Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Crow for one: ‘Microsoft’s Windows 7 will drive Mac market share below 5% by the end of 2010’
Mac Daily News ^ | Friday, December 31, 2010 - 09:42 AM EST

Posted on 12/31/2010 4:21:28 PM PST by Swordmaker

An iCal alarm popped up for us today. It said:

Mark Oct. 22 on your calendar. That's the day that Apple's classic 'I'm a Mac. I'm A PC' attack ads are going to cease to be humorous. Oct. 22 is, of course, the formal release date of Windows 7... Here's what I believe will happen: The Windows 7 launch will take those market-share gains Apple has seen over the past several years and make them disappear... Yes, the Mac has had a great run for the past couple of years. Gartner says Apple's share of the U.S. computer market for the third quarter amounted to 8.8 percent, up from 8.6 percent in the year-ago period. My bet is that market share is going to drop below 5 percent by the end of 2010... Windows 7 is a great product and Apple is going to feel the pain from it.Steven Burke, CRN, October 15, 2009

Let's check in with Gartner:

Whoopsie. Let's hope for Steven's sake that all he bet was his reputation. Not a big loss. And, Steven, Apple's feeling no pain unless it's from the strain of driving dump trucks full of cash to the bank 24/7/365.

Now, granted, while those are the latest numbers, they're not truly "the end of 2010," so we'll check in again in a few weeks when Gartner releases their numbers for calendar 4th quarter.

Of course, nobody sane expects Apple to go from 10.4% to under 5% in three months, but we're certainly not averse to serving crow twice.

Send your New Year's wishes to Steven here: steve.burke@ec.ubm.com


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Computers/Internet; Humor
KEYWORDS: apple; ilovebillgates; iwanthim; iwanthimbad; microsoftfanboys; windows7
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121 next last
To: RegulatorCountry

If you indeed think it’s gramatically incorrect, why don’t you correct it?


81 posted on 01/10/2011 4:12:12 PM PST by flintsilver7 (Honest reporting hasn't caught on in the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

I totally agree, by the way, that this exchange is getting old.

I know the reference, by the way, but since he doesn’t do the rest of his talking in the King’s English I was assuming he was not directly quoting Shakespeare. I merely assumed he was continuing his habit of using suspect grammar.


82 posted on 01/10/2011 4:20:11 PM PST by flintsilver7 (Honest reporting hasn't caught on in the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: null and void
Oh yeah? Hate to brag, but check out my little beauty....


83 posted on 01/10/2011 4:20:45 PM PST by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: flintsilver7
For 'tis the sport to have the enginer / Hoist with his owne petar"

-- Shakespeare, Hamlet III iv.

"Hoist" was in Shakespeare's time the past participle of a verb "to hoise", which meant what "to hoist" does now: to lift. A petard (see under "peter out" for the etymology) was an explosive charge detonated by a slowly burning fuse. If the petard went off prematurely, then the sapper (military engineer; Shakespeare's "enginer") who planted it would be hurled into the air by the explosion. (Compare "up" in "to blow up".) A modern rendition might be: "It's fun to see the engineer blown up with his own bomb."

http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxhoistw.html

84 posted on 01/10/2011 4:20:54 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

I know the phrase (despite not caring one whit for Shakespeare) but didn’t think it was a direct quote. I was also thrown off by the use of “hoisting” earlier in the thread which doesn’t fit with the King’s English.

I stand corrected.


85 posted on 01/10/2011 4:24:32 PM PST by flintsilver7 (Honest reporting hasn't caught on in the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: flintsilver7; dayglored; antiRepublicrat; ReignOfError
I take issue with the idea that security through obscurity is in fact any security at all. This applies to Unix in general as well. If malware exists, either as proof of concept or otherwise, then a security vulnerability exists.

As do we, having shot that canard down many times. And, a FAILED, proof of concept is no proof... The concept failed so it is no proof. Had the concept worked, then we would be seeing exploits based on the concept. They were attempts to find viable vectors to spread self-replicating, self-installing, self-transmitting malware on OSX Macs. They all failed. Ergo, although they are called "proof-of-concept" if the concept proof fails it proves nothing except they have to go back to the drawing board.

By the way, cross-platform malware has increased substantially and will continue to do so as the heterogeneity of the computing market increases.

When we start seeing it, not theoretical, then we'll worry. Not before. We've been hearing the same litany for ten years. By not listening, we've saved a lot of aggravation and money.

86 posted on 01/10/2011 4:26:50 PM PST by Swordmaker (This tag line is a Microsoft product "insult" free zone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: flintsilver7

LOL, rapid web search after my reply, I see. Your intial response belies your backtracking. You did not know the phrase.


87 posted on 01/10/2011 4:28:13 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

You’ve never heard that phrase (or any of its variants) used in the past tense?


88 posted on 01/10/2011 4:31:40 PM PST by flintsilver7 (Honest reporting hasn't caught on in the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: flintsilver7
I've heard it cited incorrectly, by people who had no idea of the source of the phrase.

People such as yourself, lol.

89 posted on 01/10/2011 4:36:43 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

Is not the replacement of “hoist” with “hoisting” not an incorrect citation? In the original the word “hoist” is not used a verb. I ask because it was not I who made that mistake.

By the way, I as a rule despise Shakespeare and those who think his writing was genius. He wrote almost exclusively in figurative language and by modern standards you would need a translator to determine the meaning of the original in today’s terms. In other words, you’re translating from an effete playwright’s English to modern English. This puts him on the same level as the average rapper.


90 posted on 01/10/2011 4:47:29 PM PST by flintsilver7 (Honest reporting hasn't caught on in the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: flintsilver7

Can you just not decipher what “hoist” being a past participle means?

Apparently not. So, now we’re just going to feign dark ennui with the whole Shakespeare thang aren’t we, lol.


91 posted on 01/10/2011 4:53:54 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry; flintsilver7
> So, now we’re just going to feign dark ennui with the whole Shakespeare thang aren’t we, lol.

I hypothesize that he tired of being bested in his trolling on the Mac, and has feinted left to troll on Elizabethan usage in hopes of an improved score.

Sadly, it appears he'll fare about as poorly there, tsk. So perhaps you are correct... :)

92 posted on 01/10/2011 5:54:08 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: dayglored
Well, it's a good thing nobody quoted Chaucer, he'd have really sprained something.

I hold a mouses wit not worth a leke,
That hath but on hole for to sterten to.

93 posted on 01/10/2011 7:38:09 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
> Well, it's a good thing nobody quoted Chaucer, he'd have really sprained something.
      I hold a mouses wit not worth a leke,
      That hath but on hole for to sterten to.

Speaking of holes... :)

Hold up thy tayl, thou sathanas! -- quod he --
shewe forth thyn ers, and lat the frere se
Where is the nest of freres in this place!
Ol' Geoffrey seemed to have a thing about the brothers... but I have only the slimmest acquaintance with Chaucer, so I may be in error.
94 posted on 01/10/2011 8:27:00 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: flintsilver7
I take issue with the idea that security through obscurity is in fact any security at all.

I take issue with anyone who throws that canard out without knowing all the nuances. Security through obscurity can be useful, as one more stumbling block to break a system, slowing down attackers, or for raising the bar for the talent necessary to break the system. It isn't something to be absolutely relied on in the end, but its use is not automatically invalid.

The argument that the number of installations is smaller creates security through obscurity is invalid here. 50 million vs. install bases as small as about 100 that have been targeted by malware. Apple is the third most valuable brand in the world, even ahead of Microsoft. Their operating systems (OS X and its brother iOS) run almost everything behind that brand. That's not obscure.

