Posted on 06/02/2006 8:19:08 AM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
According to research firm Gartner, worldwide PC shipments totaled 57 million units in the first quarter of 2006, representing a 13.1 percent increase over the same period last year. But in that time, Apple's share of the worldwide market slipped from 2.2 percent to a mere 2.0 percent, the firm's data shows.
(Excerpt) Read more at appleinsider.com ...
I suspect Apple's latest spate of ads insulting PC's and their owners, isn't winning them any new customers.
Once the intel chips are used across every line (and every Mac can run both, Windows Or OS X) I think we'll see their marketshare really jump.
The real coup would be to write an Apple OS that could run on any Wintel platform. Finally give Microsoft a reason to cut the bloat out of their bloatware.
People have been saying things just like that for years now.
"once apple does this"
"once apple does that"
"once (x thing) is complete"
"once next year comes around"
"once the new OS is mature"
"once apple kills the market for clone macs"
Etc etc etc................
At the moment the OS is very tied to specific hardware. This reduces the complexitity of development and keeps the design team lean mean and innovative. Once they see major marketshare gains however they'd have room to compete in this way.
Releasing it now would cost them valuable development hours and convince Microsoft to go into an all out drive against them (and MS is never afraid to LOSE money to kill off a competitor.
For now its probably best to let sleeping 'dog of an os's lie.
I agree.
If apple were to open it's os to the masses they'd gain alot of marketshare. Wasn't it Dell who hinted that they'd love to sell Apple's OS?
But Apple craves control. And as long as they desire as much control as they are trying to keep they'll find it very hard to gain alot of share.
Slowly, linux marketshare is creeping past apple's 2%. Just as Garner predicted.
http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,64504,00.html
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^After taking account for piracy, Gartner said 2004 worldwide market share for Mac OS is 2.5 percent, versus 1.3 percent for Linux. However, this will change next year. Gartner predicts in 2005, the Mac will slip to 2 percent market share, and Linux will grow to 2.1 percent. By 2008, Linux will have grown to 3.4 percent, while the Mac will remain at 2 percent.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
As we are continuing to see, this prediction is very realistic. on both OS's.
Having worked in an Apple store I can attest that because Intel always had different chips it was real hard to convince a potential customer of a comparison.
Now they have machines using the same chips, which can run windows if they need to. With no performance hit. Demonstrable in store.
The reason for slow sales now is the transition between the two platforms.
Apple is a hardware company. Their OS and other software enables them to add value to their hardware, distinguishing it from the other PC's on the market.
Microsoft is a software company. Their business model ties their software offerings and the OS in a way that enables them to sell more of both.
Two very different companies.
Also, if Apple were to recoup the expense of its software R&D, if they sold a Mac OS X version for generic PCs, they'd have to raise the price of the OS. They'd also have to spend more time developing the OS for other hardware platforms. To be sure, they'd probably do a good job, but considering the user costs of switching, it is unlikely that they'll lots of attract new users by allowing users to install the OS on a generic PC. Far more likely, the end result will be a decrease in Apple hardware sales, thus killing the company's primary revenue generator.
The report also shows that Linux declined from 0.46% to 0.40% market share during the same time period.
I dunno they have a ton of Software too (Final Cut, Aperature, Logic, etc).
A key aspect of profitability under Job's reign has been making more off software, charging for OS updates, etc.
I think they would be incuring a huge expense for a small gain by selling it for 'any old pc' too many drivers and manufacturers etc.
Would you buy one in a house? Would you buy one with a mouse? ...
Valid points.
Apple's skewed benchmarks on their website makes it hard for you to do what you need to do as well.
We'll have to wait and see how it's recieved.
I honestly don't think it'll be as warmly welcomed as you think it will be for one important reason.
Apple makes their machines windows bootable now, that's true, *BUT* they don't come pre-installed with both windows and macos.
That's the achilles heel. Most people don't want the hassle of doing the install themselves.(no matter how painless it actually is) This has been the biggest roadblock ahead of linux adoption as well.
Will apple store peeps officially do installs of windows free of charge for customers?(no, I don't mean under the table)
LOL!!!!!
Until that move happens, however, I don't expect any major change in market share percentages.
We've already been through this.
Your website only involves the american market, that's why apple's numbers are so(accurately) high.
I'm talking about the worldwide market, that's why those linux numbers are so(inaccurately) low.
That's a red-herring/bait-and-switch that I'd expect to see in the pages of the NY Times, not here on free republic.
Apple has always charged for major OS updates, and all those software packages you listed, plus the rest are additional reasons for buying a Mac running the Mac OS. They add value, and their "professional" nature leads to their high prices, which are necessary to recoup development costs.
However, considering the time and resources Apple puts into the development of its iLife suite, iWorks, and OS - without the hardware sales, those basic software packages would be unprofitable unless Apple charged an arm and a leg. And I used to work for an Apple Specialist, and the most time consuming tech support problems are for software issues. A cost that has to be built into the price. For Apple to make it as a software company, they'd need a much larger install base and ditto on the marketshare, and they won't get that if they have to charge a lot just so people can buy a copy of their software. Microsoft can do that, because Microsoft is leveraged by its ubiquitousness. If you want proof, look at Linux. You can give Linux away for free, but dislodging Microsoft doesn't seem to be on the horizon. How can one expect Apple to charge premium prices for their software, and still challenge Microsoft? Linux can't do it giving itself away for free.
Without the hardware sales, Apple would fold. Its business relies on the synergy between its hardware and software products. That tight integration makes their end products so attractive to many users who don't want complexity. Apple's business model works.
It's possible. It's very possible. But I have alot of doubts that apps will move to web based. The idea(and implementation) of AJAX and other such technologies have been around for a while. It seems that when these companies get together to predict the next big thing they get it wrong. I don't see how this will be any different.
Why pay for a service again and again when you can pay for an application, once, and you own it? Forever?
It isn't good business sense to continually shell out when you don't have to.
However, the corporate desktop isn't the only type of desktop out there, and it isn't the type I'm referring to.
You've got it backwards. Linux has it's highest market share in China, where it is installed and sold as a disposable pre-installed operating system, ready to be replaced with a pirated copy of Widows.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.