 of desktop sales now, in Amazon. http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/pc/565098
Yes, I have a Mac Mini.