backtop


Print 126 comment(s) - last by michael2k.. on Jul 11 at 2:20 PM

Apple is seeing strong growth in first time buyers though marketshare remains low

Apple is used to having strong quarters.  However, the recent one brought some bad news, with a major shareholder lawsuit pending against Apple CEO Steve Jobs and other Apple executives.  Still, according to recent analysis Apple will be able to take comfort with strong sales.  Apple's quarter, which ended in June, was a strong one for Mac sales according to BMO analyst Keith Bachman.

Mr. Bachman predicts that Apple will announce shipments of 2.4 to 2.5 million Macs over the three-month period.  If his prediction holds true, it would represent another strong gain of 39 percent over last year.  The industry as a whole saw growth over last year -- 12.2 percent on average -- but the estimate would place Apple's growth at 3.2 times the industry average.

A variety of factors have influenced the strong sales, he says.  One major factor is pricing.  A payment of $1,300 will get you a 2.4GHz MacBook, only a hair more than the average $1,292 paid for a 13-inch notebook.  Typically the MacBook is faster, according to Mr. Bachman, than this average notebook as well.  At other price levels and configuration he says Apple trades storage for speed, but manages to attract certain customers.

Traditionally, Apple's prices have been much higher that comparable PCs.  However, Apple has been more aggressive with its pricing of late, thanks in part to its adoption of more affordable Intel processors.

Unsurprisingly, the other major cause for the adoption according to Mr. Bachman is consumer mistrust of Windows Vista.  While Vista has struggled greatly in the business sector, consumer adoption has been kinder to it.  However, according to Mr. Bachman, there is still a strong public perception that Vista is substandard in bugs and performance and that Apple computers are less problematic, simpler, and more secure.

"Thus far, user satisfaction ratings for Vista have been weak, and startup times for Vista have been known to be much slower than the Mac OS X," he says.  "Thus, more than 50% of recent customers buying Macs in Apple retail stores are first-time buyers."

While Mr. Bachman may well be correct, one small irony is that most security experts consider Apple to be the inferior of the two OS's in terms of security.  Nonetheless, Microsoft suffers from an image problem in which many people mistakenly believe it to be less secure, thanks in part to clever marketing campaigns from Apple.

Strong growth is projected for 2009 by Mr. Bachman as well.  He says that he sees Apple growing shipments another 26 percent, yielding a worldwide marketshare of 3.9 percent.  He says that the new MacBooks coming in August, the iPhone 3G's halo-effect (people buying Apple products to work with their new Apple-brand music player/phone), and planned retail expansion will all help Apple's success going.

Interestingly, Mr. Bachman predicts a shortage of the iPhone 3G.  This may limit Mac sales and hurt the iPhone sales rates, but he says it would project an image of warm reception.  He states, "We believe it is quite possible Apple will run out of phones, post the July 11 launch [but] in the month of July, given some recent production yield issues.  However, we believe that Apple will be able to catch up with phone demand during the quarter. Hence, from a stock perspective, near-term lack of availability issues could end up being positive... with headlines reading something akin to near-term demand outpaces supply."

Could Apple have an intentional shortage up its sleeve?  The move would be questionable, but coming from Apple it might be unsurprising.  Whether you are a critic or fan of Apple, it’s hard to debate that time and time again Apple has lured customers with clever marketing and to as much emphasis on form as function. 

While Apple will need many more years of growth and strong sales to even begin to approach the marketshare level of PCs, it seems on course to at least continue to make its unique splash on the computer market.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Good!
By retrospooty on 7/8/2008 2:42:19 PM , Rating: 3
More Mac's and cheaper Mac's means cheaper PC's and more innovation - consumers win...

Still though, Mac may be looking at record sales, but still a small player... still hovering at 7%. http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=...




RE: Good!
By michael2k on 7/8/2008 3:05:49 PM , Rating: 2
7% isn't that small when you compare to Acer, Toshiba, or Lenovo...


RE: Good!
By retrospooty on 7/8/2008 3:45:19 PM , Rating: 4
but... You cant compare it that way - Apple is the only manufacturer of Mac's so if its manufacturer vs manufacturer Apple is one of the largest - Platform vs. platform its very small.


RE: Good!
By RjBass on 7/8/2008 4:01:32 PM , Rating: 2
I once criticized Apple for being the only maker of Macs and thought that they should start letting other company's start making Macs as well. But now I see just how smart they are, because the last time I checked, most of us are still using "IBM Clones", and we can all see just exactly where IBM is with their current consumer end laptop and desktop lines.


RE: Good!
By retrospooty on 7/8/2008 4:24:18 PM , Rating: 2
IBM was bloated and couldnt compete, its not really the same thing. Apple doesnt have that problem.


RE: Good!
By Yawgm0th on 7/8/2008 4:46:01 PM , Rating: 2
It would if there were other major manufacturers of Macs.


RE: Good!
By RjBass on 7/9/2008 1:41:13 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know about that.

IBM built very reliable, very dependable computers, so does Apple now.

IBM charged way to much for their machines, as does Apple now.

In both of those regards they are pretty much the same. As far as IBM being bloated, well they wernt so much when they were still owned and operated by IBM. They didn't really get bloated till they sold their consumer end product line to Lenovo.

Regardless, while I don't exactly like Macs, I still can't help but to be impressed with Apples business in the last 8 years.


RE: Good!
By daftrok on 7/9/2008 5:13:16 AM , Rating: 2
It is impressive but it is more along the lines of their marketing skills rather than their product. As us geeks know, technologically speaking the iPod is an overpriced and underfeatured product. Sure the first couple of weeks its considered to be innovative, but then Archos and Creative come out with much better products at an affordable price.

This in turn helped the sales of Macs. And I'm not saying that the Macbooks are bad, they are just so ridiculously overpriced that it'd be much easier on the pocket to pay $1400 for a 17" HP laptop with similar specs rather than $2800 for a 17" MBP. And on top of that, the quality of the HP laptops and desktops have been really shooting up.

So I guess in a way, if Macs didn't exist, then PC manufacturers wouldn't try so hard to ensure their dominance. If Macs were competitively priced however, we would see a shift in the market for sure.


RE: Good!
By psychobriggsy on 7/9/2008 4:57:01 PM , Rating: 3
So overpriced that Apple has the lion's share of the marketplace, has defined the word for portable mp3 player, and people are buying them over other players, or even the player in their own mobile phone.

Fact is, they work, people can use them without thinking, without fighting animated menus, without fighting complex software or having to drag and drop their music to their player manually. Geeks, of course, like exactly the opposite all the way, and due to superiority complexes, think that other people should do as well, and that their way of thinking isn't defective.

I really don't think that an iPod Touch is underfeatured. Really. You'd have to go a long way to beat it, and the number of people with them is increasing scarily, I see loads every day.

Macs overpriced? Sure. I don't even think that you are paying for physical hardware quality either. Looks, ease-of-use, yes.


RE: Good!
By Rev1 on 7/9/2008 8:50:41 AM , Rating: 3
Dunno About reliable i had a aptiva back in 98 and had nothing but problems with it.


RE: Good!
By retrospooty on 7/9/2008 8:58:09 AM , Rating: 2
IBM built very reliable, very dependable computers, so does Apple now

The diff is, IBM couldnt do it and make a profit, Apple can - Thus the term... bloated.


RE: Good!
By omnicronx on 7/8/2008 5:05:15 PM , Rating: 1
A little history lesson will show that IBM was basically forced to allow the sale of 'clones', it was really not their choice. Apple in turn almost went out of business after they closed off Mac clones in the mid 90's and pretty much can thank the ipod for staying afloat.

And since I am not sure if you were being sarcastic, IBM no longer makes PC's or laptops.


