the G5 compares fairly well with 64-bit x86 chips, but it's nothing to write home about.
Fairly well? You're not giving it anywhere near enough credit.
So that nobody misunderstands... it dramatically outperforms all Pentium series chips... its a bit faster that XEON and roughly on par with AMD64.
Those of us that followed Apple in the mid-90s are all too familiar with the onslaught of negative publicity that the company received that ultimately predicted the company's imminent death. Of course, the claims were grossly over stated. Apple was a very healthy company at the time as it is now. Unfortunately, the publicity had such a negative affect, that these predictions almost resulted in a self fulfilled prophecy.
At the time, Apple was still a relatively new player in most people's minds. The fact that many computer companies were in fact dying didn't help the stigma Apple received. When one misleading report was coupled with misconceptions about Apple and the marketplace, more reporters inevitably latched onto it and turned the situation into something far bigger than what it actually was.
While I wouldn't classify most of that negative publicity a mass instance of "FUD" (fear uncertainty and doubt), as most instances of FUD are uniquely intentional. These were a combination of some fear uncertainty and doubt mixed with mass-confusion. Thankfully, after a lot of education, such proclamations of death are not taken seriously, no matter what the author's intent.
However, there is a new round of Apple FUD that is not unlike the first and has been propagating throughout the same news scene as before. The new FUD is just as disturbing and equally pervasive as its predecessor but relatively undetected thus far. The new FUD plays on the public's misunderstanding about "market share" and "install base." Most individuals mistakenly use these terms interchangeably without fully understanding their meaning.
Market share is a term that describes the gross number of product sold in a given time period.
Install base is a term used to describe the gross number of products sold that are in use at any given time.
The problem with using these terms interchangeably, -- at least when it comes to computers and computing platforms -- amounts to the same problem that occurred during the 90's era news reports. People are far less inclined to consider an alternative platform if there is concern that it may not be around in the future. In the case of Apple however, these claims are totally unfounded.
Here's an example to put things into perspective: Lets say two people comprise 100% of all computer users on the planet. Each of these individuals bought a new computer for themselves at the same time; one a Macintosh and the other a Windows PC. Market share and installed base dynamics would indicate 50/50 percentages.
But if after two years time, the Windows user decides to replace his computer, "market share" dynamics will show that Windows occupies 50% more of the market than that of Macintosh users... even though there are still only two individuals using a computer.
Because "market share" only gauges sales of a platform as opposed to the total number of products in use, the results are skewed -- assuming we are solely trying to determine the total number of people using that particular product and not gauging sales. Of course, if we utilize the "Install base" dynamic, the ratio of computer users in our example is still 50/50.
When a research company reports that Apple's market share has declined and is at 2%, they may very well be correct, but this is not an indicator that Mac users are defecting to Windows, nor does it in any way suggest that the total number of Mac users is at that number. Instead, it indicates that the number of Macs sold during that time period didn't grow as fast as Windows did. The market share statistic doesn't indicate the fact that the vast majority of Windows users are simply replacing their old systems or that Mac users don't typically upgrade their computers as often.
Mac users tend to get more life out of their machine than their Windows-using counterparts. Because Mac users don't replace their computers as frequently, that translates to decreased "market share" even though install base grew... though not
>>>> But that's not a very Apple-friendly option, so we'll just remove that from the choices.
Wuh? What does this have to do with Apple?
>>>> Remember, this is the osViews tard who claims to have an "unbiased" site because users contribute the content. You know, just like/., there's ZERO bias here.
If that's what the site claims and it in fact does that then he is right. Sure, there are biases, but when those biases happen to coincide with the industry at large then there is no "bias"... at least not how you seem to be equating it.
>>>> "I wonder how many members he'd have if he didn't have Slashdot to troll for responses?"
Do I sense a bit of jellousy or bitterness in your post AC?
One thing I appreciate about osViews is that it IS so unbiased. You want to see biased... check out Eugenia articles and news posts on OS News. That site is out of control.
Apple produces a *computer* which includes the operating system. It can include whatever components in that computer that it sees fit.
The argument is not unlike Sony having a monopoly on the volume dials they use in their stereos. They create the *entire* product so they dictate what goes in it. Apple is no different in this regard.
Regardless, Apple is not not a monopoly and therefore does not have to abide by the same rules as Microsoft. more to the point, Apple is not an ILLEGAL monopoly like Microsoft... so even MORE to the point... they don't have to abide by the same rules as Microsoft, but even if they were, because Apple creates the entire product, it can bundle whatever it sees fit into its computer unlike Microsoft's Windows which is one of several coments which make up a greater whole.
"Are you saying, then, that an iPod is supposed to last only 2 years?"
Again, the popssi article was reference the ipod dirty little secret web site... an instance which has already been regarded as an obscure instance.
The life of the ipod will vary depending on the individual that has it. Every single individual I know that has an iPod 5 gig 9the first ipod) say that its serving them very well... no problems whatsoever.
"That's pretty bad."
It would be if that were the case. But its not.
"My existing mp3 players are that old, and I have every expectation that they will last much longer."
Perhaps, and yet its not entierly unlikely that those MP3 players with batteries have the same life expectancy and reliability as the iPod battery.... which is very good.
"Of course, I don't have to wreck them in order to deal with battery problems, either."
Good to know.
Neither do iPod owners either however.
>>>"As is to be expected, not all things work as planned"
That's a nice spin on "busted the thing just trying to get to the battery". Better-designed devices for a fraction of the cost have a hatch, or from 2 to 4 screws.
That's a nice spin on a device that is designed so well that the battery is intended to last the entire life of the product... as the iPod does in the vast majority of the time.
"Does this warranty cover opening the thing?"
Not sure... though that is not even necessary. If anything should go wrong with your iPod during its warrenty period an individual need only call Apple, they'll ship you a padded box the following day to mail them the iPod, they will send someone to pick it up, next-day deliever it to Apple where they will fix it that day, then next day it back to you.
"where the staff told him there was nothing Apple could do: his iPod's one-year warranty had expired. But they would be happy to sell him a new model to replace it."
That article refers to the "Apple's Dirty Little Secret" Web site not Apple's official position. If you listened to the phone call recording that got MASSIVE attention... the support rep suggested that because his iPod fell out of warenty the caller buy a new Apple warenty (costing $250) "but at that cost you might as well buy a new iPod anyways".
Obviously the support rep didn't say the thing that offerd the most level of comfor to the caller, but that hardly implies that Apple's position was to throw the iPod away.
Regardless, Apple has since updated the iPod support program to include an iPod battery. Additionally other suppliers have offered replacement batteries for even less than that which Apple sells them for.
This is all a moot point for the most part because we're talking about the fringe edge of iPod owners anways... only this extremely small number individuals are reporting problems. Thankfully, Apple and theird party companies provide support for this small group.
"A $50 DIY kit, also documented at popsci.com. Pretty steep."
Not at all. Batteryies for the Dell's Mp3 player, the archos brand gateway etc all utilize similar pricing structures as Apple and 3rd party companies do for the iPod.
Replacement batteries for the iPod are very much in sync with battery prices from other major MP3 manufacturers.
The iPod battery lasts as long as any bettery of that type is supposed to last. I forget what the exact specs are... but they are very liberal (although it does vary depending on the number of times you charge the device).
As is to be expected, not all things work as planned... hence the reason for Apple's warenty, Apple's extended warrenty as well as its more recent battery replacement programs. Additionally, iPod batters can be purchased from theird part manufacturers for less than even Apple sells.
"The rather high chance of DESTROYING the iPod (both regular and mini) just by trying to open it to get to the battery is well documented."
Perhaps, but this is based on the assumption that the iPod batter is faulty and has a high probability of failure. It does not (this despite reports to the contrary)
"The ludicrously high price of the replacement battery is also also well-documented."
And it is also well documented that you can get a cheaper battery from a different supplier for a fraction of the cost.
"Before there were complaints. Apple's semi-official position was "just throw the iPod away" when the battery died."
That'd not true at all.
Before there was a battery replacement program, Apple's semi-official provision was to buy an extended warrenty if your iPod was not already covered under its 1-year warrenty.
(Sorry posted in html rather than plain text) here it is again... properly formatted
"Apple's only hope for such great growth, really,is iMusic."
Thats a reaching statement considering the fact that they dont yet make such a product.
"That is the only thing they have that is truly competitive."
Apple makes iMusic? Never heard of it.
"The iPod bubble will burst as soon as someone comes out with something similar"
There are already plenty of knock-offs.... with similar features yet non have knocked apple off its high point.
"but with a battery hatch"
This would be an important feature if the iPod's battery was non replaceable (it is) and if the iPod battery was unreliable. (It's not)
and missing controls (like on/off switch)."
It doesn't need an on off switch. It turns off by itself.
"Likely it will cost half as much."
So, you're suggesting that this hypotheticvall competitor will ADD more and yet cost half that which Apple charges. HAH!
"Apple's desktop machine bubble already burst:"
Could have foold me. Their desktop business is doing very well.
"the Mac's appeal only to a tiny niche market"
Apple computer users make up between 10-12% of the computing market. That's hardly a tiny market by any stretch of the imagination.
You must be thinking in terms of "market share" rather than "install base". Apple's "market share" is small not because people aren't buying their computers or even because people are bying them less frequently than before. (Quite the contrary). Rather, PC users are replacing their existing machines twice as freequently. (Less longevity). Because "market share" is solely determined by quarterly or annual sales figures the "market share" number will be low while the user base continues to grow.
"which will not grow unless Apple does such things as drop the price"
I don't see how Apple could drop the price much more. They're already priced the same if not lower then PCs of comperable specs.
"and mass-market the thing."
They do this already.
A better strategy might be to simply educate the masses about business in general. If your post is an indicator or the average PC user... i'd say its an absolute necessity.
"Apple's only hope for such great growth, really,is iMusic."
Thats a reaching statement considering the fact that they dont yet make such a product.
"That is the only thing they have that is truly competitive."
Apple makes iMusic? Never heard of it.
"The iPod bubble will burst as soon as someone comes out with something similar"
There are already plenty of knock-offs.... with similar features yet non have knocked apple off its high point.
"but with a battery hatch"
This would be an important feature if the iPod's battery was non replaceable (it is) and if the iPod battery was unreliable. (It's not)
and missing controls (like on/off switch)."
It doesn't need an on off switch. It turns off by itself.
"Likely it will cost half as much."
So, you're suggesting that this hypotheticvall competitor will ADD more and yet cost half that which Apple charges. HAH!
"Apple's desktop machine bubble already burst:"
Could have foold me. Their desktop business is doing very well.
"the Mac's appeal only to a tiny niche market"
Apple computer users make up between 10-12% of the computing market. That's hardly a tiny market by any stretch of the imagination.
You must be thinking in terms of "market share" rather than "install base". Apple's "market share" is small not because people aren't buying their computers or even because people are bying them less frequently than before. (Quite the contrary). Rather, PC users are replacing their existing machines twice as freequently. (Less longevity). Because "market share" is solely determined by quarterly or annual sales figures the "market share" number will be low while the user base continues to grow.
"which will not grow unless Apple does such things as drop the price"
I don't see how Apple could drop the price much more. They're already priced the same if not lower then PCs of comperable specs.
"and mass-market the thing."
They do this already.
A better strategy might be to simply educate the masses about business in general. If your post is an indicator or the average PC user... i'd say its an absolute necessity.
I understand the joke...
Unfortunately, others don't (as illustrated in the post above yours.) Hence the necessity to label the parent post a troll or at least just mod it as overrated..
"We'll give it a rest as soon as Mac fixes the iPod battery problem."
First of all, there is no such company as Mac... (its Apple) and there is no battery problem within the iPod... as has been pointed out time and time again in these threads.
While it is true that the iPod and the Macintosh are wonderful works of industrial design. It is hardly the only aspect of either product which puts it ahead of the competition.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh?
How is a G5 more expensive than an x86 PC of the exact same components.
(Its not)
I don't know why anyone would think that you're locked into OS X if you buy a Mac. There's just as many OSes for PPC as there is X86.
the G5 compares fairly well with 64-bit x86 chips, but it's nothing to write home about. Fairly well? You're not giving it anywhere near enough credit. So that nobody misunderstands... it dramatically outperforms all Pentium series chips... its a bit faster that XEON and roughly on par with AMD64.
Those of us that followed Apple in the mid-90s are all too familiar with the onslaught of negative publicity that the company received that ultimately predicted the company's imminent death. Of course, the claims were grossly over stated. Apple was a very healthy company at the time as it is now. Unfortunately, the publicity had such a negative affect, that these predictions almost resulted in a self fulfilled prophecy.
At the time, Apple was still a relatively new player in most people's minds. The fact that many computer companies were in fact dying didn't help the stigma Apple received. When one misleading report was coupled with misconceptions about Apple and the marketplace, more reporters inevitably latched onto it and turned the situation into something far bigger than what it actually was.
While I wouldn't classify most of that negative publicity a mass instance of "FUD" (fear uncertainty and doubt), as most instances of FUD are uniquely intentional. These were a combination of some fear uncertainty and doubt mixed with mass-confusion. Thankfully, after a lot of education, such proclamations of death are not taken seriously, no matter what the author's intent.
However, there is a new round of Apple FUD that is not unlike the first and has been propagating throughout the same news scene as before. The new FUD is just as disturbing and equally pervasive as its predecessor but relatively undetected thus far. The new FUD plays on the public's misunderstanding about "market share" and "install base." Most individuals mistakenly use these terms interchangeably without fully understanding their meaning.
Market share is a term that describes the gross number of product sold in a given time period.
Install base is a term used to describe the gross number of products sold that are in use at any given time.
The problem with using these terms interchangeably, -- at least when it comes to computers and computing platforms -- amounts to the same problem that occurred during the 90's era news reports. People are far less inclined to consider an alternative platform if there is concern that it may not be around in the future. In the case of Apple however, these claims are totally unfounded.
Here's an example to put things into perspective: Lets say two people comprise 100% of all computer users on the planet. Each of these individuals bought a new computer for themselves at the same time; one a Macintosh and the other a Windows PC. Market share and installed base dynamics would indicate 50/50 percentages.
But if after two years time, the Windows user decides to replace his computer, "market share" dynamics will show that Windows occupies 50% more of the market than that of Macintosh users... even though there are still only two individuals using a computer.
Because "market share" only gauges sales of a platform as opposed to the total number of products in use, the results are skewed -- assuming we are solely trying to determine the total number of people using that particular product and not gauging sales. Of course, if we utilize the "Install base" dynamic, the ratio of computer users in our example is still 50/50.
When a research company reports that Apple's market share has declined and is at 2%, they may very well be correct, but this is not an indicator that Mac users are defecting to Windows, nor does it in any way suggest that the total number of Mac users is at that number. Instead, it indicates that the number of Macs sold during that time period didn't grow as fast as Windows did. The market share statistic doesn't indicate the fact that the vast majority of Windows users are simply replacing their old systems or that Mac users don't typically upgrade their computers as often.
Mac users tend to get more life out of their machine than their Windows-using counterparts. Because Mac users don't replace their computers as frequently, that translates to decreased "market share" even though install base grew... though not
What's with the BeOS person icon in the upper left hand corner?
why is that funny?
>>>> But that's not a very Apple-friendly option, so we'll just remove that from the choices.
/., there's ZERO bias here.
Wuh?
What does this have to do with Apple?
>>>> Remember, this is the osViews tard who claims to have an "unbiased" site because users contribute the content. You know, just like
If that's what the site claims and it in fact does that then he is right. Sure, there are biases, but when those biases happen to coincide with the industry at large then there is no "bias"... at least not how you seem to be equating it.
>>>> "I wonder how many members he'd have if he didn't have Slashdot to troll for responses?"
Do I sense a bit of jellousy or bitterness in your post AC?
One thing I appreciate about osViews is that it IS so unbiased. You want to see biased... check out Eugenia articles and news posts on OS News. That site is out of control.
Its a bit bigger than a Jornada and the weight is much heavier...
In either event, its not conducive for portability, which is what the initial question in the survey seems to be eluding to.
osViews is holding a survey which asks that people rate their liklihood of buying one of these types of devices.
The results are very telling...
"I still think OS X is going to save Apple."
As if Apple needed "saving"
The company could use a healthy dose of growth but they are certinly not it need of "saving".
Thankfully, theres nothing wrong with the iPod's battery life as has been illustrated time and time again in these forums.
Best Buy isn't dropping Macs... Apple is dropping Best buy.
It means that sites will get slashdooted within the first 30 seconds of being posted.
Apple produces a *computer* which includes the operating system. It can include whatever components in that computer that it sees fit.
The argument is not unlike Sony having a monopoly on the volume dials they use in their stereos. They create the *entire* product so they dictate what goes in it. Apple is no different in this regard.
Regardless, Apple is not not a monopoly and therefore does not have to abide by the same rules as Microsoft. more to the point, Apple is not an ILLEGAL monopoly like Microsoft... so even MORE to the point... they don't have to abide by the same rules as Microsoft, but even if they were, because Apple creates the entire product, it can bundle whatever it sees fit into its computer unlike Microsoft's Windows which is one of several coments which make up a greater whole.
"Are you saying, then, that an iPod is supposed to last only 2 years?"
Again, the popssi article was reference the ipod dirty little secret web site... an instance which has already been regarded as an obscure instance.
The life of the ipod will vary depending on the individual that has it. Every single individual I know that has an iPod 5 gig 9the first ipod) say that its serving them very well... no problems whatsoever.
"That's pretty bad."
It would be if that were the case. But its not.
"My existing mp3 players are that old, and I have every expectation that they will last much longer."
Perhaps, and yet its not entierly unlikely that those MP3 players with batteries have the same life expectancy and reliability as the iPod battery.... which is very good.
"Of course, I don't have to wreck them in order to deal with battery problems, either."
Good to know.
Neither do iPod owners either however.
>>>"As is to be expected, not all things work as planned"
That's a nice spin on "busted the thing just trying to get to the battery". Better-designed devices for a fraction of the cost have a hatch, or from 2 to 4 screws.
That's a nice spin on a device that is designed so well that the battery is intended to last the entire life of the product... as the iPod does in the vast majority of the time.
"Does this warranty cover opening the thing?"
Not sure... though that is not even necessary. If anything should go wrong with your iPod during its warrenty period an individual need only call Apple, they'll ship you a padded box the following day to mail them the iPod, they will send someone to pick it up, next-day deliever it to Apple where they will fix it that day, then next day it back to you.
Apple's warrenty service is EXCELLENT.
"where the staff told him there was nothing Apple could do: his iPod's one-year warranty had expired. But they would be happy to sell him a new model to replace it."
That article refers to the "Apple's Dirty Little Secret" Web site not Apple's official position. If you listened to the phone call recording that got MASSIVE attention... the support rep suggested that because his iPod fell out of warenty the caller buy a new Apple warenty (costing $250) "but at that cost you might as well buy a new iPod anyways".
Obviously the support rep didn't say the thing that offerd the most level of comfor to the caller, but that hardly implies that Apple's position was to throw the iPod away.
Regardless, Apple has since updated the iPod support program to include an iPod battery. Additionally other suppliers have offered replacement batteries for even less than that which Apple sells them for.
This is all a moot point for the most part because we're talking about the fringe edge of iPod owners anways... only this extremely small number individuals are reporting problems. Thankfully, Apple and theird party companies provide support for this small group.
"A $50 DIY kit, also documented at popsci.com. Pretty steep."
Not at all. Batteryies for the Dell's Mp3 player, the archos brand gateway etc all utilize similar pricing structures as Apple and 3rd party companies do for the iPod.
Replacement batteries for the iPod are very much in sync with battery prices from other major MP3 manufacturers.
"Apple has yet to solve the battery problem."
Again, there is no battery "problem".
The iPod battery lasts as long as any bettery of that type is supposed to last. I forget what the exact specs are... but they are very liberal (although it does vary depending on the number of times you charge the device).
As is to be expected, not all things work as planned... hence the reason for Apple's warenty, Apple's extended warrenty as well as its more recent battery replacement programs. Additionally, iPod batters can be purchased from theird part manufacturers for less than even Apple sells.
"The rather high chance of DESTROYING the iPod (both regular and mini) just by trying to open it to get to the battery is well documented." Perhaps, but this is based on the assumption that the iPod batter is faulty and has a high probability of failure. It does not (this despite reports to the contrary)
"The ludicrously high price of the replacement battery is also also well-documented."
And it is also well documented that you can get a cheaper battery from a different supplier for a fraction of the cost.
"Before there were complaints. Apple's semi-official position was "just throw the iPod away" when the battery died."
That'd not true at all. Before there was a battery replacement program, Apple's semi-official provision was to buy an extended warrenty if your iPod was not already covered under its 1-year warrenty.
(Sorry posted in html rather than plain text) here it is again... properly formatted
,is iMusic."
"Apple's only hope for such great growth, really
Thats a reaching statement considering the fact that they dont yet make such a product.
"That is the only thing they have that is truly competitive."
Apple makes iMusic? Never heard of it.
"The iPod bubble will burst as soon as someone comes out with something similar"
There are already plenty of knock-offs.... with similar features yet non have knocked apple off its high point.
"but with a battery hatch"
This would be an important feature if the iPod's battery was non replaceable (it is) and if the iPod battery was unreliable. (It's not)
and missing controls (like on/off switch)."
It doesn't need an on off switch. It turns off by itself.
"Likely it will cost half as much."
So, you're suggesting that this hypotheticvall competitor will ADD more and yet cost half that which Apple charges. HAH!
"Apple's desktop machine bubble already burst:"
Could have foold me. Their desktop business is doing very well.
"the Mac's appeal only to a tiny niche market"
Apple computer users make up between 10-12% of the computing market. That's hardly a tiny market by any stretch of the imagination.
You must be thinking in terms of "market share" rather than "install base". Apple's "market share" is small not because people aren't buying their computers or even because people are bying them less frequently than before. (Quite the contrary). Rather, PC users are replacing their existing machines twice as freequently. (Less longevity). Because "market share" is solely determined by quarterly or annual sales figures the "market share" number will be low while the user base continues to grow.
"which will not grow unless Apple does such things as drop the price"
I don't see how Apple could drop the price much more. They're already priced the same if not lower then PCs of comperable specs.
"and mass-market the thing."
They do this already.
A better strategy might be to simply educate the masses about business in general. If your post is an indicator or the average PC user... i'd say its an absolute necessity.
"Apple's only hope for such great growth, really ,is iMusic."
Thats a reaching statement considering the fact that they dont yet make such a product.
"That is the only thing they have that is truly competitive."
Apple makes iMusic? Never heard of it.
"The iPod bubble will burst as soon as someone comes out with something similar"
There are already plenty of knock-offs.... with similar features yet non have knocked apple off its high point.
"but with a battery hatch"
This would be an important feature if the iPod's battery was non replaceable (it is) and if the iPod battery was unreliable. (It's not)
and missing controls (like on/off switch)."
It doesn't need an on off switch. It turns off by itself.
"Likely it will cost half as much."
So, you're suggesting that this hypotheticvall competitor will ADD more and yet cost half that which Apple charges. HAH!
"Apple's desktop machine bubble already burst:"
Could have foold me. Their desktop business is doing very well.
"the Mac's appeal only to a tiny niche market"
Apple computer users make up between 10-12% of the computing market. That's hardly a tiny market by any stretch of the imagination.
You must be thinking in terms of "market share" rather than "install base". Apple's "market share" is small not because people aren't buying their computers or even because people are bying them less frequently than before. (Quite the contrary). Rather, PC users are replacing their existing machines twice as freequently. (Less longevity). Because "market share" is solely determined by quarterly or annual sales figures the "market share" number will be low while the user base continues to grow.
"which will not grow unless Apple does such things as drop the price"
I don't see how Apple could drop the price much more. They're already priced the same if not lower then PCs of comperable specs.
"and mass-market the thing."
They do this already.
A better strategy might be to simply educate the masses about business in general. If your post is an indicator or the average PC user... i'd say its an absolute necessity.
I understand the joke... Unfortunately, others don't (as illustrated in the post above yours.) Hence the necessity to label the parent post a troll or at least just mod it as overrated..
"We'll give it a rest as soon as Mac fixes the iPod battery problem."
First of all, there is no such company as Mac... (its Apple) and there is no battery problem within the iPod... as has been pointed out time and time again in these threads.
While it is true that the iPod and the Macintosh are wonderful works of industrial design. It is hardly the only aspect of either product which puts it ahead of the competition.
give it a rest with the whole battery thing.
Whomever has mod points... please label the parrent post a troll.