I don't get it! Why would I buy OSX to run on my PC when there are a
million Windows apps out there that won't run on it? Am I missing
something here? Do Window's apps run on OSX?
Chris Reeves wrote:
You're comparing the wrong way.
Apple at 6% equals OS/X at 5%, people running earlier (say OS9) at 1%..
Linux at 9%-10%, and MICROSOFT (not Dell, Gateway, etc.) at 80% or something
crazy.
Here's the thing: OS/X makes up such a small slice of the overall mindspace
it's still a second-tier development for a great number of products. That's
the issue.
Nobody sits around and thinks how to develop a unique product for Dell or
Gateway, they think about a product for Windows, OS/X, Linux. In that
environment, 6% -is- an issue.
It's not a matter of how many units a single company moves, which is doesn't
matter, it's how wide a percentage their OS represents within the
marketspace.
Microsoft represents say, 80%. What does that mean? It means more
developers pay them money to get MS Logos. More developers pay them for
tool kits. It means more products get developed with MS development kits.
It means MS has more, and far more lucrative, partner programs.
I know of TWO apple developers locally who pay into Apple. I know of
several hundred Windows developers in the metro who pay yearly fees to MS.
That's the difference. You're comparing Apple to Dell. That's not an
issue. I'm saying Apple to MSFT. And that's where I don't get Apple's
philosophy. I've seen OS/X run on a standard Dell box straight from the
development disc from Apple with just a PCI card to make it go "OK". And
there are tons of floating "hacked" versions on the net.
The thing is, if Apple wanted to get off of it's "our hardware is cool"
would be a hell of a lot more profitable if they opened up and allowed OS/X
to go open. OS/X in an open, sellable format would get more adopters -
which means more partner revenue for Apple, more developers, and a broader
installed base to draw from. That's what apple needs.
Right now is the perfect time in the grand scheme of things to do it. Apple
will stick to their hardware plan. Good for them. And they can keep their
6% of the market, while Microsoft sticks with their 80%+. And people will
piss and moan about what a monopoly MS has and how it's so bad, etc. etc.
and how MS controls developers and software releases, etc. etc. etc. But
remember this: MS has no competition in the marketspace not because it's
impossible to compete with them, but because Apple, which has the means to,
elects not to compete.
And that, IMHO, is stupid.
CW
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:hardware-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Ruset
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 9:15 PM
To: The Hardware List
Subject: Re: [H] iMac arrived today...
Compared to what? Dell?
How big of a slice does Gateway have now? How big does HP/Compaq have?
In the grand scheme of things, 6% is a LOT of units to move. Sure it
doesn't compete with Dell, but we're not talking Systemax levels here,
either.
Thane Sherrington wrote:
At 01:03 PM 02/10/2006, Ben Ruset wrote:
6% of the entire PC market is a pretty big slice. And it's getting
bigger every day.
6% might be a lot of computers, but it's a very small slice.
T
