What is Digg?233 Comments
- wallclimber, on 10/12/2007, -14/+53wisedude: " It's clear what the people want..."
======================================
Nah, it's only "clear" as to what software's already on people's computers when they buy them. The people "want" a computer, to them Windows is just what comes on the machine. In the past the majority had no idea there was any choice about it. Which, If you think about it, is only a fake sort of "popularity", which MS marketers really play up.
I think more and more people are starting to understand that there are actually other choices available now. It may be a slow process, but I can already see attitudes changing. Also, popularity is an ever changing thing. What was popular last year may be forgotton next year.
I doubt if OSX, or any Linux distro can "beat" XP or Vista, but I DO believe that all of them together can do so. We don't need any more monopolies, choice and variety is the consumer's friend. - cliffzdude, on 10/12/2007, -20/+54Can we get off the crack-pipe for just 1 minute here, and bring this discussion back to earth?
Ignore your thoughts and feelings regarding both OSs, and Apple vs. "All the other PC vendors on earth".
Now... Calmly, quietly. GET A ***** GRIP!!!
Apple couldn't ramp up production enough by Christmas to take a "chunk" out of anybody.
Microsoft sells an OS, for Apple to compete, ever, they will have to de-bundle OSX from their hardware. - Lynn, on 10/12/2007, -34/+60How is OSX going to beat Vista when it can not even beat XP? I am talking sales not your opinion of which is better.
- cleverboy, on 10/12/2007, -9/+28@cliffzdude: "Microsoft sells an OS, for Apple to compete, ever, they will have to de-bundle OSX from their hardware."
Actually, the discussion is "platform" vs. "platform" for the consumer desktop space. If u think the "battle" is comparing the uncomparable, hold on to your hat... cause its NOT. If Apple can convince people to "switch" to OS X, and avoid viruses, malware, and other things that complicate life for the consumer... its a good deal. If Apple were simply like BeOS used to be, or even dare say it... Linux (or Lindows), they'd still be bummin' for the long haul. By selling a platform *experience*, they are creating an integrated solution to common consumer problems. --And making more money per customer on it that Microsoft, because they're selling hardware too.
Now that the "platform" is even MORE compatible with "transition" options, than before, Apple is primed to steal away more customers from the Microsoft platform. The idea being that these new customers will lean towards Mac platform software, and not towards more "legacy" Windows software.
If I'd had Intel Mac's as an option 2 years ago, I know what I would have gotten. Especially with those new PowerMac prices? Sheeeooot. Screw Dell and their Outlet store. And screw two machines on my desktop. - titlesaysitall, on 10/12/2007, -16/+32true XP crushed OS X and sales wise but it comes down to which OS is right for you and with Window's 94% marketshare that must mean it's what the majority prefers. I would take OS X even 10.0 over Windowws anyday but that's my personal preference. Sometimes it's too hard to switch to OS X/GNU Linux even with added benefits of each OS>
- i5aac, on 10/12/2007, -8/+19So you think people who are only willing to buy $500 Dells are going to shell out significantly more for an Apple computer just because it doesn't run Windows? Are you kidding me?
- monergism, on 10/12/2007, -7/+18Can my screwdriver counter my hammer? They are different tools for different jobs.
- octopi, on 10/12/2007, -7/+18Apple currently owns 12% of the laptop market and I don't think anyone saw that coming, so you never know with these things. However, deliver the system when they said? Um... wasn't it THEY who said they would deliver Leopard Fall '06?
- awhiteflame, on 10/12/2007, -10/+20On the contrary, with the popularity of Macbooks recently, the great reviews about the Mac Pro, I think that Mac could very easily take a noticeable chunk out of Windows. If Vista is going to require way more than the average person has in their system at the moment (I'm talking the $499 Dells, here), and they're already fed up with Windows (or at least willing to give something else a try), I think the possibility that they will end up looking at Mac is quite good -- and enough to have Redmond kicking and screaming a little more.
- MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/12/2007, -14/+23Microsoft sucks, absolutely.
But if all or most you can see is how pretty the windows are on each then you're wasting your time handing out opinions.
There are a ton of new improvements comming to Windows and Mac that are both "beneath the hood" and more which people simplely don't know about when they talk about the two.
Either way I love and hate things from both sides. I also find it rather rediculous that Jobbs joked about 5 versions of OSX being released while Vista was developed.
Two ideas come to mind:
1. The amount of effort and work BOTH companies have put into their updates.
2. Microsoft has released about twice as many versions of Windows as Apple released OSX versions.
(XP Home, XP Pro, 2003, MediaCenter, MediaCenter 2005, N Versions, Tablet PC Versions, Pocket PC Versions, 64bit Edition, X64, and etc.)
Either way people are going to win because you'll see both companies at their best. - adml_shake, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11A year ago I would have said that no, Apple won't get near MS. However since school has been starting at various places the last few weeks i've been amazed by how people have been asking me "what do you think about these mac books" and then find out that a large chunch of them actually went out and got one. So we'll see I guess.
- Bob042, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11I'm certainly considering buying a macbook pro for college, and not bothering with the mess Vista is looking like. If there's a price drop before the end of the school year, I'll probably get one.
- MioTheGreat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Hey, Don't diss the reigstry. The fact that it is misused is a problem, but the registry itself is incredibly useful. Why? To name a really really big one, it makes Group Policy possible. Not to mention the fact that accessing it is quite fast. Plus the ability to easily merge .reg files. In an environment with config files, it becomes more complex. You have to go through the file and add entries that are missing, and remove entries you want to remove, and change entries you want to change. A .reg file does that automatically.... If people used proper uninstallers, it wouldn't be an issue.
- einsteindesign, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9If Apple were to ever crack the 20% mark, I think it could create a tipping point of awareness. But as long as businesses continue to use Wintel boxen, and the employees continue to buy Wintels for the home "becase that's what I use at work" or "that's what mom/dad use at work", there will never be a paradigm shift in the user base.
The most interesting segment of the market are the Diggers, the Farkers, the IT crew eager to give the hardware a shot with the promise of seamless switching between any flavor of OS you could want. These users range from hobbyists to gamers to IT pros -- decidedly the hardest "sell" in the PC world -- and to even make them *curious* about the Mac shows a huge win for Apple. If the hardware proves up to the task (minus the much debated "Mac Tax") then the next 2 years should prove very interesting.
The only nut left to crack is Dedicated Hosting. If you price Xserves you'll find the entry-level pricing above a Xeon, about $400+ per month per 1U device. If that were to reach the $199-$249 price point, I think you'd see some movement from Win and *nix hosting into the Mac racks. (of course if you're up $3k and into co-lo then just buy the hardware) - Ninjamonk, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12if they sold osx on its own so people could load it on to any machine not just an apple I think they would start to make inroads into the windows market share.
however they don't because they are a hardware company so I don't think they will.
if they rebranded something like the mac mini to be an ipod related home station that pluged into HD TV and HiFi and allowed the ipod to be slotted in then they would make a killing. - ani-pockdotnet, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10"Microsoft sells an OS, for Apple to compete, ever, they will have to de-bundle OSX from their hardware. "
In my opinion, if Apple de-bundled OS X from their hardware, many software/driver VS hardware conflicts would arise.
Users would become frustrated when a certain feature of OS X malfunctions or fails to work due to these driver/hardware related problems. The overall user experience would decrease. Apple touts itself in its TV advertisements as "[Mac]: It Just Works", because they make both the software and the hardware.
Sure this brings limitations to where you can run OS X and perhaps the performance of it, but in the end, the goal is to make the end user experience as best as possible.
De-bundling the OS from the hardware would lead to an exponential increase in the number of variables of working software drivers VS hardware, resulting in more problems.