RE: Good!
By nowayout99 on 7/8/2008 5:20:38 PM , Rating: 2
Apple had all profitable quarters from the time Jobs went back in 1997. iPod came years later. It certainly helped them boost their revenues by a great degree, but I don't think it kept them afloat, per se.


RE: Good!
By omnicronx on 7/8/08, Rating: 0
RE: Good!
By nowayout99 on 7/8/2008 7:15:53 PM , Rating: 5
Why such a hostile reply? Relax. All you have to do is look at their financials since 1997. They became a stable and profitable company well before iPod. The iPod later took them over the top to be the cultural icon they are now, but even the iPod didn't really take off until the end of 2004/2005. And the amount was $150 million. ;)


RE: Good!
By Calin on 7/9/2008 2:54:02 AM , Rating: 2
They became a stable, small and somewhat profitable company long before the iPod. However, the iPod made them known by everyone - and this "iPod" business helped them grow their computer/laptop business


RE: Good!
By nowayout99 on 7/9/2008 5:28:46 AM , Rating: 2
Partly true. Apple's always been a known brand; even in their worst times they had one of the most recognized names (up there with Disney, Pepsi, Nike, etc). The ipod just helped make them relevant again to a largely new sect of customers (their diehards never left). And it's true as you said, that's also helped grow their computer business as well.


RE: Good!
By Aloonatic on 7/9/2008 11:52:36 AM , Rating: 1
There were those pretty coloured monitor Apple Macs as well.

They seemed to help them out and get them plenty of news coverage and the like.

I'm not sure how well they sold however, but people were talking about them and how pretty they were, at least they were in the UK???

I know nothing about Apple really, so I'll just shut up now...


RE: Good!
By RjBass on 7/9/2008 1:49:09 AM , Rating: 2
Actually they do. They just don't make them for the consumer end market and they don't make them in very high quantities, unless you count their POS machines.

I guess what I didn't know before was that IBM was forced to allow clones. Being from an IBM family (Dad, Step Dad, Step Mother, and Mother all career IBM employees)you would think I would know that little bit of history.

Did that happen because of the IMB PC's popularity and IBM flooding the market with XT's and AT's or was it because people really just didn't like Macs, Tandys and Commodores (sp?) at the time?


RE: Good!
By ceefka on 7/10/2008 6:51:14 AM , Rating: 2
Not sure, but I guess the main difference between Apple now and IBM back then was that the OS for their PC's wasn't built by IBM.


RE: Good!
By walk2k on 7/8/2008 4:24:55 PM , Rating: 2
Uh, you can't compare it that way because that's a chart of OSes... not hardware!

It's actually over 8% if you include both Macintel and MacOS (PPC I guess?).

That's still less than HALF of Vista. I mean if people really hate Vista, then they hate Mac twice as much...


RE: Good!
By retrospooty on 7/8/2008 10:25:35 PM , Rating: 2
Can, will, did the math, and dont understand what you mean here???


RE: Good!
By michael2k on 7/9/2008 3:34:47 PM , Rating: 2
Of course you can. Apple's Macs are manufactured by Quanta and Foxconn, just like HP's and Dell's PCs.

If you are comparing to PCs, in general, Apple has something like 7 or 8 percent in the US. It can install and run Windows, it just doesn't come bundled with them.


RE: Good!
By porkpie on 7/8/2008 4:32:37 PM , Rating: 1
7% is small when you consider that's the ENTIRE Mac OS market. All the other players are just pieces of the massive Windows machine.


RE: Good!
By Oregonian2 on 7/8/2008 4:49:49 PM , Rating: 2
If the rest of the market is the "massive Windows machine", does that mean the Apple market really is the "Mac OS X machine" (to keep descriptions in the same terms)?

Curiously, I hear the term "Win-tel" much less often of late. :-)


RE: Good!
By overzealot on 7/9/2008 5:16:49 AM , Rating: 2
Mac-tel does have a certain ring to it.
It's not a win-ner though.


RE: Good!
By BansheeX on 7/8/2008 3:16:06 PM , Rating: 1
I don't really think Mac has much of an effect on prices in the traditional OEM PC sector. Mac isn't exactly trying to undercut Gateway or Dell or HP, so I fail to see how they'd be responsible for price declines on those systems. All Mac does is buy up cheap PC hardware, put it in a novel form factor, install their OS, and market the bejesus out of it.


RE: Good!
By retrospooty on 7/8/2008 3:47:19 PM , Rating: 2
It would if more people were switching... If it somehow got a larger marketshare and more momentum going, the PC side would have to take measures... Those measures would be lower prices and faster innovation - Some companies will do lower prices, and others will speed up development.


RE: Good!
By BansheeX on 7/8/2008 7:19:02 PM , Rating: 3
"If it somehow got a larger marketshare" ???

You can't prove a point by presupposing a result without conditions. That's magical. In order to win over more buyers, Apple would have to increase their performance-per-dollar themselves. If they managed to get marketshare without doing that, it will only spur OEMs to improve on style, compactness, and clever marketing.

Let's say I put a Core 2 Duo in a gold-plated box and somehow convinced 70% of the market to buy it for a triple premium. I will have acquired 70% of what once was going to companies competing for performance-per-dollar. Explain how it spurs them to innovate and lower costs when they now

a. have no profits to reinvest in such since I just won it from them (bankrupt)
b. won it from them by marketing and aesthetic reasons (wouldn't they now follow demand by copying my example if they could?)


RE: Good!
By retrospooty on 7/9/2008 9:02:14 AM , Rating: 2
"You can't prove a point by presupposing a result without conditions."

That was the whole post... If Apple continues its upward climb and gains more marketshare, It will drive the PC side to react. You cant prove it wont happen any more than I can say it will...

If Apple makes more gains, do you think MS wont do anything? Release faster, or lower thier exorbitant Vista price? do you think hardware makers wont do the same?


RE: Good!
By BansheeX on 7/10/2008 6:51:28 PM , Rating: 2
There is only so much marketshare you can steal away from Microsoft with a game-barren OS and a system that costs three times as much as a similarly performing Dell. You let me know when Apple magically overcomes these obstacles with consumers with clever marketing and climbs to 50%.


RE: Good!
By Parhel on 7/8/2008 3:29:35 PM , Rating: 5
Personally, I think the browser based figures are slanted heavily towards home computers rather than work computers. People tend to spend more time surfing the web at home versus work, and if Apple had 7% of the whole PC market, they would be making much more money than they are.


RE: Good!
By retrospooty on 7/8/2008 3:43:49 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed... its probably a good amount lower than 7%.


RE: Good!
By BladeVenom on 7/8/2008 4:38:21 PM , Rating: 2
That may be close to their American market share, but their world market share is probably about half of that.


Clever or deceptive?
By cochy on 7/8/2008 2:57:33 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Nonetheless, Microsoft suffers from an image problem in which many people mistakenly believe it to be less secure, thanks in part to clever marketing campaigns from Apple.


One person might call this clever but I might lean more towards deceptive. The Applce commercials seem to me to be overly negative towards Vista. So much so that I would say Apple is lying to the consumer when they claim that Vista doesn't work. Since deceiving the consumer is illegal maybe someone should have a closer look at this seeing as it is having a measurable impact on the market place.




RE: Clever or deceptive?
By FITCamaro on 7/8/08, Rating: -1
RE: Clever or deceptive?
By michael2k on 7/8/2008 3:37:24 PM , Rating: 1
Sorry, with my Safe Sleep option, my Mac comes up in under a second. Booting from scratch takes longer, of course.

Anyway, to the point of this conversation, what is an outright lie? That Vista's UAC is annoying? That people are downgrading to XP? Both of those are true.