95 posted on 01/10/2011 9:08:55 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: flintsilver7; antiRepublicrat; dayglored; ReignOfError
A comment? Wow, consider me "hoist on my own petard." (Verb tense agreement, your mortal enemy, would appear to have hoisted you on your own petard.)

Yes. And you've done it again. You are correcting William Shakespeare. Hamelet, scene three, to be precise. And, Flintsilver? "Hoist" IS the past tense of the verb "hoise," meaning "to lift." if you add "Ed" to it you make it doubly past tense, an oxymoron.

I suspect you don't even know what a petard is. Don't bother rushing to look it up. It's a a large open bore mortar used at close quarter by pressing it against a wall or gate, usually without a projectile, to blow a hole through the fortification.

As you may be getting an inkling, my usage was absolutely correct.

96 posted on 01/10/2011 9:28:36 PM PST by Swordmaker (This tag line is a Microsoft product "insult" free zone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry; flintsilver7; antiRepublicrat; dayglored
LOL, rapid web search after my reply, I see. Your intial response belies your backtracking. You did not know the phrase.

Just more of Flint's pattern of trying to be omniscient... trying to correct his errors by revision in later posts. I have seen through his schtick. Now he has moved on to trying to correct his grammar.

By the way, Flint, thanks for pointing out my mis-use of "pre-immiment" when I meant to write "pre-eminent." Sometimes my thinking outpaces my spelling and typing. You were right.

However, Flint, in the give and take of informal threads and Internet discussion, so long as the meaning is transmitted, it is considered RUDE to point out minor spelling errors. It is a form of ad hominem insult.

I have skipped over a few of yours in the past. Shall I continue to ignore them, or do you want me to start correcting you? I have been a writer, publisher, and editor in the past. I can be brutal.

On second thought, I shall remain polite and ignore such foibles. Continue.

97 posted on 01/10/2011 10:22:24 PM PST by Swordmaker (This tag line is a Microsoft product "insult" free zone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: flintsilver7

“I always thought FR was a conservative website for the posting and discussion of relevant political or social news.”

You’re still confused about this? Get a clue...

FR is a wide-ranging discussion site that covers almost every topic under the sun. It’s easy to filter the things you’re interested in if you try.

Feel free to stay away from threads of which you don’t approve, no one enjoys your negativity.


98 posted on 01/11/2011 2:54:54 AM PST by PreciousLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: flintsilver7

‘it is clear that any Apple numbers claiming a 10% or greater market share are listing other devices (like the iPhone and its variants) as “computers,”’

Wrong, you should really do your homework before you embarrass yourself.

The 10% figure is for new PCs sold in the US. Your W7 numbers include copies to upgrade computers with earlier, inferior versions of Windows, and are worldwide to boot. ;-)


99 posted on 01/11/2011 2:59:01 AM PST by PreciousLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker
I said earlier that I stand corrected. I admit I did not know the exact wording of the phrase, but I did know its origins. Also, in modern times, "hoist" has a radically different meaning than what you suggest. "Hoise" is not even in the current lexicon.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hoist

3. Archaic . a pt. and pp. of hoise.

Notice the term "archaic." If you're using a word in a manner that hasn't been relevant for 400 years you aren't exactly able to criticize those who misunderstand. I guess that explains your use of "pre-eminent" rather than "preeminent" - you're like 150 years old. In any case, Shakespeare is still garbage even if you did break bread with him.

By the way, I'm sure I make more grammatical errors than you do. I often think faster than I type. I do my best not to misplace commas and skip words but I do that occasionally as well. Are you suggesting I have a habit of correcting grammatical errors? There is no evidence to support that and one attempt does not change that.

While I was initially trolling in this thread and I apologize for that, I have made salient points that have not (and cannot be, for that matter) denied. I again apologize for the fact that most don't have anything to do with this thread. Still, though, that doesn't make them any less correct.
100 posted on 01/11/2011 1:23:24 PM PST by flintsilver7 (Honest reporting hasn't caught on in the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson