Slashdot Mirror
Apple Climbs Into Third Place In U.S. PC Market
Tibor the Hun writes "According to Gartner and IDC, Apple now has between 7.8 and 8.5% of market share. While those numbers are not astonishing, they are not insignificant, and their growth does not seem to be slowing down. Will the pearly gates of acceptance open up for them once they reach the magic 10%, and will that have a positive effect on desktop Linux adoption? Hard to tell, but it's good to see that normal people (not just us geeks) are choosing to go with a different OS, rather than staying with the headache-inducing Windows."
While those numbers are not astonishing
Not astonishing? A single company, offering a proprietary product*, is outdoing nearly all of several hundred companies combined who build to a given standard! Astonishing indeed!
* - including hardware, OS, and a broad range of application software
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
Why is 10% "magic"? This number is significant because that's how many fingers we have?
anyone who can't get Windows to run decently should be turning in their geek card already.
Really? Seriously?
Okay. I can get windows to run. Really, I can. That doesn't mean it isn't a fucking pain in the ass, a terrible user experience, and a waste of resources. Sorry, I have plenty of reasons to get headaches from windows. Not being geeky enough to handle it isn't one them.
http://mediagoblin.org/
I really can't see how anything but goodness can come from this. Afterall, if you really want to gain ground against an evil closed-source monopoly that charges too much for it's products, it makes perfect sense to switch to another company that even more protective of its source, charges even more for its products, and even has a nasty habit of keeping its platform as proprietary as possible.
Success!
Since when is M$ bashing flamebait on slashdot? Are you new here?
And just because most of us can maintain a windows box doesn't mean we like it - my mechanic maintains my old Land Rover, but it certainly induces headaches.
Just because you CAN run Windows doesn't mean you do. In most cases, all it takes to run Windows is to pop in the disk and let it install, and things just work. However, much like hitting yourself with a hammer, just because it's easy doesn't make it a good idea.
As opposed to Microsoft's "do it our way or the highway" approach to computing?
Has anyone else noticed that after Vista came out, Microsoft seems to have been losing ground? Netbooks/UMPC's are selling with OEM Linux like hot cakes, and Apple is steadily gaining market share. I also bet that the disappointment with SP1 made it even worse for ol' Billy. Even if Windows 7 is all that and a bag of chips, it'll be too late because Joe the Layman will have seen that Linux really is ready for prime time.
I've never known anyone to buy their first Apple desktop or laptop without trying it out first. Surely they notice the interface is different.
Developers: We can use your help.
At least Windows users don't have to open a console window and recompile their webcam driver after the monthly patch.
No sig today...
"Okay. I can get Ubuntu to run. Really, I can. That doesn't mean it isn't a fucking pain in the ass, a terrible user experience, and refuses to recognize the built-in card reader. Sorry, I have plenty of reasons to get headaches from Linux. Not being geeky enough to handle it isn't one them."
What what whaaaaaaat? I'm not allowed to demonstrate you can use that argument for -any- operating suite?
On the up side, the above wouldn't apply to OS X unless I got a clone machine *smirk*
I REALLY hope that increased Marketshare will motivate games being ported to OS X. I fear it will have to be at least 20% for that to happen though.
Flame war == more comments == more page hits == more ad impressions.
:)
Besides, instigating an MS-bashing comment flood is like firing up your favorite game and playing through it in 'easy' mode.
So once in a while, even though it's been done before, we get to have an anti-MS free for all, because it's easy. And fun.
My favorite part are the people who complain about trollish summaries, because I get to imagine how their panties got in such a tight knot.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
I converted to Macs a few years ago and found the OS X interface to be the most intuitive I've ever used. The plus and minus signs at the bottom of lists seems obviously to imply add and remove.
Windows always took me a while to learn the nuances. And then another version with a changed interface would force me to learn the changes. But with OS X I typically just ask myself how something should work and there it is, right where I'd expect it.
So far I've found that most people's issues with learning the OS X interface is actually unlearning another interface.
Developers: We can use your help.
You didn't see the "?" button on the Accounts pane? Clicking that clearly outlines what you need to know.
The "+" and "-" and similar buttons are used almost universally and consistently throughout Mac OS X, Apple applications and 3rd party applications.
It isn't about being pretty but consistent and directly useful/discoverable without clutter.
I don't disagree with a single point that you made (except maybe for the way you made them). But I have to admit, I've had little to no trouble with MY Windows machine. It's always when I have to fix someone elses that I start to get the usual headaches.
"...and will that have a positive effect on desktop Linux adoption?"
Until Linux wireless is brain dead easy, the answer is NO.
As a long-time Windows user who has since switched to both OS X and Linux...
1 - Registry bloat. No other OS keeps app settings and preferences in what really amounts of a gigantic text file. Many apps do NOT remove registry entries correctly (or fully) when uninstalled. Inevitably this file will bloat, bloat, bloat, bloat until it takes forever just to get anything out of it.
2 - System folder bloat. No package manager in Windows, yet things insist on storing dependencies in a shared manner. This is pain, since *nobody* dares remove any library from your system upon uninstall because nobody is sure if anyone else needs it. As you install/uninstall things from your system, this folder will bloat, bloat, bloat. It's incredible how much larger a Windows install can get just 1 year after a fresh reformat.
These things are unavoidable. Your users may well have avoided these issues if their machines were locked like Fort Knox and they were unable to install and tweak to their liking. As a heavy dev who's always trying new tools, the constant install/uninstall cycle takes its toll VERY VERY quickly in Windows, whereas in OS X and Linux the system remains squeaky clean.
Oh, and did I mention that I need admin privileges to do ANYTHING? I can't even install a flash plugin for *myself* without needing full admin privileges to the system. This is lazy programming, and Windows is full of it. If I were a sysadmin I'd be tearing my hair out. It's either: "screw you guys, use the pre-installed software and nothing else", or "have fun with full admin, I'll be here waiting for your f'ed up computer". There's no happy medium.
Well, a subset of the "Geek" race are the "Nerds". These include scientists, engineers and the like who rely on many Windows-only computational tools. I am fully capable of installing, configuring and perpetually running Linux but I would be shooting myself in the proverbial academic foot by doing so. What's worse is the "linux-compatible" tools DO NOT run properly in Linux (which most of the S/W companies admit). If all relevant computational electromagnetics tools could run as smoothly under Linux as they do under Windows, I would switch in a heartbeat.
No - it means that you're used to Windows or Linux conventions, and are trying to use those conventions in an Apple environment.
It doesn't work that way. I'll be blunt: learning OSX is a pain. There's a ton of non-obvious stuff that is completely different from the Windows world (I'll just point to tabbing between firefox windows when other apps are open as one of my initial pain points), and which have to be re-learned. Remember that first time you fired up Linux? How much stumbling around did you have to do? It's the same thing for OSX. Expecting to be able to navigate all of OSX without ever looking for help anywhere is.... unrealistic.
What I will argue though is that OSX has the smallest learning curve of any new OS. I remember playing around with Linux, and having to root through config files and command line arguments to get stuff to work. Windows was a collection of arcane commands that made no sense, but worked. Compared to that, OSX is a breeze.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
Almost everybody out there, including the true geeks, runs Windows at work because they have to. Linux, Windows servers, XP desktops, Solaris, whatever corporate buys. Everything EXCEPT Macs.
At home we have a Macbook. Why? I don't mind running XP at work, but I'm not shelling out my own dough for Vista. I'd rather give it to Steve.
I think the backlash against Vista, whether justified or not, has caused a lot of people to look at Macs and to some degree Linux.
Apple has seen these numbers before. They're currently on a crest, but they'll sink and rise again. They have an upper limit of around 10-15% market share. They've made it quite clear that they don't *want* any more than that, and aren't interested in meeting the needs of the rest of the market.
I've got my share of -1 postings from ripping Apple but on this you are off base. I think thi would have been true in 1992 but it is certainly not true today. It's a completely different world out there. Personal computers running Windows have become corporate computing appliances, not personal ones, where Apple has doggedly focused on being a personal computer and is imaginatively building a software, service, and shopping stack designed to build a premium consumer brand.
If they decoupled their anaemic hardware offerings from their OS, they could see double digit growth yearly, but failing that they'll stay right where they've always been.
Apple has double digit growth yearly. Apple stock is kicking total butt right now in a stock market that sucks. I wish I would have bought them a couple of years ago when Jobs first came back... I'd be retired!
Secondly, Apple hardware is hardly anemic. Apple's new PowerMac, for example, is the latest Harperton Xeon and while it might be a tad pricier than the equivalent from the likes of Dell, I guarantee you that the entire service experience, from Apple store to home, is very, very good.
Christ, I'm talking myself into buying a Macintosh... and that's the thing about Apple - you walk into the store, and it reflects the sort of perfection that Americans expect from products.. indeed, Apple has gone beyond even Japanese cars when it comes to the detail of their products...
This is my sig.
I'm a sysadmin and we have 400+ Windows XP machines on our network.
It does "work well" for them. Of course, that means they can generally run the programs they need at a reasonable speed with a minimum of glitches.
So XP works well enough for folks that are comfortable with it. It doesn't have the rich features, deep pool of easy-to-install applications, lightning speed, or sophisticated visual effects that Linux does, but it does "work well" for them.
It's "good enough" for their work -- which is all they're trying to do. That makes it the right tool for the job.
Personally, though, I find working with Windows to feel like fingernails on a chalkboard compared to Ubuntu.
Life is short: void the warranty.
AP31R0N: I agree. The rest of my family - non-technical people - use it just fine. I've deployed XP to 500 - 1,500 user networks. I've managed XP in many different scenarios.
Usually, problems with Windows only arise when: You download Malware and install it, or you are trying to do something most people won't do. I've had my share of problems with XP but I'm also really trying to do things that only a geak would do. So it breaks sometimes, and I fix it.
It's just popular to bash Windows. It's not perfect, and there's some annoying ass problems with it, but MacOS ain't no saint either.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
Dunno what you are talking about. In the scientific community, I find quite often more open source tools available with few Windows equivalents than the reverse. And often those tools have greater flexibility and a greater set of features because more people have added to them (mostly grad students).
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
all it takes to run Windows is to pop in the disk and let it install
This little bit of folklore deserves to die.
1. Got a system restore disk? (Not an OEM-style installer!) Then sure, many minutes later your "my documents" is gone, but you are pretty much back up to day-1 status.
2. Got an OEM installer disk? How many of those disks do not include the drivers for devices like, ohhh your *ethernet* adapter? That is the purest soul-sucking time sink ever.
Apple's installer is pretty great for this reason. I seem to recall it kept my wife's home files intact.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
"Will the pearly gates of acceptance open up for them once they reach the magic 10%, and will that have a positive effect on desktop Linux adoption?"
Absolutely not.
Some of you may recall that, back in the late 1980s, the Mac's market share was about 18%. For a period of time lasting into the mid-1990s, Apple was the #1 maker of PCs (IBM, Compaq and Dell rounded out the top 4; HP, Packard Bell, Gateway and a few others fought over the scraps).
If you take into consideration the fact that Macs lasted longer than PCs in those days and Mac users tended to buy more software (claims supported by numerous published Gartner studies), you could make a fair argument that Macs represented as much as perhaps a third of the total installed base and of the potential software market.
This was not seen as sufficient. Throughout the entire mid-80s through late-90s, the PC press maintained a steady drum-beat of, "Apple doesn't have enough market share to survive." Of course Apple's not going to make it if the press keeps telling everyone they can't! Combine this with some of Apple's strategic management blunders, and you have a perfect recipe for also-ran status.
Not that any of this is necessary to ensure Windows' continued market dominance. Most businesses are going to use what other businesses in their industry use. Most people are going to buy for home use what they are comfortable with at work. Windows' prevalence is its own best selling feature. This is why Microsoft enjoys a "natural monopoly", and why it will take a bigger disruptive market force than anything we've seen so far in the past 20+ years to change it.
I can't comment on the Aperture/network backup issue but...
10.5 has a unified Finder, all windows behave the same at all times... although I think you can still make them unique they default to however you chose to display the last window.
As for the mice... plug in a USB mouse. Its not that hard, and I have never seen one that is unsupported. Additionally, for laptops use two finger clicking. Two fingers on trackpad + click = right click. I find this is even faster/comfortable than having a button since you never have to look or worry about hitting the wrong one.
Similarly, if you are challenged editing text files... well nobody can help you there. Seriously, pico /etc/hosts ? Its not that hard, and there are an abundance of great text editors for the Mac.
I have to say I completely disagree, I used Windows from 3.11 to XP and DOS before those... and in my mere four years of using OS X I have never had a more trouble-free computing experience. The attention to detail is astounding and once you stop expecting it to work like Windows (such as mucking around in obscure settings dialogs) it for the most part DOES "just work" and DOES get the hell out of my way.
As for not finding good open source Applications... I don't understand that either. I've been amazed at the quality of some of the completely free Apps here (Adium, Cyberduck, Colloquy, Drosera, NoobProof, Burn, ClamXav, EZ 7z, UnrarX, MacPar, MAMP, NicePlayer, Max, PureFTPd Manager, Transmission) ... they do a great job following HIG guidelines and I've yet to find a function I couldn't find an App for even though in some cases I do choose to pay for reasonably priced software (Acorn, Cheetah 3D, MoneyWell, LineForm, OmniGraffle, CSSEdit, TextMate, PandoraJam among them...)
No free utilities is a bunch of crap. As for for-pay apps I know this is /. but I find the level of Polish for Mac Shareware a step above that of Windows. Your usage may vary but I hear a lot of unfounded claims...
Yeah, but they're so SHINEY!
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
2-4 hours is pretty good going. Of course, then you have to install all the software. Wordpad and Paintbrush aren't going to get you very far.
Assuming you've installed a retail XP with SP2 you now need to do about 60-70 updates or install SP3.
(Not to mention finding the correct drivers for the installed hardware unless like me you are using an ancient Toshiba notebook. Even then, the Microsoft display drivers (notably for S3 in general and some NVidia) are such a POS that you need to find better ones if you want games to work). Then it gets to be more fun - PDF reader, browser, anti-virus , codecs, real alternative, qtlite etc. etc.
You're lucky if you get change from 4-5 hours installing even on a fast machine.
It gets even more interesting upgrading from Vista especially for Acer, HP, Sony notebooks.
Andy
Their "shitty business decisions" as you put it, currently have them placed as the 12th largest company in the US with a market cap of over $152 billion, right behind Google and IBM. As far as marketshare goes, there are steps that they could take to pull closer to Microsoft in terms of OS adoption, but in terms of profitability, they're doing just fine.
Only 1.5 hours? You must not be installing on a laptop, and have a fresh CD that was cut last week.
Installing Windows XP without a pre-made image usually requires the following:
1. Install
2. Download drivers on another machine
3. Install drivers
(about a half-dozen reboots by this point)
4. Install MS patches
(reboot and repeat step 4 a couple times)
5. Now install base software, and its patches
Before you're done, we're talking almost a day of work for a laptop, perhaps half a day for a desktop. (laptops have more obscure drivers to install, and slower hard drives)
Anyone who says Windows is easy to install has either used pre-made image CDs, has only done upgrades, or has never actually installed it.
Are you sure you have that one right? Macs these days are basically Intel boxes with blinky keyboards and bog standard innards (OK, the MacPro innards are pretty neat but memory card risers have been around since at least S-100 bus days).
It's the Mac users that are bat-shit insane (absent myself, of course - I'm OK, just ask my dog).
Do me a favor by designing, building and implementing the clean case, inside and out, motherboard connectors, fans, etc., that's in the Mac Pro, iMac or Laptops they produce and show me the equivalent off-the-shelf clone available to compete against Apple.
You are absolutely right. I worked for HP for quite some time, and believe me - the commodity hardware that $500 HP computer is built with is dirt compared to what Apple uses.
Think about it. HP sells a consumer laptop for $500 that includes all the bells and whistles, a webcam, shiny media buttons, etc. etc. Then they sell a business end laptop for 3x as much that is slower and has less features. Do you think there is a reason for this?
Consumer laptops are made with the absolute cheapest parts HP can source THAT DAY. Two laptops sitting next to each other on the shelf at the store can have different parts but look exactly the same. The quality control in this situation is, understandably, not good.
Business machines are the same in an entire series. They use good, proven hardware, and every single machine uses the same stuff. That way you can flash the same OS image onto all of them without problems. You can't do that with the consumer stuff.
So when people compare Apple to HP or other manufacturers, keep in mind that it's the business class machines that you should be looking at. Apple doesn't use commodity hardware - they use the same piece in every unit in a series, and they use parts that are high quality and proven to work well.
This is why people think Apple is expensive, when it's actually quite competitive.
or else!
"normal people (not just us geeks) are choosing to go with a different OS, rather than staying with the headache-inducing Windows."
What's really interesting is the demographics of the people who buy Apple computers. You think it would be young people. Not now Apple costomers tend to be much older and much better educated then the average PC buyer. Turns out if you are a 40+ year old professional with a graduate level education you are a prime demographic for Apple's Mac. These people tend to NOT be geeks of "on the fringe" Certainly these people are as full on mainstream as it gets. (and there have the money to buy what they like.)