Or is this about the Japanese printer girl? The PC who locked up?


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By mikefarinha on 7/8/2008 3:43:17 PM , Rating: 5
How about Vistas hybrid-sleep option. It puts the computer to sleep and at the same times saves the current state to the HDD. Thus if you have a power outage while the computer is in sleep mode the state of the computer can still be resumed.

If no power outage occurred then Vista just jumps back into action when waking up.

Quite a handy feature!


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By retrospooty on 7/8/2008 4:02:26 PM , Rating: 4
"what is an outright lie?"

Where to start... The concept that Vista "doesnt work" , the lie that Vista is less secure , the omission that UAC is a setting that can be disabled-

Much like the old days when Apple lied and said Power PC processors were SOOOOOO much faster than Intel, with falsified benchmarks to make it look real.

Yes, outright lies cleverly diguised as cute jabs has always been a big part Apples marketing campaign.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By TomZ on 7/8/2008 4:03:28 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Sorry, with my Safe Sleep option, my Mac comes up in under a second.

Wow, I've been able to have my laptop wake nearly instantly from sleep mode since Windows XP 7+ years ago.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By michael2k on 7/8/08, Rating: -1
RE: Clever or deceptive?
By FITCamaro on 7/8/2008 4:24:54 PM , Rating: 5
Ok. Windows 2000 also had sleep/standby. As did Windows 98. Standby/Hibernate is nothing new. You touted it as some feature that Macs had and Windows didn't.

As far as issues with it, generally those are due to bad APM drivers, faulty memory, and other drivers. My first job out of college was as a tester working for a company that made fingerprint scanners. One of our biggest things we tested and sometimes had problems with was standby/hibernate. Either the sensor took to long to reinitialize or didn't at all. And a code error in the driver could crash Windows as well as it came out of standby/hibernate.

There are many more considerations with an OS than just the software of the OS itself. Especially with an open platform like Windows(something Mac claims to be....). Apple has the advantage that everything is done in-house. Microsoft does not.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By FITCamaro on 7/8/2008 4:17:25 PM , Rating: 5
Exactly. Vista also wakes up instantly from Sleep/Standby. I love it how Mac people try to compare two different things entirely as the same thing. I talk about Vista's boot time, as in from a cold start, and he talks about how fast his Mac wakes up from Sleep.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By michael2k on 7/9/2008 2:36:20 PM , Rating: 2
My apologies for changing the subject. I was trying to point out that on modern systems (Vista supports it too), you don't need to reboot.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By chick0n on 7/8/2008 4:15:26 PM , Rating: 3
ROFL !

Apple ALWAYS lie to their customers

They lied about PowerPC being faster than Intel's CPU.
They lied about their systems are more productive than PC.
*the list goes on ...*

Oh wait,

They're still lying about their OS being more secure than Vista.
They're Still lying about their systems are more stable.
*the list goes on ...*

I have no respect in Apple cuz they keep talking crap about some other company's OS when they cant even code their own kernel.

Kiss my ass Apple. Code your own OS before you talk.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By michael2k on 7/8/08, Rating: 0
RE: Clever or deceptive?
By FITCamaro on 7/8/2008 5:25:18 PM , Rating: 4
Yes well, when you have the vast majority of the market share, people are more likely to write viruses to exploit your software. And OSX has far more than 2 or 3 viruses written for it.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By michael2k on 7/9/2008 2:33:13 PM , Rating: 3
By far more, do you mean 5? The only ones I could find were:
Leap-A in 2006
QuickTime security issue in MySpace in 2007
RSPlug in 2008
AppleScript.THT Trojan in 2008
Trojan.PokerStealer in 2008

I mean, real live exploits that would hurt, damage, or compromise people.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By Oregonian2 on 7/8/2008 4:59:14 PM , Rating: 2
Well.... the first Apple's had Motorola (now Freescale) 68K processors. 68K processors were touted as being superior to Intel CPU's because the 68K had memory-mapped I/O while Intel parts had slug slow "I/O space" for I/O. Stated as such that's true, but if one clipped off the I/O pins of an Intel part (they had pins back then) the Intel CPU's had memory mapped I/O as well. Anything with RAM memory space had memory mapped I/O capability. Intel's CPU had the Motorola feature and more, but it was twisted to make the Intel part inferior. And that was a looooooong time ago (I started my first processor design using the 8008 :-).

Nothing new....


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By psychobriggsy on 7/9/2008 5:06:39 PM , Rating: 3
Comparing the 8086 to the 68000 and saying the 8086 is superior really isn't a wise move. The 68000 was by far the superior CPU, architecturally (32-bit internally, by modern terms it would be called a 32-bit CPU), with plenty of registers and addressing modes on top.

Macs using the 68000 were still totally rubbish of course. The Amiga was where it was at.

Problem with the 68k series was that Intel improved their CPUs regularly, whilst Motorola kept the 68000, and just introduced new CPUs at higher and higher prices, rather than trying to force upgrades on computers utilising them.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By Clauzii on 7/8/2008 6:56:03 PM , Rating: 2
Relax maaan :)

I don't know of a single company that doesn't favour their own products, so let it go.

Vista lie #1: It will contain feature this and feture that. Sorry, a lot got stripped off in the final round, EVEN if it was years late.

Vista lie #2: Easy system change. No. Hardware issues espeicially in the corporate world.

There are tricks on both sides. But Your last sentence pi.... me off, and that takes a lot. I have a spoon. It works. I don't need to reinvent spoon. And of course they do program their pwn things also. To think otherwise is utter stupid. No offence btw.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By Reclaimer77 on 7/9/2008 7:03:37 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Sorry, with my Safe Sleep option, my Mac comes up in under a second. Booting from scratch takes longer, of course.


You can always spot when someone has been drinking the Jobs Koolaid when they boast about a feature thats been standard in PC's for over 7 years.

I believe this " Safe Sleep " is something called HIBERNATE !? Yeah, its been around.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By nikon133 on 7/8/2008 7:15:14 PM , Rating: 2
I have never understood why doesn't Microsoft fire back.

I'm pretty sure you can still find digital cameras and other equipment that comes with Windows support only - or at least has more software bundled for Windows.

Plus, PCs are so dominant in the games market (I'm talking about computing platforms, not consoles). And lot of Mac users are home users. Commercials with people playing latest games on PC and solitaire-kind-of-stuff on Macs could be very handy in breaking down all that false supremacy hype. Even if people are not into games, it would be a great showcase on platform possibilities.

Kids go for cool, but where is coolness in, say, commercial where, after school, kid says to his friend "We'll be playing Race Driver: GRID over the net this afternoon, why don't you join us?" and the other one says "I can't play with you - I have Mac". Next scene shows bunch of kids having loads of fun with their steering wheels, and solitary kid staring at his turned off Mac.

And every commercial could end with message like "Have it all in one box. Productivity. Entertainment. Multimedia. Windows".

It is not like Microsoft can't invest couple of $$$ for decent PR campaign...


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By jeff834 on 7/8/2008 9:48:00 PM , Rating: 2
Very easy answer to this. When you have 90% of the market in the US and probably even more worldwide, why waste money fighting back? Let's say $10 million dollars of a given product is sold per year, I sell $9 million worth, you sell $500k worth and the other $500k is from others. You start a campaign that says your version of said product is better than mine and it earns you 2% more market share from me. Should I then spend money to get that $200k back, when I'm still making $8.8 million? Seems like a silly idea to me. The big picture here is that while Apple is stealing a small chunk for themselves MS has absolutely nothing to be afraid of.

That's only one reason. Reason #2 is Apple makes Macs and they make iPods/iPhones. MS makes Windows, Office, other software, Xbox, Xbox games, Zunes (still? not sure on that lol), networking hardware, etc. While I don't really know the numbers, I'm guessing Windows is probably the biggest moneymaker, but even with Apple gaining a bit at Window's expense I would hesitate to call them MS's biggest competitor.

