>The timing of a switch from PC hardware to Mac hardware isn't really tied to Apple's introduction of new products, it has more to do with a person thinking they need to replace their current PC. PCs and Macs are so incredibly overpowered for what most people do that they last a long time. A 7 or 8 year old PC or Mac is kind of common.
Agreed, and that's my point. I don't think Boot Camp or its loss is particularly significant in terms of sales.
>I also think you need to look at the number of Macs sold not marketshare. It the number of Windows users is growing faster than the number of Mac users then Apple can be selling more and more Macs each year but have declining marketshare. In other words, less marketshare could be slower growth, not declining users.
Mac sales have been growing, notably in late FY24 where revenue records were also broken. Mac sales are on the up.
>I expect many switchers learn that they were not as dependent upon Windows as they thought they were. That it was really something known vs something unknown, and now they know macOS too.
Agreed. It's similar to existing Mac users moved on from Classic Mac OS to X, then from 32-bit to 64-bit. People move on from software.
>But I don't think those who have not switched are as up to speed, and due to Windows' market position a lot of new corporate (or technical or gaming) software is still written only for Windows. So if one is less concerned about their personal computing needs there is still a possible concern with respect to doing a little work at home. The existence of Boot Camp can relax such fears.
True, I agree it's a factor for some people. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the FY22 sales were from people grabbing Intel Macs while they could.
>I'm not sure x86 software was lost. Both Apple and Microsoft provide very good one-time x86 to ARM binary to binary translation.
It's limited. While you can run Mac native software incredibly well, virtualising x86 is nowhere near what it was on x86 hardware. It'll improve in time.
>This sort of hardware change (x86 to ARM) does accelerate the Mac upgrade cycle a little bit.
Agreed. I think the architecture move is far more a selling point than Boot Camp on both x86 and Apple Silicon. For me it's been night and day in terms of performance, particularly with video editing. It's nice to have a portable that isn't constantly throttling.
>Apple Silicon's performance may overcome some reluctance, but not all of it. Boot Camp and drivers seems a minor investment. Also switching may not be permanent. If someone has to have Windows due to work needs will they buy two computers, one for work and one for personal, or will they switch back to Windows for the personal side?
I'm sure some will have both. Gamers in particular would likely keep a dedicated computer/console for that.
>I think the only thing preventing Apple Silicon Boot Camp is Microsoft's contractual obligation to run ARM Windows only on Qualcomm CPUs. Supposedly that agreement ends soon. As soon as Microsoft is contractually allowed to run on Apple Silicon I expect we'll have an announcement from Microsoft and Apple. Microsoft supporting Mac hardware, Apple providing Boot Camp and drivers. Microsoft getting to benefit from that outstanding Apple Silicon performance, beating anything on Intel or other competing ARM-based CPUs.
That'd be nice to see. I wish Apple would have released details on the percentage of users who actually used Boot Camp.