At least on Apple hardware, with Apple software/drivers, the variables are much, much smaller- but of course even still the user experience is not perfect. Ah well, its better than one other operating system I can think of. =) - LaughingMan11, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Wallclimber is correct. Choice is good for everybody. The major flaw of one particular platform becoming too dominant for too long is that if an ecosystem becomes homogenous, weaknesses can be amplified... The same principle that applies in biology that encourages heterogeny rather than homogeny in order to have better gene selection and better immunity to diseases applies to our computer platforms as well.
Personally, there is very little (outside of my full time job) that I really need to use Windows for, so I spend most of my time using my Mac. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+13Apple will take a chunk out of Dell & HP, and people will be surprised to learn they can get a cheaper, better computer from Apple that still runs Windows if you want it, but it has the added benefit of running OSX... which from all indicators, even die-hard PC users love.
- BWhaler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7So this thread is FlameBait.
For me, I use Mac OS X, and will continue to do so.
Why?
1. It works best for me. I appreciate the little details Apple puts in their OS, the types of details which makes me more productive.
2. Better security. I don't care why, hell maybe it is because no one cares about the Mac. But the end result is the same: My computing experience is better.
3. I like supporting the little guy. And the fact that the Mac is better for me, makes it a simple decision.
4. Every company is evil, but we have to vote with our wallets and chose the least evil companies out there. For me, choosing between Apple and Microsoft on the evil scale is a no brainer.
5. I like to vote with my wallet and innovation. While Microsoft has certainly innovated some things, I think they are pathetic compared with Apple. I laughed at how a poster here pointed to the 15 platforms Windows XP and its ilk runs on as innovation.
6. Apple is exciting to be part of. Vista is a sad shadow of Microsoft's promises. We now know that Zune is Toshiba's re-branded player with an iTunes knock-off. Sure, Microsoft is promising next year it will be better, but it's just sad. I have the iPod today, and with the patents Apple has been filing of late, the next generation looks to be crazy cool. Even if they do 10% of the patents.
7. iLife and iWork. They are both brilliant. Innovative, Have no peers. Run on OS X only.
I am not saying everyone should be on the Mac. It's certainly not right for everyone. But I am sure that 20-50% of the consumer market would be better off.
But for me, there is no comparison. Leaving the Windows world was scary, but not now that I can install Parallels and Windows on my laptop, it's funny that I really have no interest.
I look at the last security patch from Microsoft this week. It didn't fix anything and opened up new security holes. Do I really want to be dealing with this low quality crap from Microsoft? No. (And yes, Mac OS X has holes and is vulnerable. My point is not having to deal with these continually headaches from Microsoft.) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12Congrats Apple. Welcome to the double digits.
- brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7The problem with the $200 eMachines and the $500 Dells is that in the computer world, there's no avoiding it: you get what you pay for. People like to blame XP for being unstable when they're using it on a sub-$500 machine. What most people don't know (or refuse to believe) is that IT REALLY DOES MATTER what quality of hardware you're running.
I know someone that builds computers for a living, and he only uses the highest-quality parts. I cannot count how many times I've seen his machine--even with slower specs--outperform a big box machine from Compaq or Dell. Quality does matter. - skipunk, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9You know, I don't think you can make the different tool argument about OSX and Windows anymore. With OSX you can do software development, design type work, and business work. Of course you are gonna have some platform/domain specific software and games, so I think maybe it would be more appropriate to compare a phillips screwdriver to say a robertson screwdriver
- Wolfghost, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10I would mode you up, except for the lame '90 "M$" references.
- Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9the 500 dells will come with vista basic (no glass)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8octopi, that is not exactly correct, either. Initially, at WWDC'05 I believe, it was announced that Leopard will ship late 2006 or early 2007 - about the time Vista was (is?) expected to ship. Although Apple are effectively delaying Leopard - they are pushing it back to the end of the "release window" (i.e. early 2007), technically they are still on schedule.
