Slashdot Mirror


Why Microsoft Should Fear Apple

jcatcw writes "Computerworld's Scot Finnie says that Microsoft should be afraid because Apple has gotten smarter about how it competes. He says that it's the Parallels Desktop software that has been truly transformational for the Mac. Finnie did a simple three-month trial of the Mac last in the fall and realized four months later that he wasn't going back. Since then he's received hundreds of messages from readers who've also made the switch. 'In the end, this is about perception. It isn't about Apple's market share or even its quarterly sales numbers. (Apple's notebook computer sales for the fourth quarter were 4.1% of all portable computer sales, according to DisplaySearch.) What this is about is that Apple is reaching the right people with its product, winning new converts, Windows user by Windows user -- and creating buzz. How do you measure buzz? You don't. It's something that experienced people in this industry can just feel. And that's the condition Microsoft should fear. Because buzz can turn into something much harder to combat than sheer numbers.'"

8 of 576 comments (clear)

  1. why? you still need an os install disk... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    to run parallels. microsoft could give a flying fark where you run their os, as long as you buy one.

    DELL or other pc manufactureres should be scared of macs.

  2. Re:rolls eyes by porcupine8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sure there are plenty of people with their heads up their asses using Windows and Linux, has it put you off of those platforms too? Because I know I pick my OS based on the fact that no one I dislike uses it.

    --
    Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
  3. Re:Why Microsoft doesn't really give a shit. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Not really. When I got a Mac, one of the first things I did was buy (second hand) a copy of VirtualPC, which came with a Windows license. I installed it, used it for a couple of apps (the speed wasn't great, but it was okay). Then, a few months into owning the Mac, I just stopped bothering. Since then, I've bought an OS X upgrade and a new Mac. I have bought nothing from Microsoft.

    Sure, you may run XP in Parallels now, but will you buy new Windows software? Will you buy anything that says 'Vista only' on the box? Or will you just slowly replace your old XP apps with Mac apps, and then forget about your VM? I would guess that the latter is more likely for most switchers.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  4. Re:Microsoft should worry until... by Ephemeriis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft shouldn't be too worried until Apple begins to sell OS X for installation on hardware besides theirs. When OS X can be put on all kinds of hardware, I will gladly purchase it and I'm sure many others will as well.

    Actually, I'm not sure if I'd be that excited about standalone sales of OS X. Yeah, it looks pretty... Apple's got some nice applications available... But I'm not sure that I want just another OS available to me. I can get fairly close to the OS X experience with Vista or various flavors of Linux. What really makes Apple shine is the same thing you are lamenting - lack of hardware choices.

    In the PC world you've got hundreds of PC manufacturers, thousands of hardware vendors, billions of combinations of components that are all supposed to work together...

    Sure, I'm a hobbyist and I like to tinker. I've built my last dozen machines myself, by hand, from individual components. I like that level of control. I like to sift through benchmarks and reviews to find the motherboards that work best for me. I like the feeling of pride in having a quality PC that I built.

    But my sister doesn't care. She wants to go in, buy something off the shelf, and just have it work. She isn't even completely clear on the fact that HP, Dell, IBM, Gateway, etc. all make computers that are called PCs. She sees stickers that say "Mac Compatible" and wonders why there isn't a "Dell Compatible" sticker. And to her, buying a Mac is simpler and more straightforward than buying a PC. She can understand that OS X 10.3 is newer/better/faster than 10.1 She knows that if it says "Mac Compatible" it will likely work. She doesn't need to wonder about whether the printer has a Parallel interface or USB. It just says "Mac", so she's safe.

    And I really think that's part of the appeal of Apple products. They're simplified to the point where they just basically work most of the time.
    --
    "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
  5. Re:Microsoft should worry until... by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, I really don't forget that. The point is that it's an issue of market segmentation. Let me break it down a little more simply: It's not generally valid to complain that Apple charges a huge premium for their hardware. It is valid, however, to complain that Apple isn't trying to service all markets.

    If you don't understand the distinction that I'm making, I don't know what to tell you.

  6. Re:Microsoft should worry until... by lord_mike · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But you also forget a lot of people can't afford to pay $1100, like college students. $500 is a lot of money to some people.


    But, thanks to the insane operating requirements for Vista, that $500 laptop will run like a dog... in fact, I would imagine that it would practically be unusable with only 512 meg of RAM that it probably comes with.

    Microsoft helped out Apple significantly by essentially killing the cheap laptop market with memory-hogging Vista.

    So, now you quite literally HAVE TO pay $1100 for a laptop to get something that runs... that makes MacBook a very viable option.

    Thanks,

    Mike
  7. Re:Microsoft should worry until... by alexhmit01 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Developers who want to starve, sure. A 3% market share can only support so many developers. Pretty soon Apple developers will be the new musicians: out of work and unemployed in every sense of the word, waiting for their big gig, which they're sure is just right around the corner.


    I've never understood this assumption, it's wrong on so many levels. Counting Apple's share of computers sold through certain channels and assuming that that is the market for your software.

    For example, some percentage of Windows machines are servers, my random desktop application shouldn't count those as potential purchasers. If I make consumer software, then the 50% of Windows machines in corporate networks with controlled installations shouldn't count either. If I am writing software with limited requirements, then Apple Computer's generally longer deployment lifetime means that I'm looking at a different installed base.

    Or to put it in another way:
    If I write software for Java developers to buy, I DO NOT CARE about Windows, Linux, or Mac computers in the hands of non-Java developers. If Apple grabs 25% of the Java developer market, I'm in business. If I write software for musicians, Apple's approx 40%-50% marketshare in this niche makes them viable.

    And your assumption ignores competition. Sure, lots of Windows computers need file compression, but how many of them had bought Winzip? After Microsoft embedded unzipping in the OS, how many of them bought Winzip? Apple has a thriving shareware market, Windows may, Linux does not.

    As a developer, I care is there a potential market for my software. I really don't have any skin in the OS X vs. Microsoft Windows battle, do you?
  8. Re:Java isn't going to lead the way... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You seriously underestimate the gaming market as well.

    Well, you might be attributing too much to the gaming market as well. Don't get me wrong, it's a big market and people who buy gaming rigs tend to push the bleeding edge of hardware. For some of us old folks, gaming on a PC has absolutely no interest whatsoever. A lot of people don't need the bleeding edge of hardware -- they need decent software that's easy to use.

    In my opinion, Apples are coming bundled with a lot more software which is relevant to what people want to do. Handling your digital photos, movies, e-mail, and some light productivity software is probably what a lot of people want. I've been waiting got the right time to add a Mac Mini to my network -- it doesn't need to be huge, it can share disk space with the other critters on my network. But, I want the OS and the apps that come with it. I'm willing to pay a premium for that 'underpowered' machine.

    At home I run a dual core 64 bit laptop, and it's barely up to par

    I can't even fathom what you're doing with your machine. And, it is certainly not representative of what I and loads of other people do with out home machines.

    If MAC wanted to break into the market in any serious quantity, they would have to lower their prices and make a more robust offering with OSX, that's all there is to it. No old lady is going to front $2000+ for a good machine

    I think Mac is currently in the midst of breaking into the market in serious quantity. The fact that this thread exists tells me it is.

    I think you might also be missing what older people are willing to pay for a machine which doesn't give them troubles. Old ladies routinely seem to buy Cadillacs, because that's what their husband always bought and they like them. If I had an old grandma who wanted a computer and could afford to put up the cash, I'd absolutely steer her towards a Mac -- because it won't contribute to er early demise with all of the frustration.

    You are a developer, and probably a gamer. But, you're also not representative of the rest of the consumer market for computers. I'm a developer at work -- but at home, I'm a light casual user who doesn't really tax his machines all that much: my XP box running at equivelant to around 2.8 GHz (AMD CPU) with 1GB of RAM is more than I've ever needed at home. My even slower FreeBSD box with 768 MB of RAM is just as zippy. I would personally never spend $2k on a machine (my last few have been less than $500 CDN), but I might be willing to go up a couple of price points for a Mac.

    The whole point of this thread is that for a lot of people, the Mac offers a very attractive alternative to a Windows machine. For the people who really will do some web surfing, mail, a little light word processing, and handling all of this new-fangled digital media they still don't quite understand, the Mac is an exceptionally good choice.

    They would also have to move away from the hipster appeal and start marketing to real businesses. No one will use a product at home that is not used in business without good reason.

    Well, considering the revenues Apple has been pulling down (even if you discount the revenue from iTMS), and considering entire Universities are announcing they're going all Mac, I think you might find yourself wrong on that statement. Apple has been in 'real' businesses for a few decades now.

    Apple aren't trying to supplant Microsoft as the dominant operating system. They're trying to make a niche for themselves of people who want something a little different out of their machines. Personally, that hipster marketing campaign makes me really wish I had one. There will always be a market for the big, honking PC rigs. But, there will always be a market for what Apple is selling as well.

    You are entitled to your own opinion. Cancel or allow. ;-)

    Cheers
    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.