Microsoft to Mac - Its our Vista and You'll Pay If You Want It

[BJ_M]

just to throw more coal on the fire

[Rudyard]

Out of intest does anyone know the official world wide breakdown of OS's??

Windows --%%

Mac --%%

Linux --%%

Other --%%

Does anywhere have this actual information (as opposed to a bloke told me in the pub type stuff)?

[oldandinthe way]

Here are some numbers. They may be making assumptions which overstate the Mac installed base

Installed Base by Life Span
Assigning Macs a five year useful life span, and PCs a two year life span, the installed base for Macs among PCs on the planet is around 4.5%.

In the US, where Apple sells half of its Macs, Apple has over 8% of the usable installed base: 10 million five year old US Macs vs about 120 million two year old US PCs.

There are of course many older PCs still in use, but they are not getting upgrades and new software because with Windows it doesn't make economic sense to invest in old junk when a new PC costs on average $740.

A large portion of these older PCs are now running Linux, or alternatively, pirated commercial software, neither of which assists the retail software business.

PCs don’t vanish after two years, but they do stop contributing toward a commercial impact on the market.

Source:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q1.07/9E601E8E-2ACC-4866-A91B-3371D1688E00.html

The are lots of other numbers floating around the net (do a google search). I haven't seen any estimates above 18% which is so optimistic to be a bogus number.

[BJ_M]

on this site:

Operating System January 2006 January 2005
Windows 92.6% 95.7%
Macintosh 2.3% 2.3%
other 5% 5%

[DereX888]

/quoting DereX888/
...
A 'bit' too perceptive for someone who claimed to be so dumb,surely?
...
I mean only someone so highly delusional could believe such misinformation ;

/quoting RLT69/
...

and then desperately deny the obvious facts of security and the MAC platform's negligable capatilistic appeal/incentive...

Do you always mix'n'match different people' opinions just to make your point?
I won't comment on a reply to some imaginary 'compiled' person.
You gotta do better than that.
Where did you learn to conduct discussion that way, Goebbels Sunday School of Propaganda? Steve Jobs' Church of iLife?

I can assure you, I am not RLT69 and RLT69 is not DereX888

As for myself, I am a heterosexual Mac user (yes, DereX888, there is such a thing) who uses Macs because that is what I am comfortable and proficient with.

WHY ON EARTH do you feel the need to make a statement about your sexuality ???

Perhaps because he is proud to be a normal straight person and don't feel 'ashamed' of this fact, nor 'intimidated' by any political correctness?
Hey, I'm straight PC user and proud of it too.
Got any problems with that?

on this site:

Operating System January 2006 January 2005
Windows 92.6% 95.7%
Macintosh 2.3% 2.3%
other 5% 5%

Buahahahahaha!

Its already THAT bad?!

[BJ_M]

im fairly positive that there are more LINUX boxs than any sort of mac box around ... because there are MILLIONS of linux embedded and non embedded products around ... like most DVR for security, routers, render farms (nowdays), , clusters, and on and on , all sort of products (even fridges from lg)...

[ssj2_goha]

im fairly positive that there are more LINUX boxs than any sort of mac box around ... because there are MILLIONS of linux embedded and non embedded products around ... like most DVR for security, routers, render farms (nowdays), , clusters, and on and on , all sort of products (even fridges from lg)...

Yeah that is true. Linux is free though and easy to modify for embedded systems. But I think most people are referring to "boxes" as peoples computers they use though.

[BJ_M]

well - they are all computers and they are all being used (for the most part)

[oldandinthe way]

Generally when attempting to gauge market penetration of the PC, desktop systems are used as the standard.

Linux is likely to show lower numbers than the Mac in this category, since embedded systems and servers are not counted.

Since the compliation of these numbers is used for analysis of business opportunities there is great rational for this, an elderly computer running Linux and the Apache Server is a useful piece of equipment, of great economic benefit to its owner, but does not represent a business opportunity for the computer or software industries. It does create a hardship for people who would like to believe "mine is bigger than thine".

[SCDVD]

Here is some interesting information regarding Apple's strong arm media manipulation in their continuing attempts to lie to their followers about the real truth of vulnerabilities in Macs. Apple has to aggressively do this stuff continually to keep their loyal followers blind. This is just a tiny slice of all the slime that is going on.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=451&tag=nl.e539

Here is a summary report regarding security patches. It also appears that Apple "slipstreams" patches. Slipstreaming is including patches for unadmitted vulnerabilities.

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-6166971.html?tag=nl.e539

Standby folks and let's listen for the cult clansmen to deny that any of this information is true. Listening to their ranting squall should be very entertaining. It's a bit like telling a small child that their father is a criminal - they don't have the capacity to understand and they won't believe it no matter how much it is proven to be true. They need their daddy and that is all that matters in their little world. It's the same with the Mac cult.

[Cornucopia]

Generally when attempting to gauge market penetration of the PC, desktop systems are used as the standard.

Linux is likely to show lower numbers than the Mac in this category, since embedded systems and servers are not counted.

Since the compliation of these numbers is used for analysis of business opportunities there is great rational for this, an elderly computer running Linux and the Apache Server is a useful piece of equipment, of great economic benefit to its owner, but does not represent a business opportunity for the computer or software industries. It does create a hardship for people who would like to believe "mine is bigger than thine".

I would think that a useful calculation WOULD include past purchases, because the pool of possible new purchases isn't infinite and those past purchases reduce the available pool. Most people don't upgrade JUST because there's something new out there, they upgrade because they need to (broken, too slow, not as efficient, etc). AND, most users continue using a similar OS to what they're use to using--not much "jumping ship" without good reason. That means that even IF the pie gets bigger, the extrapolated trend would favor the predominant (past and current) brand/OS.

Scott

[ssj2_goha]

OK here's a question: IF (and this is a BIG if) Apple release OSX (10.5 or later version) to be able to be installed on ANY pc not just apple hardware. how many people would try it? Or even switch to it?

[SCDVD]

I work with a graphics designer who used a Mac before she started to work here. Because our company is set up to use PCs on a network and some of the apps that she needs to use runs only on a PC, she was set up with a fast PC running Windows XP. She said she felt awkward at first because of the differences between OSX and Windows XP but she has become a full convert. Two weeks ago she retired her Mac at home and bought a PC. She says that she believes the biggest reason that people balk at changing is the initial awkwardness in adjusting to the differences. During that adjustment period, it's natural to criticize the new environment. I suspect the reverse would be just as true for a Windows user to switch to OSX.

[Dv8ted2]

OK here's a question: IF (and this is a BIG if) Apple release OSX (10.5 or later version) to be able to be installed on ANY pc not just apple hardware. how many people would try it? Or even switch to it?

I would try it for a while, then go back to windows.

[JohnnyMalaria]

OK here's a question: IF (and this is a BIG if) Apple release OSX (10.5 or later version) to be able to be installed on ANY pc not just apple hardware. how many people would try it? Or even switch to it?

Why wait? Some folk in this thread are already using OS X on non-Apple hardware (illegally and, seemingly, without shame despite also posting frequent praises for Apple. Funny way to praise them by screwing them over....)

[ssj2_goha]

actually i'm the person doing that..... but the question was: if apple released it......

[DereX888]

actually i'm the person doing that..... but the question was: if apple released it......

... it would be more popular than all linux distros combined IMHO, but it wouldn't do much dent in the "windows world".
Perhaps over the time, say 5-10 years, it may have change, under the condition of providing better hardware support for all the hardware out there like it is with Windows. Otherwise nothing would change and Mac users would still be in the freaks niche.


As it is now and for any foreseeable future, the personal computer world is pretty much Windows and Linux only.
Any OS needs hardware support first, then the software writers will come and follow.
Apple's OSes never gain much populraity just because of "evil Microsoft", but because they run on Apple's hardware only, I thought its obvious.
If this doesn't change rather soon, Macs will simply vanish or join the "unix club" (something everyone knows is great, yet no one uses it).

Im betting on some future linux distro with easy GUI (some cross between say stability of slackware with suse desktop style and rpm, with built-in wine or any really easy or better transparent windows emulation for "backward" windows programs compatibility) that has yet to emerge.
OS like that, if free or very cheap with phone support, will knock Windows pretty fast, among home users at least.

[oldandinthe way]

The PC world will continue to be dominated by Windows for the foreseeable future.

A great GUI will not make Linux the dominant O/S. Its GUI was what Apple's strategy was based on and they are a minor player in the PC business.

What is needed is a "killer-ap" which only runs on Linux. That will not happen for reasons that are fundamental to the existance of Linux - the commitment to open source. Any great app for Linux can be ported to windows with minimal effort.

PC vendors select the O/S that consumers buy, if there was a significant consumer demand for Linux they'd drop Windows in a heartbeat and pocket the extra money.

Some time back Walmart offered a low-priced Linux system on its website. It was dropped due to lack of interest.

All of the applications most users need already run on Windows. In the consumer market, the dirty secret is that most PC owners don't pay for software other than antivirus updates and games. They use what ships with their machine, or pirate or download the few apps they want to run. (I know that the folks on this site have much more software than that but they're "special") Look at the video software that the newbies get in trouble using. They got it for free.

Microsoft gets something like 80% of its O/S revenue from oem sales of the O/S. Upgrades are small potatoes compared to that. Its a good thing because most users can't install an O/S upgrade successfully. If I wanted to run Vista, I'd buy a new machine, because given the price of the O/S and the time required to download new drivers, chase down application updates and backup my system, it would be CHEAPER for me. Time is money. And I have been in the computer industry for 40 years, so shockingly I might miss a few of the gotchas that would catch others. Look at the price of Vista, then look at the price of consumer machines with Vista. Unless you have significant money trouble the choice is clear.

Today's Wall Street Journal had an article on how Microsoft is helping to sell Macs. It seems to their reporter thant the ability of the Intel Macs to run Windows is helping to sell Macs. What a lot of crap. Why buy a higher priced Apple Intel machine to begin with and then add the cost of Windows to it. Their examples were almost identical to the examples with Windows emulation used in the past to hype the Mac. If you want to run OS/X you pay extra for a MAC, if you don't or can't you'd have to be an idiot.

Enough of this rant. The computer world we see today, is much like it wll be until there is a hardware breaktrough, a new software analogy or one or more killer-aps. And I know of no one who has the slightest idea where any of these might come from.

[lordsmurf]

I think OS X would be a good competitor to Vista.

I can see the ads now: "Aren't you tried of cleaning your own Windows?"

[DereX888]

I think OS X would be a good competitor to Vista.

I can see the ads now: "Aren't you tried of cleaning your own Windows?"

...and Microsoft's response (after they buy off, rename and bundle i.e. CCleaner with windozes):
"New in Vista SP4: automatically wash your Windows with Mr.Clean*!"



* Mr.Clean for Windows (copyright DereX888@VideoHelp (c) 2007) available as upgrade for systems running legitimate version of Microsoft (c) Windows (r) Vista (tm) Service Pack 4 (?)
Mrs.Clean for Winux (copyright DereX888@VideoHelp (c) 2007) available soon!