- MioTheGreat, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Because, you know, offering choices would be terrible. It's simply not Apple's way.
- JorgeGT, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10I like Mac OS's, from Classic to OS X .
They are so damn beautiful, stable, and powerful.
...
I use Windows XP.
It supports *all* my games, *all* my programs, *all* my hardware.
...
While the last sentence doesn't change, I will still using Microsoft Windows. Sad but true. - Yoda716, on 10/12/2007, -11/+15I think this should be stated the other way around. For all of you who think XP "crushed" OSX you are dead wrong. Start off with the registry, who's dumb ass idea was that? It causes more problems than it solves and more than that it slows your system down your system and eventually forces you to re-install the OS. NTFS file system is terrible for searching files among other things. Oh but vista will have a new network stack you say? Its coded from scratch and has all ready proven to be less secure than the Win 95 stack. Microsoft should just steal the BSD stack like they did with windows 2000. It worked out well for them last time. If you don't know what I'm talking about go listen to Security Now ( twit.tv ) Windows will all ways be a festering turd of an OS.
- JorgeGT, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6You have to check college's requeriments! Many times students are required to run certain applications - and you can have compatibility issues.
- robohoe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5An answer:
Who cares?
Just use what you like. Simple as that. - xxdesmus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7The simple answer is: "No, not even close, as usual."
End of story. - BWhaler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Daring fireball has a great article on marketshare.
Apple is not looking for 50% of the market, because there is no money there. Companies buying based on pennies, and people here who want to build their own computers to save money are not what Apple wants as customers.
Apple is the only PC maker making money right now because they are going for the segments that SPEND GOOD MONEY.
These are the good customers for a company. As Dell is learning the hard way, the race to the bottom is a bad business over time.
So for all of you who won't buy OS X until you can put it on a computer with parts from Radio Shack and egghead, you're going to be waiting a long time. You're not worth Apple's efforts. - mcpaige, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11Change is slow..but there will aways be the OS war!
- KCorax, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5It's 0% actually, it was 5% non-voting and was rebought over time.
- iSEPIC, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11I can use the same analogy to the iPOD vs the other mp3 players..
Who's dumb ass idea was it to make the nano so damn "scratchy"
Who's dumb ass idea was it to make the iPODs battery non-user replaceable?
Who's dumb ass idea was it to make the iPODs not play WMA and other formats?
Who's dumb ass idea was it to make the iPOD not allow you to just simply drag and drop music onto it as a usb thumb drive (e.g. from linux, or any other OS in the world that supports usb dirves).
But.. the iPOD is the most popular, isn't it? Why? The market decides. And guess what, they have spoken for all of them, iPOD, other MP3 players and yes OSX and XP/VISTA - mywhitenoise, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7you can always get a student discount. I think it's 10% off, plus you could sell the nano you get with it.
- Sefirosu, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I'm surprised how many people don't know basic math and always compare with Celery like crap PCs. No ***** Mac comes with this ***** and every damn equivalent PC I have checked was either the same price or higher.
This argument was valid a few years ago but it is not now.
And use whatever the hell you want and leave me alone, enough already. - PhillyMJS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yeah, yeah, I am so sick of people saying stuff like, "Release OS X for beige boxes... Your company could be the next Microsoft."
Uh huh. And look at Microsoft now: They may be a huge, rich company with tremendous marketshare, but it was proven in a court of law that they achieved those things through no small use of illegal means. Currently, they're the laughing stock of the industry, struggling to get Vista out the door (years-late and gutted of all its compelling features), and with their employees burned out, demoralized, updating their resumes and one step shy of open revolt (if you believe what you read on minimsft). I much prefer Apple just the way it is, thanks.
Have you even considered what would go into selling OS X for generic PCs? Everyone who advocates this seems to harbor the illusion that they could cobble together a PC from any old spare parts they had lying around, and by putting OS X on it magically end up with something that works as well as a real Mac. Not bloody likely.
First, tight integration of the hardware and software is what makes a Mac a Mac. The OS X developers know exactly what hardware they're writing for, and can take full advantage of its capabilities. The limited pool of hardware also makes testing a much less onerous proposition. The Windows developers have to code to "lowest common denominator,"-- the alphabet soup of acronyms and abbreviations representing the hardware standards Windows supports. All they can do is hope that all the commodity hardware implements those standards correctly, because they have no hope of testing all the possible hardware combinations that can be (and probably have been, somewhere in the world) assembled into a functioning PC. Microsoft has spent twenty years and untold billions trying to approximate the "It just works" aspect of the Mac, and the best they've been able to come up with is "It usually works, but quite often it doesn't and we don't know why. Maybe if you reboot..." I'm a field tech, and the most common Windows problem I hear is "[Feature/application] worked fine all day yesterday, but when I came in this morning it didn't."
Second, where would all the Mac drivers come from for all those commodity components? Jobs can't snap his fingers and suddenly have driver support in OS X for all the cheap, generic hardware pouring out of the factories in Asia. Even when NeXTStep was available for x86, it only came with a short list of supported generic hardware. If you wanted to install and run NeXTStep on something that wasn't on that list, you were SOL. So then the drivers would have to be produced by the companies making the hardware. Crappy hardware drivers are a big part of what makes the Windows experience miserable, and those companies have been putting out Windows drivers for years. What makes you think they'd do a better job of producing Mac drivers without any prior experience at it? Furthermore, multiple components from multiple vendors mean support becomes a nightmare. Right now if you have a Mac problem, it falls to Apple to solve it because they make the hardware and software. I don't know how many times I've heard of and experienced finger pointing matches between Microsoft support people and the hardware vendor support people, each blaming the other for some random problem instead of trying to address it. It's not a problem for techies who are able to troubleshoot their own problems, but OS X is supposed to be the savior from that sort of thing. It won't be if it runs on generics.
Third, it would not be profitable for Apple to sell OS X for generics because they'd have to price it to make up for at least some of the revenue loss due to the resulting lost Mac sales. The people who currently bitch about the price of a Mac will not buy an OS from Apple that costs as much as their cheap PC did (if not more). And don't even tell me Apple could price it lower and make it up in volume, because a stroll through the dot-com boneyard proves that the "we'll make it up in volume" business model flat out doesn't work. Most of Apple's revenue comes from their computer sales, not iPods. They have to maintain that revenue somehow to fund R&D, or you'll see OS X stagnate like Netscape Navigator did when Microsoft killed Netscape's revenue by making IE free.
Fourth, even if Apple did sell it for generic PCs, many, many, many people would still download it illegally, anyway-- particularly if Apple priced it to try to compensate for lost hardware sales. That means more lost revenue, because now people stealing the OS haven't even purchased a Mac on which to run it. So sooner or later Apple would be adding activation to OS X out of necessity. Honestly, considering how hard the "we want everything for nothing" crowd has already worked to crack the developer copies of OS X Intel and subsequent updates, I wouldn't be surprised to see OS X 10.5 ship with installation keys and/or activation.
Finally, do you think Microsoft would stand idly by while Apple made this incursion into "their" turf? Look what happened to Be, Inc. Hell, look what happened to Netscape and Go Corp, for that matter. The only thing that saved NeXT from the same fate was Apple purchasing them. No, Microsoft would quickly retaliate if Apple started selling OS X for any old PC. They'd probably discontinue Office for OS X, and lean on Dell and the other big-name PC makers to ensure they didn't ink any deals to sell PCs preloaded with OS X. In other words, Microsoft would just go back to their old, anticompetitive ways to the degree they could get away with it.
~Philly - iSEPIC, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10@ skipunk - Sorry I disagree, that's one of the reasons I switched-back. Once you try and find software for stuff, I'll use ONE analogy, but there are 1000s more: DVD RIPPING AND BURING. When I'm on a windows box I have over 150 different pieces of software I can find, usually get a free demo and pay later if I want, and or just plain out buy, or even pirate. With the OSX PC (yes Virginia, a Mac is a Personal Computer too), with help from others, found maybe 35 different tools. I use this as an example, becuse most die-hard Mac users will come back with a list of comparable tools - but what if I dont like the 35? And I like one of the 150 for another platform? Well now the solution is to not only buy a 2500 computer, but to also buy 150 license of Windows XP, or whatever it costs for Parallels - and then boot into XP run the program, then boot back into OSX. To me, the lack of available software for the Mac is one of the main reasons I choose to go back to my existing pre paid for AMD64 box I built myself and give my Apples to family who really all they do is surf the web, and send/receive email and print photos, and could care the hell less about burning cds/dvds and or playing games, and or using software to connect to their corporate network, or waiting a year for google earth, or waiting 8 months for gchat when it first came out, and so on and so on. Personal preferences is what it boiled down to for me, your results may and probably will vary.
- Jumangi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5If I had a nickle for every one of these never ending Linux/OSX vs Microsoft 'articles" I could retire already...
- ElectroBot, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6As of WWDC 2006 Apple had a 12% share of the notebook market. That's a big percentage for a company that people say has higher priced computers.
- CaptRR, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I have been to several "high end geek meetings" and their were 2 macs out of 100 laptops present at them.
Perhaps you are going to the wrong "high end geek meetings". - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4No offense to the submitter of this story, but I am so tired of this constant battle. I am a Mac user. I wouldn't ever contemplate using Windows again. That is not to say that someone else doesn't love their Windows based machine, goodluck to them. My point is, people go on about the whole market share thing, which is not really a valid argument. I use a Mac because it is the best and most advanced OS out there today, and if a better one came I would use it, but for the time being it is and anyone who says otherwise is quite clearly blind. Just because Windows has 96% market share does not mean it is a better OS. That is like saying that the next winner of pop idol will make better records than a really cool talented underground band, just because they sold 5 million albums or whatever. Percentage doesn't reflect the quality and superiority of OS X.
- troublemaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Well, you sound like an expert.
I have been working with computers for programming since 1983. Since then I've worked as a UNIX/Windows admin, support desk, logistics and sales, and the last 10 years ObjC/C++/ASM/C#.Net developer at different locations. I have used about 20 different computers since I started, and let me tell you - from my expertise, the Mac has got *IT*. If only ignorant ***** like you could stop saying "Oooh, Mac's gay!" every time they see an Apple, the world would be a better place.
I don't mean to sound like an ass, but unless you have more experience and better insight than me, then (pardon my french) shut the ***** up. - MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3It is when the 500$ Dell comes with a Monitor, Keyboard, Mouse, Maybe a printer, and is completely upgradable to any other type, style, speed or make of PC.
Just a thought. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3It will when Microsoft and developers drop support for XP.
- Visceral, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3It's a great OS, but no.
- troublemaker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3For some apparent reason, someone clicked "thumbs down" on your article, despite your insight. Someone don't like hearing the truth... it's all about your needs, what you like, your preferences.
Thumbs up from me, mate. - pkulak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"Coming in second in the poll was 'Spaces,' a way to simultaneously display and switch between applications, making a desktop look something like an actual, real-world desktop that has multiple file folders and documents open."
That decription made baby Jesus cry. - ElectroBot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The MacBook starts at $1,099 US (and that's without the student discount)
With the student discount its $1,049 US and you get a free 2GB iPod Nano (until September 16th, 2006)
BTW the cheap $600 laptops usually don't have DVI out, Firewire, Mac OS X, etc. -
Show 51 - 100 of 233 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is