An Open Letter to Microsoft: Re-Release Windows XP

Yahoo Tech (excerpt) ^ | February 28, 2007 | Christopher Null

[HAL9000]

Excerpt -

Dear Mr. Gates, Mr. Ballmer, and the many good folks at Microsoft Corp.,

It's time to sober up on Windows Vista. This just isn't working out, and your users are getting frustrated to the point where they're souring on Windows altogether. In case you haven't seen some of the more noteworthy blog posts on this topic, I refer you to Chris Pirillo, Scot's Newsletter, or Spend Matters. Or check out the recent bug reports regarding product activation and security flaws. This is all stuff I managed to dredge up that was written yesterday.

People are unhappy with Vista. Really unhappy. And though I know Microsoft has its own form of Steve Jobs' reality distortion field, it certainly can't keep you from seeing at least some of the sobering sales figures and the crush of disappointing reviews of Vista. I don't want to dredge up all the reasons people are unhappy with Vista in this letter. I want to talk about what you ought to do stop a mass migration to Linux and the Mac.

~ snip ~

[DaGman]

"...but it's got a long way to go for desktop usage. The configuration tools and user interface standards are a mess."

I'm finding out how true your post is. Since I first posted a couple of hours ago, I've started to try to install some basics like AVG anti-virus, and start planning to install on my daughter's wireless desktop pc. Whooo boy... AVG has to use 3 RPM files for install that are not natively supported by Ubuntu. And, the Linux user manual talks about compiling the source code for the specific Linux kernel... So I've got to go find how to do this as I've never been a programmer and had to compile stuff. And, the wireless network card may or may not work without some hassle.

I don't have a lot of time to spend on these things. I'm used to just

[Vinnie]

I revived it. It's running the latest version of Ubuntu - the great web browsers associated with it, and is very fast.

I will have to replace it eventually - wear and tear will take its toll - at that point, I'm going Mac.

I'm alternating XP and Ubuntu live CD.

My future plans are the same as yours.

[DaGman]

...I'm used to just downloading the .exe file, installing and moving on to the next task.

[Barrett 50BMG]

"One other factor to remember about market share - PCs tend to be low-quality, disposable computers that have to be replaced more frequently. Macs are more durable and have a longer useful life, which is bad news for computer salesmen."

say what?

[Quix]

True enough.

Thanks thanks.

[ShawTaylor]

"The 2.5% figure is worldwide sales, not US sales and that does not represent installed base"

If the 2.5% represents worldwide sales, that's even better for Microsoft, given that, worldwide sales are far bigger than US sales.
But the 2.5% figure from that article DO represent US sales.

"Webapplications.com shows that in February web usage on worldwide websites that are heavily PC weighted was 6.38%"

Webapplications represent nothing.
They don't represent PC or Mac sales. They merely represent PC or Mac users in the limited sites they monitor, and their figures have always been very different, and much more skewed aginst Microsoft than figures from the much better known and more reliable Websidestory.
Even Apple themselves, in their most recently reported sales figures, said they had sold just 1.6 million machines in the last three months of 2006, virtually the same number it sold in the previous three months, yet Webappications is reporting market share increase for Macs. So where are the extra mac users from?
There was no sales increase.

"Steve Jobs "boast" is backed up by the sales figures reported to the FTC in their annual and quarterly reports which are a little more accurate than the guesstimates made by analysts"

Apple sold virtually the same number of Macs in the 4th quarter as they sold in the quarter before that.
The FTC is not a PC/Mac measuring outfit. Jobs boast is simply an empty boast.
If PC users had been switching at the rate of "9000" per day, that would make 3.24 million switchers per year, and Apple would not be having a measly 2.6 % share of PC sales worldwide in December.
We have been hearing this talk of "Apple has been gaining market share" for over 15 year from the apple fanboys, and Mac shares are still a very tiny 2.5% worldwide today.
Where is all the "increase in market share" at when it comes to real sales?

[ShawTaylor]

"One other factor to remember about market share - PCs tend to be low-quality, disposable computers that have to be replaced more frequently"

Huh?

"Macs are more durable and have a longer useful life"

Hahahahahahaha!
Apple make some of the most unreliable hardware on the planet:

http://www.appledefects.com/?cat=11
http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=MacBook_Pro

Get back to me when you get back to reality will ya?

Don't let me even start on the super high failure rates for the iPod.

[ShawTaylor]

"In fact, Apple holds 2.8% worldwide market share using Apple's stated 1.61 million Macs "


Apple fanboys been claiming Apple is increasing market share" for as long as I can remember, stretching back over 15 years at least.
And after 15 years of Apple "unceasing market share" you still have a measly 2.8% share worldwide(according to you), and you think that is impressive?
Where is all the "increased market share" you zombies have been claiming every year for at least 15 years at then?
If I am not mistaken, Apple USED to have over 25% share of the PC market, long before Windows was even launched. Today, that is a very distant memory.

[Señor Zorro]

But I do believe every terrorist computer captured so far has been a Windows PC

From what I've read (like "Holy War, Inc."), I think al-Qaeda favors Macs.

That said, I agree that being an Apple fanboy doesn't make you anything other than an Apple fanboy.

[ShawTaylor]

"That's a broken windows fallacy"

Naaah.
Its a fact.
Given that Windows overwhelmingly dominates computer installations on the planet, it follows to reason that most of the jobs for computer installation, configuration, programming, application software writing, sales, marketing etc will be on the Windows platform.
You are talking nonsense.
But hey, what's new about that?


"That Windows, due to its difficult nature, creates thousands of jobs is not necessarily a good thing.">

# 1. Windows creates tens of millions of jobs not just in America, but on practically every country on tyhe planet, inlcluding China, japan Europe, India South Africa etc.

#2. Those jobs are not due to "difficult nature", they are due to the fat that more applications run on Windows by far than on any other platforms, and Windows installations vastly outrank any other operating system on the planet.
What more ya got?

[antiRepublicrat]

Its a fact. Given that Windows overwhelmingly dominates computer installations on the planet, it follows to reason that most of the jobs for computer installation, configuration, programming, application software writing, sales, marketing etc will be on the Windows platform.

For one, if it wasn't for the Windows platform, it would be for another platform. But the fallacy comes in the admin jobs. Microsoft products take more people to administer them than others, a LOT more. Remember the articles about the arrival of Vista boosting such jobs? To think that such extra, needless jobs are a good thing is to invoke the broken window fallacy.

[Swordmaker]

But the 2.5% figure from that article DO represent US sales.

Now either you are calling the published articles, IDC's own reports lies, or you are lying. PROVE YOUR 2.5% figure. If Apple's undisputed Mac sales of 1,610,000 for Quarter 3 are only 2.5% of all US sales, then US sales of computers for that quarter were 64,400,000. That is not true. Quarter3 2006 US computer sales were 16,956,000. Do the math... just don't make false claims you can't back up.

I have proven mine. Do I have to provide the chart AGAIN? You make claims; I provide proof.

I think I will post it again:

Notes:
• IDC estimates for Gateway & Toshiba are prior to financial earnings reports.
• Shipments include shipments to distribution channels or end users. OEM sales are counted under the vendor/brand under which they are sold.
• PCs include Desktop, Notebook, Ultra Portable, and x86 Servers.
• PCs do not include handhelds. Data for all vendors are reported for calendar periods.
Source, IDC, October 18, 2006

Let's READ the chart... it says ". . . U.S. PC Shipments, Third Quarter 2006). . ." and then it says ". . . 4 Apple 975(,000) 5.8%. . . " and then it says ". . . All Vendors 16,956(,000) 100%. . .">. I'll let you do the math to learn that Apple sold 5.8% of all PCs sold in the United States of America in the third quarter of 2006.

They don't represent PC or Mac sales. They merely represent PC or Mac users in the limited sites they monitor, and their figures have always been very different, and much more skewed aginst Microsoft than figures from the much better known and more reliable Websidestory.

Now I think you need to document that claim. In actual fact Webapplications.com is skewed toward Windows centric websites, not Apple.

Your claims fly in the face of all other statistics, Shaw. Back them up. Provide the data you claim exists. I can provide sources... you make and repeat unfounded assertions without providing proof.

[ShawTaylor]

"For one, if it wasn't for the Windows platform, it would be for another platform"

But it IS the Windows platform, because Window dominates computer installations on the planet by far, ad Apple doesn't.

"But the fallacy comes in the admin jobs"

Most jobs created by Windows are not in admin jobs We have millions of sales marketing, programming, application development jobs, teaching, training etc jobs created by Windows, not to talk of the hundreds of millions that use Microsoft Office on Windows and make living that way.

"Microsoft products take more people to administer them than others, a LOT more. "

Nonsense.
In fact Microsoft products like Word, Excel, Access, SQL Server, exchange Wrver are amongst the best, if not the best on the planet, and Windows Server trumps Linux in costs of administration easy:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver/facts/default.mspx
You are still talking nonsense.

[ShawTaylor]

"I think I will post it again:"

Let's assume Apple has 2.8% market share wordwde.
What's great about that?
Apple USED to have over 25% market share long before Windows was even launched.
Apple is totally dominated by Microsoft in computers today.

"Now I think you need to document that claim. "

I don't need to document nothing.
Webapplications have never claimed they track actual PC sales. No PC maker has ever quoted Webapplications as a source pf PC sales, as far as I know. They do for IDC and Dataquest.

"In actual fact Webapplications.com is skewed toward Windows centric websites, not Apple"

Nope.
Webapplications.com over estimate both Mac and Firefox market share.
Firefox market share from Webapplications.com has always been significantly higher than those from the more reliable Websidestory.

[antiRepublicrat]

Where is all the "increase in market share" at when it comes to real sales?

Going off Apple's latest 10Q filing with the SEC, it appears they sold 28% more total Macs than they did the same quarter in the previous year. Desktop sales were about the same, but the notebooks took off amazingly, a 65% increase in sales. And to top it off, this latest quarter was a week (7%) shorter than the previous one, so we can probably say sales rose almost 30%, adjusted.

Overall PC sales growth for 2006 was 10%. Apple's was 28% (unadjusted). That is a huge relative growth.

If PC users had been switching at the rate of "9000" per day, that would make 3.24 million switchers per year

Current sales total to 6.4 million per year. 3.2 million requires only half of those be switchers. The PC market is HUGE, 240 million shipped last year, so a million more from one company doesn't count for much in the percentages. But it is awesome for Apple shareholders.

[Swordmaker]

Webapplications have never claimed they track actual PC sales. No PC maker has ever quoted Webapplications as a source pf PC sales, as far as I know. They do for IDC and Dataquest.

They DON'T track PC sales, and have never claimed they did... they track actual OS and browser USAGE... which is more related to overall Installed base than Market share of sales for any specific period.

Apple USED to have over 25% market share long before Windows was even launched

Apple had a 35% share back in the late 70s... so what. We are looking at what is happening RIGHT NOW.. the last year or two.

Webapplications.com over estimate both Mac and Firefox market share.

You've been challenged to PROVE your assertion and have failed. You are the one spouting claims without providing sources or data to back up your claims. I have done both. Provide a source; put up or shut up.

[ShawTaylor]

"Going off Apple's latest 10Q filing with the SEC, it appears they sold 28% more total Macs than they did the same quarter in the previous year"

Yes. But sold about the same in units as the previous quarter.
Meanwhile, Webaplications has a nice increase for Macs from the previous quarter.
So where is that increase from?

"Overall PC sales growth for 2006 was 10%. Apple's was 28% (unadjusted). That is a huge relative growth"

Still leaves Apple with an estimated 2.8% share worldwide, even using your own figures. That's not much is it, after over 30 years in business by Apple.
Not to mention the inevitable slowdown in Windows PC sales in the run up to Vista, something that the February and march figures will rectify.

[antiRepublicrat]

Most jobs created by Windows are not in admin jobs

But a percentage of the millions that are end up being part of the broken window fallacy. It will be hard to get an IT department to admit that because getting a system that's easier to maintain makes empire building kind of difficult.

Windows Server trumps Linux in costs of administration easy: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver/facts/default.mspx

You gotta be kidding me. You're trusting vendor hype? I don't suppose virus/adware/security was factored into that? I also wonder what the total productivity loss due to the Vista UAC will be when hundreds of millions of people are clicking on a billion needless dialogs daily.

[antiRepublicrat]

Meanwhile, Webaplications has a nice increase for Macs from the previous quarter. So where is that increase from?

Who knows. I never really trust stats from them or Websidestory.

Still leaves Apple with an estimated 2.8% share worldwide, even using your own figures. That's not much is it, after over 30 years in business by Apple.

Considering that Apple hit rock-bottom in the 90s, it appears their climb back up is doing extremely well, with very impressive growth. Two things, a switch to OS X (leaving the legacy behind, as opposed to Vista) and then to Intel have been instrumental in their recovery.

Not to mention the inevitable slowdown in Windows PC sales in the run up to Vista, something that the February and march figures will rectify.

Ballmer doesn't think so. People see basically flat growth for the general PC market for a while. Meanwhile, Apple continues very good growth far beyond the industry average.

[ShawTaylor]

"they track actual OS and browser USAGE.. they track actual OS and browser USAGE.."

Webapplications track PC/Mac other OS users that visit the sites they monitor. That's about it.
No more no less.

"which is more related to overall Installed base than Market share of sales for any specific period."

As far as PC/Mac figures go, the only figures that matter are actual sales, amd actual market share. Its a bit different for browser market share, where site visits matter more.
After all, most computers in the two most populous countries on the planet, India and China (China is the second biggest PC market on the planet), are not even linked to the Internet at all.

"Apple had a 35% share back in the late 70s... so what. We are looking at what is happening RIGHT NOW.. the last year or two."

You would say that, wouldn't you?
If you had over 25% share before, and today you have 2.8% share, is that significant? Yup.
It's like starting as the CEO of a company and ending up as the cleaner.

"You've been challenged to PROVE your assertion and have failed"

I have huh?
Let's look at comparative browser IE/Firefox figures from Websidestory and Webapplications shall we?
Websidestory:

"According to Web analytics outfit WebSideStory, over 25 percent of all visitors to sites in the U.S. now use Internet Explorer 7, coming in second to IE 6, which claims 62 percent.

WebSideStory expects IE 7 to become the dominant browser inside a year, gaining ground as Microsoft continues to roll it out through its Windows Update services.
-----snip-----
All versions of Internet Explorer, grouped together, claim between 85 percent and 90 percent of the worldwide browser market, according to measurements from several analytics firms. "

Websidestory makes IE share at 87% (25%+62%), and on average other web measuring sites give IE between 85 and 90%, but Webapplications still cliam IE share is just 79.09%.

http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=101007W1JNKK

Webapplications:

" Microsoft Internet Explorer 79.09%
Firefox 14.18% "

8% between the 2 figures is a hell of a difference isn't it?

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=0