Slashdot Mirror


'Perfect Storm' of Mac Sales on the Horizon?

fkx writes to mention an eWeek article suggesting that, finally, the PC-using public is going to 'get' the Mac. According to the article, the new advertising, increased functionality of OSX, and Intel-based machines are all raising the profile of Apple's machines to new heights. From the article: "However, this cycle isn't your usual processor upgrade cycle that comes every time Intel or Advanced Micro Devices tweaks a process. This is a major shift that affects all parts of the Mac customer-developer-vendor ecology. Longtime Apple watchers can count two earlier events of similar magnitude. The first such transition occurred in March 1994 with the arrival of the PowerPC architecture. The Motorola 680x0 architecture that had served the Mac platform for a decade was quickly supplanted by a set of new, more powerful machines. "

11 of 669 comments (clear)

  1. Very true by p0tat03 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    At least in my college-age demographic it is. I'm seeing a HUGE desertion of PC's in favor of the MacBooks (the MBPs are a little bit out of the range of the average college student). It's going to be a good year for Apple.

  2. makes sense by stoolpigeon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    basically getting a mac now means being able to do all the stuff you've always done on your pc - plus all the stuff a mac can do. in the past there was always what you were 'giving up' - now that's gone. it is now the windows machine that runs less software.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
  3. Part of the pie chart represents "just kicking it" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    *Just kicking it does not include gaming.

  4. Competition by chill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They face stiff competition when an almost identical Compaq laptop is $300 cheaper -- and has a bigger screen. Same CPU, same RAM, same graphics chip, same ports -- except the Compaq also support 802.11a -- same HD, etc.

    With the Compaq you can opt for an AMD Turion 64 w/ATI graphics chipset instead of the Intel and it's CHEAPER. The Mac has the built-in camera but the Compaq has the option of a built-in Lightscribe DVD+-DL burner for $25 more.

    Yes, the Mac is more fashionable but the big point is going to be OS X -- will the general public (i.e. -- not Apple fanboys) be willing the make the switch at a 30% premium?

      -Charles

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  5. Re:Again, the public.... by Angostura · · Score: 5, Funny
    It's a dusty tan box that sits under their $50 pressboard "computer table" from Wal-Mart that they turn on to check email and surf porn, and every so often, open a pirated copy of Word to update their resumes.


    That's the issue. My parents (in their late 70s/early 80s) decided to get a Mac when they decided they liked the idea of getting a video camera and doing some video editing and DVD authoring. The bundled software simply sold them on the idea. Dad subsequently got a USB music keyboard just because he enjoyed the idea of playing with Garageband.

    But yes, their old Windows 98 box was fine for e-mail. I'm not sure about their porn-surfing habits.
  6. Re:Again, the public.... by Metrol · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Computers aren't used for anything more important that a paperclip for most people.

    A couple of years ago I would have agreed with you on this. One aspect that has changed in many people's lives is the entry of a wide variety of digital toys. Digital cameras, video cameras with hard drives, digital music players, and the stack of other goodies flooding the retail chains. Today the computer at home is an important resource for bringing all these things together, as well as the other stuff you mentioned.

    Apple has positioned itself pretty well in this regard, as the company producing the computer that is built to deal with this. I suspect that they'll be better positioned to take advantage of this over the next couple of years than Microsoft will be.

    Please note, I'm anything but an Apple fan boy. What the heck do I know though? I think KDE on FreeBSD is the bestest game around!

    --
    The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.
  7. Re:Again, the public.... by Shag · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you're talking about desktops or towers, then yes, the public couldn't care less. And Apple has woefully small market share in that area - probably around, what, 3 percent?

    When it comes to laptops, though, there are different factors. Suddenly size, weight, battery life, and even appearance (well, for the fashionistas among us) come into consideration. And do I need to point out that a 17" widescreen notebook from Apple weighs about a pound less than one from anyone else?

    This January, Apple's share of the US laptop market stood at 6% - about double its share of the desktop market.

    This July, Apple's share of the US laptop market stood at 12% - double where it was in January.

    Apple has projected that as universal binaries of more applications for "creative pros" become available, that share could go higher.

    Maybe they'll continue to do better in notebooks than desktops.

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  8. Mac is the best platform... by partenon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    for most of the geeks :-) Before being bashed by FOSS gurus, let me show my example.

    I'm a Java and Ruby (on rails) programmer. I've dropped windows about 2 years ago, and used various flavors of linux in this meantime (debian, ubuntu, gentoo and ubuntu again). Less than one year ago I bought my first mac (mac mini).

    Java development in Windows is "standard", in linux is good and in Mac it is great. You have the same tools as Windows or Linux and, since java is "portable", all other tools (frameworks) works fine. The difference between Windows and Linux/Mac is that Windows restricts you *a lot*. Ex.: I put all my libs in just one place, and make sym links to them in the projects I need. In Windows, its not possible (afaik) (yes, a simple example, but try to keep the libs updated on a windows box...) . And the difference between Linux and Mac is performance. *Usually*, a Java application runs faster on Mac than on Linux, because the Java VM in Mac is done by Apple, meaning that its built by the ones who knows the OS. In Linux, as you certainly know, is a certain pain to install Java (you need to follow one or another howto to get things working), and the performance is *usually* worse than in a Mac, because the VM is done by Sun, which is concerned mainly in getting things working. Yes, they care about performance, but not that much :-) (just remember that IBM and BEA's VM's performs better than Sun's)

    When programming with Ruby, Mac is really awesome. Again, Windows looses here. In Windows, you have a set of tools (editors/IDE's) that also exists in other platforms, but its performance is poor (afaik). Also, some Ruby libs requires some sort of compilation (mysql, rmagick, ...), and it can become a pain to get things working. On Linux, things are far better than Windows. You have almost the same tools, but its far easier to get things working: just apt-get / emerge / whatever and you are ready to go. In a Mac, just "port install" what you need, just like linux. The difference between Mac and Linux is in the tools. The same ones + a fantastic editor (and cheap for some, expensive for others). Ok, its not that smart to left an inexpensive OS to go to an "expensive" one just because of an editor. But trust me, it worth.

    Besides these work-related details, you also get an OS that just works, with enough applications to do what you usually do on a PC, a good terminal (I definitely cannot use the "cmd" anymore), a more than nice UI and so on... And for people who asks me "why use a mac", I just ask the same: "why use a Windows". There is no reason to use Windows. I can't find something that Windows does better than Mac (ok, I left an space here for some +5 Funny comments).

    But yes, there *are* reasons to use Linux instead of Mac. Specially if you want "all the freedom you can get", if you don't want to spend a penny in software or simply don't care about the UI.

    Of course, I talked about just the OS itself. The hardware *is* more expensive, specially here in Brazil (macs comes from US, which means they are taxed in *only* 100%). But if you think a bit better, it probably worth. In my case, I spend more than 10 hours/day looking at a computer, so, it certainly worth for me :-)

    And I'm sorry, this would be a single-line comment, but it simply grows :-(

    --
    ilex paraguariensis for all
  9. Re:Its probabbly true. by alittlespice · · Score: 5, Informative

    The issues are minor. Apple does fix stuff. And with the retail stores, it's even better. I've been a PC guy forever, but I just switched to Mac. Got a 15.4" MacBook Pro. Then my battery did the expanding thing. More than doubled in size. I took it back to the retail store (Yorkdale in Toronto), and got a whole new machine, no problem at all! Was back up and running in no time. If I had bought a Dell and something went wrong (and lets not kid ourselves, every company has issues occassionally), it would have taken ages to get the part fixed, including likely having to ship the machine somewhere and going without a computer for days. Every manufacturer of anything, computers, cars, and even pens, occassionally makes defective stuff. What's important is how the treat you when it happens. I couldn't be happier than with the staff at the retail store. Oh, and the computers aren't really that much more expensive. Considering you getting the top of the line chips etc, not old out of date Pentium M's or anything. Compareable hardware from Dell, Toshiba, etc has a compareable price.

  10. Parent flamebait but I'll bite. by aristotle-dude · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I tried OSx86 10.4 on on my Dell laptop.

    I see.... so tried is a new euphemism for pirated?

    Paradimes in OSX that suck: 1) To eject a CD-ROM, USB-key, or external storage, I drag it to the trash. That seems illogical to me.

    I think the word you were looking for was "paradigms". Drives are dragged to the trash because you are not only ejecting the media but you are writing the file system buffer back to the drive (in the case of read/write media) and deleting its cache. With XP, you are also supposed to eject USB devices before disconnecting them for the same reason.

    2) To install a program, I "click-and-drag" it to my "hard drive". I had to google how to install something in OSX. Double-clicking the downloaded file yielded some puzzling prompt I can't recall.

    First of all, did it occur to you to RTFM? Second, you are not "installing" anything but rather copying the application bundle from the disk image for folder on the desktop to your applications directory. I call FUD on this one since most applications will run from a disk image let alone from the desktop. You should not expect it to behave like windows.

    3) Driver management is a nightmare. Sure, it works great with Mac hardware, but who wants to be locked into one brand? Oh wait, Mac-happy fan-boys do.

    What driver management? Oh wait, you are running a pirated/cracked version on your Dell. Did you expect it to work on your Dell? Locked in? How do you like the WMA ecosystem and being locked into windows?

    4) OSX feels like an OS that is 50 feet thick. And by that I mean it feels like there's layer upon layer of abstraction, as if it were trying to protect me from seeing how a computer really works. So you are saying that you do not like user friendly OS design and Object Oriented systems? If you want to hack away, go to http://developer.apple.com/ and read the documentation. Install the Developer tools and play with Interface builder. The power of the OS is all there for developers to extend. I think you are confusing complicated interfaces with "power". Open up a terminal windows and fill your boots.

    5) OSX is not very business friendly. It doesn't fit business-logic.

    What an absurd statement. Could you quantify that? By business friendly do you mean MIS friendly? Is it too damn easy to use that you are afraid business people might just use their computers are tools without needing so many MSCE's on their payroll?

    6) The bundled applications were inferior. Give me Outlook Express over Apples default mail application any day. That thing was an utter, illogical, painful experience to configure.

    More FUD and bullshit. You have got to be kidding me. Mail in Tiger has features features in common with Outlook 2003 like message grouping by topic threads. What is there to configure beyond email accounts and signatures?

    7) OSX is slow. Seriosuly, it's just not as snappy as winXP. Granted, I was running OSx86 on a Dell laptop, but I've used OSX on a mac before, and it really is a little laggy from all the superflorous garbage it distracts you with. "Ooooh, dancing icon. Thor like!"

    Yeah, having a GUI with a GPU accelerated compositing engine can be a bit slower than a simple bitblitter graphical stack like GDI+. Try out Vista and you will see how it is not as snappy either when running the Aero Glass interface.

    To anyone who is considering buying a Mac: Try using OSX first!

    That is one thing we can agree on. I would also suggest people try out Vista before blindly upgrading to it.

    In my honest opinion, I think Windows Vista will pave over OSX when it's released.

    Right. Do you even know anything about the current state of Vista compared with what was promised at PDC 2003? I use XP more than I use OS X simply because that is what I use at work and I used XP at home until the end of 2002. I'm afraid that your "experience" with a

    pirated

    X86 Tiger install does not qualify you to critique the OS X.
    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  11. Re:Sorry, not happening by eltonito · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I suppose when you go car shopping you complain that a fairly reliable Honda costs 20%-30% more than an unreliable, poorly designed GM. Sure, the Honda gets 25% better fuel economy, performs better and doesn't break down as much, but the GM is cheaper and it has a longer warranty than the Honda.