As for the Apple vs PC commercials, while I certainly don't agree with them and could argue good points completely opposite of theirs, I don't think they could be called lies. Are PCs less secure? There certainly are more exploits for PCs but you could argue no one really cares enough about Mac OS to find exploits. Are PCs less stable? Just the operating system I would say no, with applications from a dozen different sources perhaps, but you have to sacrifice a bit of stability if you actually want to run any 3rd party software which I think most people do.

I've had Vista for a while now, it came on my new laptop and I upgraded to 64bit Vista on my desktop. I can honestly say on my laptop I have absolutely no problems with anything. On my desktop I have had occasional hiccups, but that is much more from running 32bit applications on a 64bit OS than anything else. I disabled UAC on my desktop, not on my laptop and it asks for things once in a while but I certainly wouldnt call it annoying. The biggest problem with Vista is that I wouldnt call it an upgrade. It seems more like just a step to the side than forward or backward, which makes it not really worth the money.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By jeff834 on 7/8/2008 9:54:59 PM , Rating: 2
Just an extra note I left out of my first post. Why should MS advertise Vista when HP, Dell, and other companies advertise themselves and 99% of their computers come loaded with Vista? Most of the windows sales MS makes are OEM to the computer manufacturers. Very few people actually go to the store and buy a retail copy of Vista.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By michael2k on 7/9/2008 2:11:20 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is that Microsoft is #1; by "firing back", if they aren't careful, they give free advertising to #2, Apple.

The other problem with "Windows only" software and hardware is if they "tout" that as a feature, Apple can easily aim "anticompetitive" guns at them. In other words, "Microsoft is using it's monopoly status to shut out a direct competitor, #2 Apple, by inducing hardware companies to favor Windows over Mac OS X". Instead when you have Windows only software or hardware, the hardware is seen as 'broken' because it doesn't follow industry standards (such as USB mass storage or 802.11abgn, etc) or the software is seen as 'out of date' (such as the old Quark Express, Adobe Photoshop CS, etc).

Finally you underestimate how powerful it is for parents (with kids) that Macs do not play games. Your ad would be instant bonus points for the Mac: Get a Mac, let your kid search Wiki for information, get email, even do their homework, and they can't play games.

Parents the world over would be thrilled. Then they would get a PC for themselves to play Starcraft2.

Or... they would get Parallels and install XP/Vista on their Mac and lock it so the kids couldn't log in and play. The Mac ad would say:
"Get it all. Mac OS X. Unix programs. Windows programs. Mac programs. Games. Only on one box"


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By Domicinator on 7/8/2008 9:18:53 PM , Rating: 4
Biggest seller on Vista for me:

The general state of OS performance a year and a half after I first installed it on my gaming PC. As someone who installs and uninstalls a lot of software, namely games, I usually felt the need to reformat and reinstall XP about once a year. Not so with Vista. The Vista installation on my gaming tower is still peppy and responsive, and subsequent patches after launch have only made it better and better. Same goes for my laptop, which I got about a year ago.

I have still not gotten one virus or other piece of malware other than your standard variety spyware that can be easily removed. I never had any driver, software compatibility, or game performance issues after the first two months of launch. My laptop is a crappy $700 Gateway that I got at Best Buy, and it runs Vista just fine, also with no compatibility issues. The only complaint I have on the laptop is that it boots up a little slower than my quad core machine.

And to put it simply, I'm VERY impressed with the things Vista has made it possible for me to do with my home network; things I was never able to figure out how to do on XP. I'm not a networking guru, so I need that aspect of an OS to be very user friendly.

And despite what the Apple commercials may say, I find it very easy to burn CDs and DVDs, organize my photos, and make my network and media available in every room in my house on several different machines. (One of them is my wife's MacBook from her job!!!)

Vista is an OS worthy of GAINING market share for MS, but the first few months it was out gave it a bad name, and Apple's deceptive marketing made it even worse. To me, Vista is an OS that unfairly got a bad rap. MS was in a "damned if you do damned if you don't" situation when they released it.


RE: Clever or deceptive?
By cubby1223 on 7/9/2008 1:07:15 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
One person might call this clever but I might lean more towards deceptive. The Applce commercials seem to me to be overly negative towards Vista. So much so that I would say Apple is lying to the consumer when they claim that Vista doesn't work. Since deceiving the consumer is illegal maybe someone should have a closer look at this seeing as it is having a measurable impact on the market place.


Meh. Apple's been bashing PCs in ads for 20 years, never hurt sales before. I don't see much deception anyways. People do not like Vista. That is a fact. So many times I hear from people they hate their new computer with Vista, and everyone they've talked to hates their new computer with Vista also. This isn't me coaxing the response, it's other people volunteering their feelings to me when I'm there to fix something either hardware or software or miscellaneous.

I know I'll get enough responses from people here how much they love Vista. Get over yourself, you are one person, not representative of others.


Perception
By mikefarinha on 7/8/2008 3:25:30 PM , Rating: 3
As far as the public reception of Vista goes, the keyword in the article is perception.

With Windows XP Microsoft spent upwards of $200 million on advertising back in Oct 2001. Back then I would see WinXP commercials almost daily, to date I have yet to see a Windows Vista commercial... do any exist?

The whole problem with Vista adoption rate isn't the naysayers, it's the fact that Microsoft is responding to the naysayers with silence.




RE: Perception
By Spivonious on 7/8/2008 3:34:23 PM , Rating: 2
Totally agree. Microsoft really screwed up by not marketing Vista, and screwed up even more by not having a response to Mac vs. PC.

The only reason Apple has any sort of success in the electronics market these days (including MP3 players) is because of their fantastic marketing. Remember those old iPod commercials with the shadow dancing wearing white earbuds? If those hadn't come out, I doubt the iPod would still be around, as there are and have been superior MP3 players.


RE: Perception
By sprockkets on 7/8/2008 5:07:14 PM , Rating: 2
They still have those stupid commercials, as if anyone by now doesn't know what an ipod is.

Yep, Microsoft, just did like one short silly commercial about the flip 3d, and that's it. I guess they expected it to just sell itself.

I like OSX, but as usual, Apple shoots itself in the foot with stupid antics like, no right click, no tap click on the touch pad, stupid multiple shadows, and other stuff.

Hey Apple, I like your Mac Mini, but how about spending an extra $5 more on the optical drive and join the rest of the world by offering a DVD burner STANDARD? Calling it a SuperDrive when Blu Ray is around is retarded.


RE: Perception
By trespasser on 7/8/2008 7:14:20 PM , Rating: 1
For what must be the thousandth time on this forum: Macs have had right-click and tap click for ages. If yours doesn't, you can enable it in System Preferences. You can even generate right-clicks and scrolling using multiple fingers on the touchpad. (Yes, I know some Windows trackpads support similar features.)

As for the stupid commercials, it's called "mindshare." Why don't you ask your parents if they know what an iRiver is?

You are, however, completely correct about the DVD burner.


RE: Perception
By TomZ on 7/8/2008 3:44:40 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with you - Microsoft should not let Apple's ads, in particular, go unanswered.

But I have seen a number of Vista ads on TV, but they are pretty much unremarkable. I think to get some more attention, they need to stir up some controversy like Apple does.


RE: Perception
By Myg on 7/8/2008 4:08:47 PM , Rating: 2
That would be an error on Microsoft's part.

Apple is looking for a decisive battle to create a new and greater image for themselves.

If they get in a battle of ads with Microsoft and win (something which market share and money isn't decisive on) they could easily win back a lot of territory. Heck, even if they didn't win, they would win sympathy for being the under-dogs and gain from it anyways.

It would be a lose-lose for MS, and not worth the risk. If they want to keep their position, they are best keeping their image as cold, tight and silent as it is now.


RE: Perception
By walk2k on 7/8/2008 5:26:40 PM , Rating: 3
Judging by the MS commercials I have seen, I have to say they would be better off NOT doing any commercials. They are terrible, and completely outclassed by the Apple hype machine.


RE: Perception
By MScrip on 7/8/2008 6:10:20 PM , Rating: 3
Microsoft doesn't really need commercials for Vista.

250 million computers were sold in 2007. 230 million of them had a Microsoft OS on them. Microsoft PCs sell themselves. When people say "I need a new computer" they mean they are getting a computer with Windows. Now they will get Vista.

If you've been using Windows for the last 15 years and are comfortable with it, your next computer will have Windows on it. See all those people walking out of Best Buy and Circuit City with new computers? Windows.

Microsoft could never do another Windows commercial ever again... and HP, Dell, Acer and Lenovo will still sell millions of computers each month... with Windows.


RE: Perception
By nikon133 on 7/8/2008 11:37:22 PM , Rating: 2
I know they don't need to advertise Vista... but isn't that like saying you don't have to kill mosquito for biting you? It's just a small peck and it will not hurt you (any more) if you let the poor thing live after that, and hey, you've maybe saved it's life by feeding it... right?

OK, so it is stupid analogy, but if someone tries to sell more by making fun out of you, you'll kick back not because that someone is increasing it's profit, but because it is making fun out of you. Microsoft is trying something with all that "Games for Windows" thing, and a bit more of an image boost would not hurt. Plus, it would make many Microsoft customers (at least those annoyed with PC-guy-Mac-guy-adds) happy.


RE: Perception
By michael2k on 7/9/2008 1:56:19 PM , Rating: 2
If Microsoft ignores Apple, Apple will become too strong to ignore. You don't become #1 by ignoring #2.

I mean, look at the marketshare numbers again. Apple is #2, even if it is stuck at 8% marketshare.


RE: Perception
By bernardl on 7/9/2008 10:19:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you've been using Windows for the last 15 years and are comfortable with it, your next computer will have Windows on it. See all those people walking out of Best Buy and Circuit City with new computers? Windows.


Apple is not aiming for the mass market and is not interested in becoming mainstream.

I think that it is clear by now that being the #1 is not a sensible target for many companies and Apple is one of them. There simply is no relationship between market share and the value your customers can derive from your products.

As an engineer using Win machines at work I used to have a PC at home too for heavy imaging applications. I have been on Mac OSX for a bit more than a year and find the user experience to be miles ahead.

So Mac is not just about cool looking machines, I am simply more productive on Mac than I ever was on Win.

Not owning stock from either company I don't see why I should deprive myself from using the product delivering the best value.

Freedom in our lives is already shrinked to ridiculously low levels, why impose on ourselves allegences to brands on top of the rest???

Cheers,
Bernard


RE: Perception
By mikefarinha on 7/9/2008 10:35:42 AM , Rating: 1
Well it looks like Microsoft is finally going to launch a Vista ad campaign. Today they announced that they are going to be spending upwards of $300 million. Here is a spinet from the article... I guess my original comment was quite timely!

quote:
“We know our story is very different from what our competitors want us to think,” Brad Brooks, Corporate Vice President of Windows Consumer Product, told attendees of Microsoft’s Worldwide Partner Conference in Houston during a keynote address on July 8. “Today we are drawing a line and are going to start telling the real story” about Vista.

While Brooks didn’t call out Apple by name (he instead referred to a “pretty noisy competitor out there”), he made it clear that Microsoft is finally going to hit back via ad campaigns, including the $300-million-plus one it has under development with Crispin Porter + Bogusky. (Sadly, Microsoft didn’t show off during the keynote any of the new ad collateral that Crispin Porter is creating.)

http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1475


Someone at Microsoft should have learned
By Chosonman on 7/8/2008 2:56:32 PM , Rating: 1
You would think the multi-national lawsuits and dwindling reputation should have taught the guys at Redmond a thing or two about creating a light weight OS. And maybe they did learn their lesson finally from what's being said about Windows 7 being more streamlined.




RE: Someone at Microsoft should have learned
By TomZ on 7/8/2008 3:51:18 PM , Rating: 2
You are expressing pure fantasy. Show me any customers, either for home or office, who are looking for a new version of an OS with fewer features than the previous.

In fact, the gripe that many people have with Vista is that it doesn't have enough new features to justify upgrading from XP.

So the reality is quite different than you perceive.

Streamlined Windows 7, oh please!


RE: Someone at Microsoft should have learned
By Inkjammer on 7/8/2008 3:54:42 PM , Rating: 3
Streamlining can have many forms. I wouldn't care if Microsoft wanted to include every software package they could comprehend into Windows 7... so long as we're given the option to prevent their installation upon install.

The average consumer could get their toys and Wingeeks like myself could custom-config their OS to their desire.


By retrospooty on 7/8/2008 4:46:57 PM , Rating: 3
"I wouldn't care if Microsoft wanted to include every software package they could comprehend into Windows 7... so long as we're given the option to prevent their installation upon install."

Exactly - give me hte option and be done with it!!!


By Icelight on 7/9/2008 12:40:09 PM , Rating: 2
"Wingeeks" like yourself should be well-aware of applications like nLite. Yes, it's not direct from Microsoft, but it's still available.


By mondo1234 on 7/8/2008 4:48:30 PM , Rating: 2
Correct, they are not looking for fewer features, they want more features but mainly an OS thats easy. I dont know anyone in business (not computer related) that has time or desire to be a nerd.

The average business Joe doesn't care about the OS, only what runs on the OS and that it makes him money.

People at home are even worse, they just want to surf the web. The last 10 people I know that bought computers blow off the Office Suite.

Most people don't want State of the Art, they only want one "good enough". OS's are becoming less important.

OS's are like shovels and a farmer needs a good shovel! Everyone else wants one that gets the job done and doesn't give them a splinter.

Vista is definitely the the State of the Art in Shovel Technology.
Its still just a tool - Kind of like Balmer ;)


RE: Someone at Microsoft should have learned
By Inkjammer on 7/8/2008 3:52:02 PM , Rating: 2
That's my major complaint about Vista. It feels bloaty. I like most everything about it, but it feels like a bit of a resource hog. The steeper requirements certainly don't help that bitter, tingling sensation.

I can't uninstall half the embedded crap that comes with a full Vista installation, and that annoys me. I will not now, nor ever, use Windows Movie Maker.


RE: Someone at Microsoft should have learned
By FITCamaro on 7/8/2008 4:28:04 PM , Rating: 2
It's not the best program, but in a pinch it works. And for the average consumer its enough. So they include it.

I love it how everyone praises Apple for having a complete solution on their computers, but when Microsoft tries to do the same thing they're a) ridiculed and b) sued for trying to be anti-competitive.


By michael2k on 7/9/2008 1:48:46 PM , Rating: 2
If Microsoft included an awesome program, it wouldn't be ridiculed.

If Microsoft didn't engage in anticompetitive practices, they wouldn't be sued for it.

Easy, no?


Hmmm
By clarkey01 on 7/8/2008 5:30:40 PM , Rating: 2
Sadly many people think that owning an Apple is a sign of intellectual superiority. I don't think that is the case at all. I think that people who own Apples are saying, whether they want to or not, that owning an Apple says that what the computer does is not nearly as important as the social statement being made. e.g. "I am smarter that a PC owner because I own an Apple." Or "I am more creative than a PC owner because I own an Apple." Or the worse yet. "I am not a lackey of the corporate giants because I own an Apple." The ugly truth is that Apples are a closed standard and because of that they will never be anything more than a novelty computer




RE: Hmmm
By michael2k on 7/8/2008 7:51:44 PM , Rating: 2
You are strangely ignorant of reality. In what way is Apple/Mac a closed standard?

Myself, I own a Mac because I don't have time to own a PC. I've owned PCs for 20 years (from the age of 14 until the age of 24) and it used to be fun to build, configure, install, set up, etc, and now that I'm married with kids it's much easier and simpler to get a system pre-configured for me.

That means HP/Dell would qualify too, so why a Mac over a PC?

The bundled software is better, even over commercial stuff like Adobe Premiere, though lately Adobe has caught up.

So I guess one anecdote does not negate another :)


RE: Hmmm
By EnderJ on 7/9/2008 12:47:27 AM , Rating: 2
His ignorance of reality is as true as your mastery of basic arithmetic.

I don't know how many arguments I've had with my own father about crApple's products. All he cares about is the image they carry, not whether or not they're actually superior.

No he'd rather mess with iPods/iPhones, or rather call me up and ask me to come over and fix it instead of using something else that allows simple drag and drop capabilities via windows explorer without the need for proprietary software like iTunes always sticking it's fingers into everything.

"It's not an iPod/iPhone though.. Everyone else knows what they are" <-- I'm sick of hearing that.


RE: Hmmm
By michael2k on 7/9/2008 1:45:58 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry for the typo. The '2' is next to the '1'. In any case, your father has needs you can't seem to understand.

I have 6GB of music. I do not want to "drag and drop" files individually onto my 4GB iPhone. I have 21GB of movies; I did not need to drag and drop files selectively onto my 30GB iPod.

In which case, plugging in an iPod/iPhone into iTunes is simpler/easier. Just select the playlist, or let the program auto-populate. Why can't you see that is a solution for some people? Do you lack empathy, reason, or compassion?


RE: Hmmm
By EnderJ on 7/10/2008 10:15:53 PM , Rating: 2
Typo aside.

I think you missed where I explained my father's needs at the end of my comment. He doesn't care about the "auto-sync" features of iTunes. The only reason he buys iPod's or iPhones for him, his wife, or my 9yr old sisteryes my 9yr old sister has an iPhone) is purely the image factor. You're talking about a man who cares more about "image" then anything else. He's swayed by "pop culture".

He bought his wife a Blackberry Pearl when they first came out because it was "new and popular". He replaced it again with an "grey market" iPhone as soon as he could get his hands on it, despite her instance that she didn't want either. His entire reasoning behind it was to gain attention from their peers.


RE: Hmmm
By michael2k on 7/11/2008 2:20:02 PM , Rating: 2
You were the one arguing that drag and drop was superior to iTunes auto-synching, you never said he didn't use it.

So my post was a reply arguing how auto-synching was superior.


RE: Hmmm
By jonmcc33 on 7/9/2008 7:49:44 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
I've owned PCs for 20 years (from the age of 14 until the age of 24) and it used to be fun...


Um, 24 minus 14 equals 10. Did I miss something? Did Apple inflate your math a little bit?


RE: Hmmm
By michael2k on 7/9/2008 1:40:47 PM , Rating: 2
No, the '2' is right next to the '1'.


Those knees must be hurting, Jason Mick
By jonmcc33 on 7/8/2008 5:56:21 PM , Rating: 3
I knew the moment I saw the subject line that it would be another Jason Mick article. If it's anything negative on Microsoft or Vista and positive on Mac/Apple OS X then it's going to be from Jason Mick.

I hope you wash your mouth out afterwards, Jason Mick. Steve Jobs must be one happy man because of you.




RE: Those knees must be hurting, Jason Mick
By Pirks on 7/8/2008 8:28:45 PM , Rating: 2
Why would Jason want to wash his mouth after saying (quote from the article above) "most security experts consider Apple to be the inferior of the two OS's in terms of security"?


RE: Those knees must be hurting, Jason Mick
By jonmcc33 on 7/8/2008 9:11:49 PM , Rating: 3
Because he used an article in reference to Apple Safari in regards to that? That's talking about the web browser and not the OS.

He does, however, talk about 39 percent Apple sales gains, uses the $500 price cut of Apple's most expensive $3100 laptop as some sort of twisted example of good, talks about his imaginative consumer mistrust of Microsoft, says that OS X boots 50% faster than Vista, boasts about some clever Apple marketing campaign...blah, blah, blah.

At what point has he removed the Apple appendage from the back of his throat?

I swear, DT needs to have a new contributor that points out all of the flaws in OS X to cause it to be at version 10.5.3 already?

Here, I will help: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1141


RE: Those knees must be hurting, Jason Mick
By Pirks on 7/8/2008 9:55:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So where is the threat?
Since when did the default/embedded web browser stop being considered a part of the OS itself? Don't you understand that if IE has a security flaw it's a problem of Windows as well, because IE is a _default_ Windows browser? That was a lame excuse.
quote:
At what point has he removed the Apple appendage from the back of his throat?
I don't understand why you are so twitchy about Apple's gains. You should be cheering them for briniging long missing competition to the market. Instead, you start personal attacks against anyone who's about to say ANYTHING positive about Apple (and there's a lot positive to say about them no matter how you slice it). What's the matter with you? Try to be more objective, like me. I experienced a lot of trouble with Vista pre-SP1 and still consider their UI pretty ugly, Mac's F11 and Vista's Win-D is just one of many examples. But I still won't attack any one who says good things about MS, because there are still good things in Windows no matter how you slice it.


RE: Those knees must be hurting, Jason Mick
By Pirks on 7/8/2008 10:01:34 PM , Rating: 2
Please replace "So where is the threat?" with "he used an article in reference to Apple Safari in regards to that" in my previous message. It was a copy/paste mistake on my side, sorry.


By jonmcc33 on 7/8/2008 10:56:41 PM , Rating: 2
It wouldn't be anything if it was just positive comments about Apple. The problem is that he's a fanatic. It's always everything negative about Microsoft and Vista and only positives about Apple.

That part you don't seem to understand and that is my point. He's quite obsessive with it as well. Maybe he should seek some therapy?


Apple offers a complete solution, unlike Windows
By sapiens74 on 7/8/2008 4:38:40 PM , Rating: 2
I don't own a Mac and I love Vista, due to the fact I can control the hardware and software on it, but most users want to turn on the computer and it simply works. Vista doesn't do that out of the box. Other than ultimate edition, most users needs to install third party programs for DVD playback and Anti virus, and more robust programs for movie making and picture managing software.

Apple provide a complete setup out of the box. I'm surprised their marketplace is not larger, and this is probably due to pricing.

To be fair my Sony Vaio SZ series (love this laptop) was $2500 with just Vista Home Premium. A MAcbook pro costs less and has a more robust application set, and it can run OSX and Vista or XP out of the box.




By Lerianis on 7/8/2008 4:57:15 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft cannot do what you want them to do, because as soon as they did that, people would be screaming "UNCOMPETITIVE PRACTICES!"

Frankly, at one time.... Microsoft was looking into putting Windows LiveCare One on machines by default when they are shipped.... when they were threatened by Britain to NOT do that, that is when they said "I give up!" and didn't do it.

Also, for Vista.... you don't need a third party program for DVD playback. Windows Media Player does that out of the box in all editions, as does Windows Media Center in Home Premium and up.
You do need to install third party antivirus, but frankly.... I would do that on a Mac as well, just to be safe, in all honesty.

More robust programs for movie making a picture managing? That I have to agree with you on, yet how many people do you know who ACTUALLY need those programs? I use ACDSee10 myself, but I don't have a movie making software installed because I don't make movies at all, and I'm a 'geek', as they call us.


By sapiens74 on 7/8/2008 6:44:23 PM , Rating: 2
Funny you should mention OneCare, I use that on all my home computers.

Have you used the DVD playback in Vista? Horrible. I use Cyberlink for that.

I'm just saying that when you buy an Apple without anything else you simply turn it on and it has everything you need from the get go. I can see a lot of people like my mother wanting the hassle free setup. I spend a lot of hours setting up Vista like a want it. If I had three Macs I could simply setup the first and clone the other two with program they use when you install the OS, copies everything including Apps


By TomZ on 7/8/2008 8:43:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Have you used the DVD playback in Vista? Horrible.

Funny, it works fine for me. I've never had a problem with it. I personally like that I don't have to download and/or purchase a separate app, install it, maintain it, etc.


By jonmcc33 on 7/9/2008 7:47:02 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
...when you buy an Apple without anything else you simply turn it on and it has everything you need from the get go.


It won't play any of my Windows games from the get go. That's everything I need.


By retrospooty on 7/9/2008 9:09:29 AM , Rating: 2
"I'm just saying that when you buy an Apple without anything else you simply turn it on and it has everything you need from the get go. "

So do many PC from major manufacturures, they almost all come with Antvirus, backup software, DVD players etc... You are comparing a self loaded Vista, vs a store bought Mac.

The diff. is, with the PC side you have a choice. With Apple you HAVE to pay more and HAVE to buy OEM.


Yeah Right
By tubalcain on 7/8/2008 7:07:41 PM , Rating: 2
"While Vista has struggled greatly in the business sector, consumer adoption has been kinder to it."

HP/Compaq, Dell, Gateway, Sony, and all other OEMS
sell Vista preinstalled with very little exceptions. People didn't rush out to buy Vista and thats a fact. The kinder consumer adoption analysis is extremely flawed on the face of it. MS needs to make their next OS 64 bit only, hire some OSX designers, ditch the goofy DRM schemes and just make it plain old better.




RE: Yeah Right
By Clauzii on 7/8/2008 7:21:33 PM , Rating: 2
Amen :)


RE: Yeah Right
By Domicinator on 7/8/2008 7:37:27 PM , Rating: 1
You're wrong. Making the next OS "64 bit only" would only cause more bitching. The bitching would be unfounded, but it would still happen. I got sick of all the unfounded Vista whining (unfounded mostly because the whiners hadn't even tried Vista or had only tried it right at launch) about a year ago. And I'm already sick of the bitching about it being "64 bit only" and it hasn't even happened yet. I can just see it now. "Waa waa waa, Microsoft is trying to make me buy a new 64 bit computer. I hate Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates and both of their mothers!!!" And of course it would spawn a zillion new Jason Mick articles stating the same thing.


RE: Yeah Right
By tubalcain on 7/8/2008 11:08:12 PM , Rating: 1
I wouldn't say that I'm wrong but I do understand about the whiners and bitching. Thats the problem, too many variants of the same OS and then to muddle it they have 32 bit and 64 bit versions. MS is trying to please too many people and there needs to be a cut off at some point like they did to 95 & 98, instead you have that whole Vista capable fiasco. If they focus on insuring that 64bit works and drivers, apps are good to go then there wouldn't be so many whiners and bitching because most shit would work.


RE: Yeah Right
By Belard on 7/9/2008 8:10:28 AM , Rating: 1
For those who get their panties wet for Vista. Perhaps there is a REASON that people are bitching about Vista. Hey, if it works for you - great, fine. Makes zero difference in my life!

People are rightfully upset about Vista because IT does require more cheap RAM, more CPU power to get the job done... and for what? There isn't a single earth-shattering gotta-have feature on Vista, period. ooooh transparent ugly GUI windows. blah.

I've used vista, I tried to like. I don't. I'm not impressed by it. Its slow, it takes forever to boot, even longer to shut-down, if it does. And THAT is on a NEW PC that came with it pre-installed. Nuke it, reformat, install XP and gee-golly, the computer does everything faster, it actually shuts down. That is what productivity is about. XP wasn't this bad when it was new, since it's just a skin-job of Windows2000.

Vista will never be installed on my computer, nor my clients nor my friends. We're talking college students, those who work in the tech industry, defence, etc. Hey, even Intel is refusing Vista! Because its simply not worth it.

With that rant said... Windows7 should be 64bit only. MS needs to make toss out the stupid DRM, fix the bad code that slows things down, fix the MCP... uh er I mean UAC. Make it look like a modern professional OS. A great example is office2007. Excellent work! Oh yeah, that team IS working on Windows7.

MS has about 12 months to get their 64bit house in order, considering HOW bloody incompatible vista is with XP drivers, they might as well be 64bit. Also, drop all these sub versions. OEM, Retail, Upgrade, basic, Ultimate - 32 then 64bit versions, etc etc.

Apple does it easy. Go into a store, pay $120 for a copy of a new OS. It does both UPGRADE or clean-install. WOW... and if you have 2-5 Macs, the $190 version will cover you.
All that's needed is Standard and Business. (put Ultimate into both, remove Media Center for business)

Why 64bit only?

This weekend, for $500 at some local stores - you could buy a dual-core AMD HP computer with 4GB of RAM and 64bit Vista. 18months ago, a $500 computer had 1GB of RAM to get the same job done. In 12 months, AMD & Intel will have $100 quad core CPU, 4GB of RAM will cost $50. 8GB is a sweet spot for 64bit Vista. And if they fix Windows7, it'll be even better. So if a basic $500PC can come with 64bit OS to avoid lawsuits with 32bit version with 4GB of RAM. Then the PC of the future might as well be 64bit. Those who have problems with VISTA today with both 32/64bit verions will likely have problems with Windows7.

Almost ALL new hardware works with 64bit XP and Vista. Vista is ME-part2. This is the best time for MS to make the standard. Then developers will know what they need to do for 2009.


RE: Yeah Right
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 7/9/2008 10:06:31 AM , Rating: 2
The developers knew what they needed to do for Vista n 2007 and still dropped the ball at every turn. Do you really think they won't do so again? The exceptionally long period of XP (7 years) is the problem. People are so used to XP that many can't remember the pre-XP days. Stagnation has happened and it's going to be a painful process to get people back into the world of change.


RE: Yeah Right
By Belard on 7/10/2008 2:27:17 AM , Rating: 2
Vista isn't an entirely new OS. Its an upgrade, revision. It is generally compatible with previous software and hardware.

If the OS was an actual upgrade to XP, not just DIFFERENT - then we'd have something to talk about. Win98 > XP was different, two very different operating systems -that work very simular. Vista does nothing new, just move things around or made it more difficult and suck the life out of hardware while doing it.

Apple didn't crap all overitself when it moved from 680x0 CPUs to RISC PowerPC, and they didn't do it when they moved to Intel x86 CPUs. The Apple GUI is pretty much the same since 2000 and still generally better looking and polished the way XP and Vista are not. Thats not too big of a deal, but its MS doing a "me-to" thing as usual.

The only thing MS invented in an OS is a Start button.


Its all a lie!!
By tayhimself on 7/8/2008 3:08:32 PM , Rating: 2
Cue the apple haters in 3, 2, 1....




RE: Its all a lie!!
By Fronzbot on 7/8/2008 3:22:22 PM , Rating: 2
Don't you mean cue the Linux users claiming the superior OS?


RE: Its all a lie!!
By Solandri on 7/8/2008 3:58:41 PM , Rating: 5
What do you mean "claiming"?

;)


...
By Myg on 7/8/2008 4:01:28 PM , Rating: 3
Caption for picture on right:

"Hah, check this out you PC lovers! Wait... that's our market share"




RE: ...
By TMoney468 on 7/8/2008 4:18:17 PM , Rating: 2
Regardless of the marketshare that Apple has, I'm extremely happy with my MBP purchase over 1 1/2 years ago. It still feels like one of the fastest computers out there, and I've really grown to like all of the mac-specific programs that are out there.


RE: ...
By DASQ on 7/8/2008 5:56:38 PM , Rating: 2
Wow.

Rabid purchase defense!

Notice how he slipped it all in there under the pretext of a counter to the market share comment.


Typical Arogant Steve
By TheDoc9 on 7/8/2008 5:33:34 PM , Rating: 3
I've used every OS from microsoft from DOS (the original not by MS) on up; 3.1, 95, 98, ect.

It's so funny, Vista is the best one and it gets the most flak! lol. You want to talk about incomplete OS’s - Try going from 98 to 2000, the drivers support for most products weren't even finalized a year after it's released (arguably manufacturers fault and not MS’s)!

quote:
Thus far, user satisfaction ratings for Vista have been weak, and startup times for Vista have been known to be much slower than the Mac OS X," he says. "Thus, more than 50% of recent customers buying Macs in Apple retail stores are first-time buyers


This of course completely sidesteps the issue and it builds support for his platform while allowing him to bash his competition. How does he know his first time buyers are going to macs because of Vista? Is there a survey, how is the survey worded, what are the options on the survey? Apple is flashy and slick and new, it sells. Reminds me of Nintendo because really, how much fun is it to wave a remote control around.

Slower startup times? Where's the state on that?




RE: Typical Arogant Steve
By trespasser on 7/8/2008 7:29:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple is flashy and slick and new, it sells.


Yeah, so new they've been in the industry since 1976.

quote:
Reminds me of Nintendo because really, how much fun is it to wave a remote control around.


I dunno, but it's the first console where people actually brought up in conversations with me how much fun they thought it was. Maybe we could admit the possibility that people like the user experience on their Macs, too.


RE: Typical Arogant Steve
By TheDoc9 on 7/8/2008 10:06:19 PM , Rating: 2
haha, I'll clarify 'new' for you. I mean the box looks innovative and slick, and the OS is flashy like windows vista, except that the mac OS has always been ahead of the curb in the flash category. The PC industry could learn from this and microsoft certainly has.

It's interesting how apple was declaring bankruptcy - or just about to - a few years ago. But then they made the imac, a colored computer and were suddenly popular again.

In any case about the nintendo, I'm sure some people like it. I have one, and it's ok. But there's a big difference between owning one and playing it often vs. playing one once at grandma's family reunion.

I don't know what -people- you're referring to but for me, waving my arms around every time I want to play a game isn't fun, it's really annoying.


Lower Price
By Rodney McNaggerton on 7/8/2008 7:53:00 PM , Rating: 3
Let me tell you about those lower prices -_-.
Really though, those figures are spun. For a very simple example, say that a sock manufacturer sells 700 socks one quarter, then 1000 the next quarter. That represents a growth of 300 socks or 42.8% change in one quarter. However if the sock industry as a whole grows from 100,000 to 110,000 socks in one quarter that represents a growth of 10%. While that 42.8% number may look impressive, it doesn't really show how minuscule that change was compared to industry change. So dailytech, if you're going to compare apple's change to the industry change please start doing it by raw numbers rather than percentages, so that we can get an idea of the real picture.




RE: Lower Price
By Rodney McNaggerton on 7/8/2008 7:56:43 PM , Rating: 2
Also, as a percentage of change, the sock company that sold 1000 items only contributed to 3% of that change or 3% of 10% which is .3% of the industry change. Do you see what I am trying to point out? Those numbers are just PR numbers but don't reflect the real growth going on.


Vista is just a start
By bobcpg on 7/8/2008 3:56:49 PM , Rating: 2
I really think Vista was just put out there to get people, drivers and programs compatible with their latest showing. Windows 7 will build off of this and MS is most likely pour all the marketing into it.




RE: Vista is just a start
By Griswold on 7/9/2008 1:02:24 PM , Rating: 2
Its always been like this in redmond.


Good article by Mick
By Domicinator on 7/8/2008 5:05:25 PM , Rating: 2
I'm always the first to criticize Jason Mick for his Apple slant (he's just as deceptive as the Apple commercials sometimes) but in this one, I think he represented the situation fairly.

First off, the Apple commercials are a joke. I've actually met a few people in the last couple of years who think you can't burn your photos to a CD unless you have a Mac. I've met more people who think it's "easier" to burn a CD on a Mac than on a PC. Of course when I ask for reasons why, they usually say "Because it's just easier." And then I usually reply, "Oh, I see. It's easier because the clever Mac vs. PC commercial told you it was!!" And I think we all know that Macs are definitely NOT secure. Mac users have an extremely false sense of security and are in for a very rude awakening when hackers actually start caring about the OSX platform.

I personally would never want to switch over to Mac OS and I shudder to think of a computing environment where I would be forced to do so. If I ever did buy a Mac, it would be a MacBook Pro, and I'm sure I would only use Windows on it. I am a Windows guy. I don't want to use a computer that only allows me to use the software that Steve Jobs deemed suitable for me to use. And I have always thought that guy was a crook long before this lawsuit stuff came up. To me, Apple is no less of an evil empire than Microsoft.

The one thing I take issue with on this article is the statement that the average computer costs $1200. No way. I can't think of one person I know in the last couple of years that has payed that much for a computer. Even a decent laptop these days is sub $1000.




RE: Good article by Mick
By Digimonkey on 7/8/2008 6:52:34 PM , Rating: 2
Actually you read it wrong. He said the average was about $1200 for a 13.1 inch notebook. Which is correct. However you can get them for as low as $900 sometimes brand new. Where I doubt you could ever get new mac book pro legitimately for under a grand.

That said, I do like the feel of the macbook pros also. I was once upon a time considering about possibly getting an older G3 series and wiping the MacOS from it and putting FreeBSD on it instead. Now however the MSI Wind is coming out and it makes more sense to get it instead.


are you sure its not the boot camp?
By RedStar on 7/9/2008 10:43:38 AM , Rating: 2
It would seem to me that MAC sales really took off when people could use a native windows O/S on a Mac computer.

As part of the package, i am sure Apple's transition to "PC x86 architecture"(once ridiculed by Jobs) has to be also included as the biggest reason for Apple's recent success.




By Griswold on 7/9/2008 1:00:58 PM , Rating: 2
It is. Recently the german newspaper and magazine publisher Axel Springer announced that they will switch all computers to macs. The CEO named the possibility to use windows on them as the number one reason followed by "cheaper" hardware on a per unit basis (I dont think he knows what he's talking about...). Once that transition is over, only google will have more macs in a business environment than them.


Yeah about Apple & security
By clarkey01 on 7/8/2008 5:29:35 PM , Rating: 3
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11869

"Recently, a hacker conference showed just how vulnerable systems running Mac OS X are, due to their slow rate of patches. The Mac machine was hijacked within 10 minutes, while the Linux and Windows boxes survived the day."

Apple and there BS being shown up again




What if...
By Digimonkey on 7/8/2008 4:44:12 PM , Rating: 2
These numbers consists more of Mac users buying a second or third mac because the price is more affordable now vs a lot of people switching from Windows to Mac?

Just a thought.




pictures first impression
By kattanna on 7/9/2008 12:03:01 PM , Rating: 2
at first i didnt see he was holding a chip in his fingers and instead thought he was saying what he thought about the average male mac owner

but thats me




"I mean, if you wanna break down someone's door, why don't you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone!" -- Jon Stewart on Apple and the iPhone














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki