Slashdot Mirror
Noise Over Mac OS Market Share "Slip"
OakDragon writes, "Mac OS market share actually slipped since last September. This reverses a trend in the winter and spring months that showed some slight growth. The actual percentage loss is small: 0.02%. But it may be significant since it follows a solid growth trend. It must be disappointing to Apple and Mac fans to see what is basically a flat line in desktop market share." Mac-oriented sites are pointing out the unreliability of the metrics from Net Applications, which are based on users of the HitsLink service.
I'd have to say that from my limited sampling, these numbers are very possibly off and a .2% downward change is likely statistically insignificant, especially given their sampling methods.
....really old design from the early 90's, but it's been low on my priority list for the last four years) was likely the first online textbook receiving much more international traffic (about 1000 unique visitors/day from all over the world) and I have seen the international Macintosh marketshare increase from about 4% to 6.5% of total traffic over the past year.
Traffic from my blog primarily from the US shows about 19% of traffic is from the Macintosh (200-900 unique visitors/day). Of all the traffic that hit my blog from the recent Boing Boing posting, it appears that of those that clicked through, over 23% of the clicks were from Macintosh systems and from the traffic I get from Slashdot, about 15% is from Macintosh systems. This limited sampling shows a steady increase in the percentage of Macintosh users that have visited over the past few years.
Traffic from another site I manage, Webvision (I know, I know,
Both of these statistics mirror the trends I have seen reported for the platforms marketshare on much wider scales. These are direct measures that I am reporting as opposed to a fee based service like HitsLink whose measures are not as direct. Too bad Google's Zeitgeist no longer reports on platform statistics which were a good measure of overall platform usage from a much wider used resource.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Forgive! It was the Eye Candy what made me do it!
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
Film at 11.
What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
Of course these numbers and not at all scientfic. The change is also completely insignificant. I agree on all of that. However, I have a feeling many who will denounce these statistics would be singing thier praises if they showed a significant gain ;-)
"reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert
http://useragentswitcher.mozdev.org/
:-D
set to os x
Go dig into the numbers a bit. I'm not a Mac fanboi (see my abuse of one earlier today) but this is a non-story. The site in question is tracking Mac OS and MacIntel seperate, so of course Mac OS is dropping. Add the two together and you get a different picture. They appear not to have fixed the scripts that generate the cute graphs though, because up to now they broke out each OS variation so they could see the migration patterns in Windows versions.
Democrat delenda est
Mac-oriented sites are pointing out the unreliability of the metrics from Net Applications, which are based on users of the HitsLink service.
Yet if it proved the opposite they wouldn't question its reliability at all, and would bring it up every chance they get.
99% of the computer buying population has no idea what your post even means.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Another explanation is that the potential Macintosh customer now realizes that the Mac is little different from a Dell PC or a HP PC. The principal difference is the price.
Well, I just priced out a new workstation comparing the top of the line MacPro and an equivalently configured Dell. I ended up buying the 3.0Ghz version of the MacPro for $1000 cheaper than an equivalent Dell.
Once Steve "I have a big ego" Jobs switched the Macintosh from the PowerPC to the Intel processor, the Macintosh lost its mystique.
Au contraire. Have you ever unboxed a new Mac? Have you ever really spent time with a Mac? While the OS is most of the experience, it goes beyond the OS.
Using some simple patches/tools, you can run Windows XP on the Mac. With a little effort, you can run the x86 MacOS on a Dell PC or an HP PC.
And with some simple tools, I can run Windows on my Mac. So?
Since the Mac is now essentially a PC clone, why would you pay a premium for Mac hardware?
See my above comment. It turns out that for the high end at least, the Macintosh is MUCH less expensive than a Dell or HP.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Does this mean that Apple is beleaguered again?
Warning: The intelligence of this post may be larger than it appears.
"Other" is actually Linux combined with Mactel (and still others) as they break out the Mactel and MacOS (PPC) separately apparently......
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Quite frankly I don't want to see OS X have some huge marketshare. I'd prefer the platform to have enough marketshare that developers can make money and Apple to make a profit, but not big enough for Virus writers and spyware authors to care (the way it is now).
Why does OS X have to have an increasing marketshare to remain successful?
Talking about using CP/M is funny, but, since few Slashdot readers know what CP/M is, they won't understand the joke.
CP/M is Control Program for Microcomputers, an OS used with 8088 microprocessors back before IBM thought of selling PCs. It was a dog of an OS, mostly because it was unfinished. Back then CP/M was sold by a company that thought printing the original of manuals on a dot-matrix printer with an old ribbon was acceptable practice.
The Morrow Microdecision came with a Command Line Interface language called Pilot that was in many ways better than the CLI that comes with Windows XP. I suppose Microsoft's plan is never to supply a finished OS so people will always want new versions.
--
Bush lied, the U.S. government killed thousands. Impeach.
Bloody hell! It's back to beleaguered then.
spoonerize "magic trackpad"
Well, I just priced out a new workstation comparing the top of the line MacPro and an equivalently configured Dell. I ended up buying the 3.0Ghz version of the MacPro for $1000 cheaper than an equivalent Dell.
I'll be honest: I read that and I thought you were lying. So I went and looked for myself, and sure enough, I can't duplicate your results.
I can't get the Dell price down far enough. Only $1000 more expensive than the MacPro? The best I can do is $1500 more expensive.
Excuse me while I go and try to find all the pieces of my entire fucking worldview that you just completely shattered.
why would you pay a premium for Mac hardware?
About the same price. Oh, and Macs have no such thing as "driver installs." Peripherals work. Right Now. Instantly. No errors. No dialog boxes. No ding noises.
And OS X is the best operating system on the planet.
Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
What is the fascination with market share?
What's the thinking here? More market share must mean more sales and therefore more profit? Apple seems to be making plenty of money, so what does more market share gives you, or is it just a measure of how many customers you did not get?
IMHO, the problem is you can not make a product that will please everyone. Apple has decided to make a certain kind of product - looks cool, well designed, easy to use and at a premium price.
I guess it depends on how you classify your market. If you are talking portable mp3 players in the USA, then Apple has around 80% of the market (their figures).
If you mean "laptop computers" then the field is wide open to every man and his dog that can bolt a machine together - including the el cheapo models who compete on price alone. This is akin to putting Mercedes, Audi and Lexus in the "car market" and wondering why their share is so low (hint: you are including Hyundai and others). This is not the same market. Who are the premium computer manufacturers? IBM might be there, Dell isn't.
As long as Apple continues to focus on making their products this way they will have a following and will generate profits - to hell with market share.
I don't make predictions, and I never will.
Dell's computers aren't cheaper than Apples for the same thing, but Dell sells cheaper computers. They just aren't comparable to any of Apple's.
Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
IIRC even Steve Jobs said something early this year about being surprised at sales being stronger than expected. The PPC to Intel transition is a major one and is an excellent long term move. But it did cause some people to hold off on buying waiting for more native software, and allowing time for the shaking out of any minor glitches in the first products. A few probably also held off on buying when they heard that the Core 2 chips were coming.
It is pretty obvious that the move was a wise choice and that both Macintosh users and Apple will be better off long term. The appeal of the new generation of machines can be expected to increase over time. In addition to new features in the OS, it is reasonable to expect that 10.5 will bring even better performance. It'll likely make better use of multiple CPU cores, use the GPU horsepower for other tasks, use the Core 2 supplemental SSE3 instructions (I've heard them called both SSSE3 and SSE4), and use of the 64-bit capabilities. The software for Windows support will also be more mature (Apple's utility is currently beta).
The release of Vista will likely bring an increase in the number of people pondering new machines instead of just an OS upgrade. With Apple being more visible than in the past some of those people will opt for getting Macs instead (either solely for the Apple experience, or to run Windows too). Some may also be playing wait and see with Vista. If it isn't really, really, wonderful, it'll help Apple.
Anyone who thinks that a 0.02% change is likely to be statistically significant has to be smoking crack. Of course, with enough users and a rigorous enough methodology, it's possible, but I doubt it.
But why would a nerd buy a Dell or HP when you can build a clone for half the price?
Ummmmm, perhaps because I am not a nerd? Geek perhaps, yes. But not a nerd. Furthermore, it is not my job to build computers. Rather it is my job to do other things like generate and analyze data, teach, write grants and papers. I would much rather spend my time doing these things than building boxes, installing drivers, dealing with conflicts and such. I want my computers to work when I pull them out of the box. I want my computers to simply work when plugging in a peripheral without launching a wizard that says "I see you are trying to add new hardware". I want my computers to not constantly notify me in the middle of a presentation that my anti-virus software is out of date or than the computer suddenly discovered a new wireless network. (I've seen people who, for kicks when someone is making a presentation with a Windows laptop at a big conference, start creating new wireless networks).
When your time reaches a certain value/minute, you start to look for ways to optimize your life and for me at least, the Macintosh allows me to get work done without getting in the way.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Home users are not desktop system builders in the numbers that matter. Fewer still even want to think about customizing a laptop.
Dual boot and virtualization are not (yet) mass market. They are for the enthusiasts who simply must be able to work in both the PC and the Mac environments.
OSX for the generic PC would require drivers for every random combination of PC hardware.
"the Macintosh lost its mystique"
I don't give a crap about mystique. It works better.
"why would you pay a premium for Mac hardware"
Because it's very well designed, and comes with a state-of-the-art OS. Any other dumb questions?
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
That's not a fair comparison, for three reasons:
1) The Mini is a low-end machine, and Core 2 is a brand new processor. Even Dell is only fielding Core 2 in its higher end XPS and Precision lines, just like Apple is fielding it in their higher end iMac and Mac Pro lines. The only reason you got it in a lower-end machine is because you built it yourself, which 99% of buyers won't do.
2) Your "custom machine" includes no warrenty and no technical support. That's probably not a problem for you, but it is for Apple's target market.
3) The two products you mentioned aren't in the same market! The Mac Mini is a SFF machine, something which carries a several-hundred dollar premium in PC space (for machines several times as large as the Mini).
The basic problem you have is that Apple doesn't have any product targetted at the market you're talking about, the headless desktop. Apple's desktop is the iMac, which is very competitively priced in its market. For example, to get a machine like the $1500 iMac 20", you'll pay Dell $1850 for a comparable XPS 210. At that price, the two machines have the same processor and RAM, the Dell has 70GB more HDD, a TV tuner, and an USB2 external disk, while the Mac has Wifi/Bluetooth and a much faster GPU. It's also, based on my own experience, more compact, nicer looking, and quieter.
In short, Apple's prices on the Intel Macs are great, if they're selling the product you want. If they're not, then its not fair to make comparisons with products they sell that aren't intended for your market.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
In my personal experience, I know more and more people buying Apple who never have in the past. Especially in the notebook computer market.
I wouldn't be surprised if that is what most everyone else here is seeing as well.
Sometimes these studies aren't an exercise in what the truth is in the real world, especially if they are funded by those who don't like what is happening in the real world.
As to TFA, I have a question... There are lots of Slashdotters that can probably answer this for me pretty well: Isn't .02% statistically negligible, WRT a market trend report?
Mod me OT on this one, It's fine with me.
I'm always amazed at the vitriol that spews forth on this subject. Although, frankly, post threads like those in response to this article are always interesting to read (and sometimes funny).
IMVHO, use what machine and OS you like, like what machine and OS you use (if you have a choice). It isn't the chip, the windowing system, the kernel, or the manufacturer... it's what it does for you personally. I like Solaris, Fedora, Mac OS (any, really), XP, 2000, Irix, HP/UX... well, just about any of them. The hardware is always a relative benchmark to me. If I like it, and it works great without kicking me in the pants every time I try to use it, then I use it. I enjoy my little Blade 100 as much as my VAIO as much as my iMac G5. Like what you use, and use what you like.
A Passionate Independent Musician
I'll tell you what the post means. It means that somebody has paid a press agent to put stories in the media pushing an anti-Apple agenda.
Let me explain a bit about HitsLink. Their reason for existence is to be a paid "hit"-man for publicity pros. Are you CBS-Viacom or the Radio Industry? Do you need to make it seem to the business community that Howard Stern is tanking on Sirius Satellite Radio? Have Hitslink provide a story saying that the number of Lycos searches for "Howard Stern" are down by X %. Forget the fact that everybody knows that you'd go to Sirius.com if you want to read about Stern. Forget that nobody uses Lycos any more.
Let's say you are Salem Radio Network and you want it to seem like conservative commentator, former Sec'y of Education and degenerate gambler Bill Bennett's morning show is really happening. Get HitsLink to create a story saying that he's "Number 9 in the nation". Forget that he's just been dumped from the third biggest market in America (Chicago). Forget that the actual listings show that there are 24 talk shows ahead of Bennett's. Let's just round the figures out so that there are 2 or 3 talk shows tied for Number 1, Number 2, etc. So you can say that Bennett is in the Number 9 slot when in reality he is number 24 out of 30.
It pays to know that nearly every story that you see or hear in the media has been placed there by a press agent or public relations department in the form of a press release, which gets reworked (sometimes) by a "reporter" (really a stenographer) into a "story" which is presented as "news". It pays to know that outfits like HitsLink exist just to spread manure.
You have to ask yourself if a story like this passes your own "smell test".
You are welcome on my lawn.
I think the name "Core 2 Duo" is actually wonderful, however I wish they could introduce the concept of duality into the name somehow.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
Your point #3 highlights why Apple is not growing.
Apple is making money hand over first, so their strategy of not paying too much attention to marketshare doesn't seem to be a bad one.
They're not tagetting a rational market. More people would rather have a beige box than a tiny little cute espresso sipping elite box.
IYou're right in a way, in that what lots of people do want to buy is a cheap beige box running Windows. Sure, Apple would sell such a machine, but why would anybody buy it from them, instead of buying it from Dell?
As for the warranty, I've read the anti-apple websites.
The anti-Apple websites are unreliable, by virtue if their very subject matter. They exist because Apple is held to ridiculously high standards. Take Dell's 240x series of monitors for example. Websites universally laud the 2405 and 2407 for being the best monitors in their class. Yet, Dell is on their 7th revision of the basic 240x design, and its taken that many revisions to sort out the inverter whine, the lopsided stands, the backlight bleeding, the banding on gradients, the fuzzy text, etc. Everybody just accepts it as a fact of life that when you order one of these things, you will have to take Dell up on their "15-day no-questions return" at least once. Yet, everyone denounces Apple for far less serious problems with the MacBook, even though the problems aren't nearly as widespread.
If you look at actual studies of customer satisfaction, say those conducted by consumer reports, Apple is at the very top of the heap.
The only reason I compared against the Mini is because it's the only thing Apple offers that is close to what I needed.
It makes absolutely no sense to compare two products that have entirely different purposes. If Apple doesn't sell the product you want, then complain about that. Don't rig up a comparison that's fundementally flawed.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
You're not seeing the flaw in your reasoning. Does it make sense for me to bitch that the Ford Focus is much slower and more expensive than my Kawasaki motorbike? Does it make sense for me to ask, "well, what car from Ford compares to the bike?" Does it make sense for me to bitch about Ford not making motorbikes? Of course not!
As for what people want: if Apple could make money selling such boxes, they would be. If Steve Jobs is anything, he's good at making money. The simple fact is that even if they did, nobody would buy it. Your friends don't want an Apple machine. By your own words, they want a custom, functional box. So why would they buy from Apple? They wouldn't, they'd buy from Dell or build it themselves. So what purpose does it serve Apple to target a market that doesn't want their products?
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I want my computers to work when I pull them out of the box.
Having just bought my first "pre-made" computer in years (a new laptop from Compaq), I find this statement *hilarious*.
After taking this thing "out of the box", I spent no less than 30 minutes weaving my way through pre-setup wizards and registration dialogs. I then spent no less than *two hours* uninstyalling tosns of pre-loaded crap software I did not wan ton this machine - stupid toy games, trial versions of anti virus, trial versions of DVD burning software, trial this and trial that, all cluttering up my tray with 15+ icons.
In comparison, last time I built a computer, it took me about 30 minutes to put the pieces together, and 30 minutes to install the OS. Net savings of 1.5 hours and god knows how many hundred dollars.
Of course building your own laptop is not really an option, hence why I bought this one. But god, I buy pre-made PC's as little as humanly possible.
Macs on the other hand - I have not had any real experience with yet. From what I hear they funciton much better "out of box" - no pre-configuring, no trial craptastic software pre-installed.
I've just put together the complete figures, based on their stats, incorporating both "Mac OS" and "Macintel", since December last year. Mac OS overall is down from a high of 4.49% in April, but consistently up from a low of 4.28% in June.
(Bit of a job getting that to look right and get it past the lameness filter!)
I know this can be a little confusing to computer novices. The 3.73GHz Xeon is slower and uses more power than the 3.0GHz Xeon, even though they use the same socket. However, you shouldn't be talking shit, especially about a subject you know little about.
TO START
PRESS ANY KEY
Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...
I just went and speced out a hefty Mac and a Dell. Had to go with the super duper video since it was the only model both offered.
Dual 3.0Ghz Xeon
4GB Memory (4x 1GB sticks on both, ECC on both)
4X 500GB SATA drives
512MB NVidia Quadro
DVD +/- everything drive
No monitor on either system
Apple: $7,449 firm
Dell: $5,575 before the infamous Dell discounting starts
One year warranty on the Apple, Three years Economy OnSite on the Dell
Democrat delenda est
http://www.coolest-gadgets.com/20060919/is-apple-
If that is really a random sampling, it has everything to do with overall market share. But it isn't. It is a sample of the market which subscribes to HitsLink. That's not a random sample.
Vidi, Vici, Veni
IIRC you'll have to look at Dell's business machines to find comparable pro hardware (dual Core 2 "Woodcrest" Xeon CPUs - the 5150 chip is 2.66 GHz). I believe Dell has an offering called the Precision 690.
The non-Xeon Core 2s cannot be used in pairs of chips. One chip = 2 cores.
At 3.7 GHz, it sounds like you're looking at machines with the earlier Pentium IV or D CPUs, much different animals.
Note that the Xeon is dual core, so with dual Xeons you're getting four cores.
This kind of topic always gets so many responses ... its just crazy! And once again, the "report" that kicked it all off has no information on the methodology used.
*Yawn* As long as Apple stays in business and I can upgrade my machines every 5 years or so, I'm a happy camper. Nobody is forcing the unaquafied masses to buy Macs, so they should all just settle down and reinstall their systems or something.
Not all random numbers are created equally.
Maybe it is elitism, but quite frankly, I don't care. It is true when any "niche" product or genre or whatever gains mass appeal, the people who are really "into" it inevitably get pushed out and the lowest common denomonator gets lower.
To me it is the same thing as having a bunch of strangers show up at a small get-together of friends. Sure, you could turn it into a big party and have lots of fun, but it'll never be that initimate get-together it once was. Is it wrong to prefer to keep a small party small? I don't think so.
Then again, who am I to be a Mac elitist, anyway? I've only been using them full time for like a year. Maybe I'm one of the "unwashed masses" lowering the bar. I'm not exactly the stereotypical Mac user.
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
"Au contraire. Have you ever unboxed a new Mac? Have you ever really spent time with a Mac? While the OS is most of the experience, it goes beyond the OS."
...um nevermind.
Oh yes, oh yes I have. That new Mac smell, each little piece ready for the unwrapping, the soft white curves, the feel of plastic on my naked...
Sometimes my arms bend back.
Disclaimer: I am a very happy owner of a Mac Pro.
I'd prefer the platform to have enough marketshare that developers can make money and Apple to make a profit, but not big enough for Virus writers and spyware authors to care (the way it is now).
I honestly have never understood this idea that Macs would suddenly get more interest from Virus writers if they had market share.
If you were a cracker and you saw these pompous Apple commercials, saw the Apple trolls that say that Apple can do no wrong, and saw all this news coverage about POTENTIAL viruses for OS X that turn out to be garbage, would this not be an obviously huge target to shoot for if you were going for notoriety?
No. I have no doubt you'd get some more interest if there were more market share, but basically Apple has been giving crackers the raspberry for years now. I highly doubt they're just idly ignoring a target that would likely get them huge press and shut Apple up about being Virus-free. That's way more interesting than an XP exploit, which we've seen hundreds of.
Why does OS X have to have an increasing marketshare to remain successful?
Because it's a publically traded company?
Wikipedia sez: "The My freelance gig in front of a Mac trolls appear in virtually every discussion about Apple Computer. The troll claims to have witnessed <the latest Apple hardware> taking 20 minutes to copy a 17 MB file from one folder to another and proceeds to question all Apple users as to their platform choice. It is a straight forward copy-and-paste from a weblog entry by Jason Kottke. It has also led to some very inspired and amusing parodies."
Yes twitter... too bad w3schools is not even close to being representative of the real world. Might as well use the statistics from kernel.org.
Warning: Rant to follow
Unless you're Ballmer or Jobs or a Linux distro company, does it really matter? I mean, really, really matter?
Do I, as a OS X user, see any sort of effect if OS X usage goes up or down?
In case you're wondering...no.
I guess I just get tired of Linux fanboys declaring that "we must get this to the desktops of the unwashed masses" or the Mac fanboys stomping around saying how much Microsoft is copying from OS X into Vista, and the Microsoft fanboys sitting around all smug with their favorite OS enjoying a practical monopoly status.
You use what works best for what you want to do, market share be damned. I use OS X for some things and WinXP for others because they each have their strengths in different areas. If John and Jane Public can easily get their digital photos of Junior's 8th birthday party by simply plugging their camera into their Windows box and pressing a button, more power to them. If you develop the Next Great Thing in an Unbuntu environment, congratualtions.
If a WinXP platform did what I want it to do as well as, or better than, OS X for a better value then I would have stuck with WinXP. If the engineering tools I need to use every day worked on a Linux platform as easily as on an WinXP or OS X platform, I would have stuck with Linux.
I coouldn't care less if OS X market share changed 0.02%, up, down, or sideways.
I'm done ranting.
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
I don't want to start a holy war here but what is the deal with this eight-year-old Mac troll? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig browsing slashdot when I should be working for about twenty minutes while it attempts to to make me laugh 17 times. At home, while looking at the *BSD troll, which by all standards should be a lot less funny than the Mac troll, I'd be giggling in two minutes, if that.... From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Mac troll is a superior troll. 8-year-old Mac troll addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use the Mac troll over other faster, funnier, more reliable trolls.
I think Apple should start selling ATX CPU/MB combos.
People with a fiduciary responsibility to thousands of shareholders have decided that expanding into the cheap shit market wouldn't be a good move.
Speaking as a shareholder, I'm rather glad that you're not in charge of Apple's product planning.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Jesus Fucking Christ, Get OVER YOURSELF! You don't want it, okay, we don't care, go away? And yes, I'm posting this from an apple laptop, so what? The $900 unit with student idscount was a great buy for me, and it's lasted me 4 years now, replacing the two dells I beat the crap out of and an IBM thinkpad that died of natural causes and a gateway that just went poof due to my abuse. the apple's the only thing that's survived. I've had your $500 dell laptop, and it just didn't stand up to my stresses. Not exactly normal, but I strap the ibook to a motorcycle gas tank every day, slam it shut and abuse it most henoiusly, and put it through the rigors of a lifestyle that most people consider insane. It worked. FOR ME. You don't see me wasting pages upon plages of slashdot space just detailing how I think everyone's wrong and that I need to show my superior intelligence by preaching and telling the ignroant crowd what theyu should think. You know what? I realize this post is completely SUBJECTIVE AND RELEVANT TO MY EXPERIANCE MOSTLY. Just like most of your posts. A post better not made. For the love of god, pleas,e just stop preaching to the slashdot chior. You know, the ones who already knew everything you stated and made an informed decision to buy what they wanted at the time they bought it.
Dell Precision 490
Mac Pro
- Two Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz Woodcrest) processors
- 1GB (2x512MB) 667MHz DDR2 ECC FB-DIMM
- 250GB 7200rpm SATA hard drive (RAID 5 not available)
- NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500 512MB
- One 16x SuperDrive
- Support: AppleCare Protection Plan (3 years warranty and support)
- Integrated 1394a and 1394b
- Price: $5198
There are several options that cannot be made "equivalent" or are difficult to do:TO START
PRESS ANY KEY
Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...
More people would rather have a beige box than a tiny little cute espresso sipping elite box.
No, more people want something that just works (and often in our consumer driven society something that looks 'cool' too). They don't want to munge around with drivers or kernel compiling. This is why linux and do it yourself PCs remain a niche market. These same people are also willing to pay more for something that just works. This doesn't make them stupid or lazy, it just means they think their time is better spent using their computer to do what they want to, instead of looking up kernel config options so their video card can play some game.
That is the segment that the Mac targets which is for most part currently on windows. I think what you'll find though is that the switch campaign has been pretty successful and the people who do go mac don't often go back.
Didn't you just compare them? Doesn't that make them comparable? They are just computers with largely identical parts inside.
Actually at least OmniGraffle and OmniOutliner, along with GraphicConverter and a couple other things were extremely useful extras that came with my PowerBook (bought in 2003). They were NOT trial versions nor crippleware. I use them regularly, although I haven't updated them since then.
I'll sorely miss OmniGraffle when I eventually buy a MacBook Pro, since it's no longer part of the package. Not sure about GraphicConverter, but OmniOutliner sure is included.
Maybe you should have actually tried them before deleting them. And yes, if you don't like them you can just delete them, along with the trial version of Office and Quicken. My PoweBook didn't have any eReader nor
However, you shouldn't be talking shit, especially about a subject you know little about.
/. Thanks for clarifying.
And here I thought that was the whole point of
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
As to TFA, I have a question... There are lots of Slashdotters that can probably answer this for me pretty well: Isn't .02% statistically negligible, WRT a market trend report?
That information is not available. You see, the source data was not presented, only the results without and details of the methodology. This is PR, not science and is designed to influence people who pay attention to PR, instead of look at scientific data. The fact that you know what statistically significant means, is indication that you are not in the target market. The PR firm that puts out these studies just looks for a way to use statistics to support the position of whomever pays them. They don't release their data and make really obviously misleading statements because they know most people will never notice anything more than a headline that says, "OS X Failing in the Market." This is the same company that produced a bunch of stats showing how iPod sales are declining and the bubble has burst and used the normal retail sales cycle that happens every year as justification. Gee sales are lower than they were just before last christmas and just like in almost every other retail sales market on the planet? We'd better write a bunch of articles immediately so people know and lets forget to mention that this trend effects anything other than iPods.
I'm always amazed at the vitriol that spews forth on this subject. Although, frankly, post threads like those in response to this article are always interesting to read (and sometimes funny).
There are numerous causes for this. Mac users are a minority, and deviating from the norm in any way is socially a big taboo. As a result, Mac users feel the need to compensate by ardently defending their decisions. Likewise, pointing anything inferior about a product a Mac, Windows, or Linux user is using is a direct attack on their ego. You're telling them emotionally, that they were wrong. Especially for large financial investments, like a computer, people tend to irrationally defend whatever decision they made, because they feel threatened. Finally, many new Mac users find suddenly that a lot of the problems they were having have suddenly disappeared when they get a Mac. As a result, they tend to be astonished that Macs are not more popular and very vocal about praising them, sometimes to excess. All this leads to a culture clash, where people get very loud and often irrationally defensive.
IMVHO, use what machine and OS you like, like what machine and OS you use (if you have a choice). It isn't the chip, the windowing system, the kernel, or the manufacturer... it's what it does for you personally.
Any rational person who uses multiple OS's regularly quickly sees that each has things they do better than others. The problem is most people have only really used one, so they argue from a position of ignorance, simply to defend a choice they don't really have a lot of information about. People also have trouble empathizing with others, especially via weak mediums like blogs, so they operate under the assumption that everyone has the same needs and wants as they do. Add to this an unhealthy dose of misinformation from PR campaigns and astroturf and a few trolls and rabble rousers who just enjoy causing trouble and you get the loud, angry mess that is a OS flame war.
The only thing to do is sit back, enjoy the funny parts, and occasionally try to answer factual questions to help those who truly want real info.