Noise Over Mac OS Market Share "Slip" 481
OakDragon writes, "Mac OS market share actually slipped since last September. This reverses a trend in the winter and spring months that showed some slight growth. The actual percentage loss is small: 0.02%. But it may be significant since it follows a solid growth trend. It must be disappointing to Apple and Mac fans to see what is basically a flat line in desktop market share." Mac-oriented sites are pointing out the unreliability of the metrics from Net Applications, which are based on users of the HitsLink service.
Statistics..... (Score:5, Informative)
Traffic from my blog [utah.edu] primarily from the US shows about 19% of traffic is from the Macintosh (200-900 unique visitors/day). Of all the traffic that hit my blog from the recent Boing Boing posting, it appears that of those that clicked through, over 23% of the clicks were from Macintosh systems and from the traffic I get from Slashdot, about 15% is from Macintosh systems. This limited sampling shows a steady increase in the percentage of Macintosh users that have visited over the past few years.
Traffic from another site I manage, Webvision [utah.edu] (I know, I know,
Both of these statistics mirror the trends I have seen reported for the platforms marketshare on much wider scales. These are direct measures that I am reporting as opposed to a fee based service like HitsLink whose measures are not as direct. Too bad Google's Zeitgeist no longer reports on platform statistics which were a good measure of overall platform usage from a much wider used resource.
Am I reading TFA correctly? (Score:2)
Yet, at the link to the actual data, it says, for August 2006:
winXP: 84.18%, win2000: 6.54%, Mac: 3.71%, win98: 2.40%, winME: 1.10%, Other: 2.07%
So, 3.71%, not 4.33%. Looks like The Inquirer is reading the line for April 2006, and not September 2006. Actually, Mac share drops continually during the period December 2005
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I've just put together the complete figures, based on their stats, incorporating both "Mac OS" and "Macintel", since December last year. Mac OS overall is down from a high of 4.49% in April, but consistently up from a low of 4.28% in June.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I r
Re: (Score:2)
Well, given that my blog is not really Macintosh centric, those stats should be valid. Just in case though, I posted more international stats from an even more platform neutral site or did you not read that far....
w3schools.com backs you up. (Score:2, Redundant)
I'd have to say that from my limited sampling, these numbers are very possibly off and a .2% downward change is likely statistically insignificant, especially given their sampling methods. Traffic from my blog primarily from the US shows about 19% of traffic is from the Macintosh (200-900 unique visitors/day). ... shows a steady increase in the percentage of Macintosh users that have visited over the past few years.
They were actually reporting a 0.02% change, which most people would consider noise. Cla
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Macintosh = Dell PC = HP PC (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, I just priced out a new workstation comparing the top of the line MacPro and an equivalently configured Dell. I ended up buying the 3.0Ghz version of the MacPro for $1000 cheaper than an equivalent Dell.
Once Steve "I have a big ego" Jobs switched the Macintosh from the PowerPC to the Intel processor, the Macintosh lost its mystique.
Au contraire. Have you ever unboxed a new Mac? Have you ever really spent time with a Mac? While the OS is most of the experience, it goes beyond the OS.
Using some simple patches/tools, you can run Windows XP on the Mac. With a little effort, you can run the x86 MacOS on a Dell PC or an HP PC.
And with some simple tools, I can run Windows on my Mac. So?
Since the Mac is now essentially a PC clone, why would you pay a premium for Mac hardware?
See my above comment. It turns out that for the high end at least, the Macintosh is MUCH less expensive than a Dell or HP.
Re:Macintosh = Dell PC = HP PC (Score:5, Informative)
I'll be honest: I read that and I thought you were lying. So I went and looked for myself, and sure enough, I can't duplicate your results.
I can't get the Dell price down far enough. Only $1000 more expensive than the MacPro? The best I can do is $1500 more expensive.
Excuse me while I go and try to find all the pieces of my entire fucking worldview that you just completely shattered.
Re:Macintosh = Dell PC = HP PC (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Macintosh = Dell PC = HP PC (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I have a very hard time beli
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The non-Xeon Core 2s cannot be used in pairs of chips. One chip = 2 cores.
At 3.7 GHz, it sounds like you're looking at machines with the earlier Pentium IV or D CPUs, much different animals.
Note that the Xeon is dual core, so with dual Xeons you're getting four cores.
Re: (Score:2)
You should probably mention that you are comparing Apple's top desktop to a top Dell Precision workstation from the Small Business section. As another poster said, businesses don't actually pay that much when they buy more than one.
More importantly, your statement only holds true at the very top end...
I'm calling bullshit on ya (Score:3, Informative)
Dual 3.0Ghz Xeon
4GB Memory (4x 1GB sticks on both, ECC on both)
4X 500GB SATA drives
512MB NVidia Quadro
DVD +/- everything drive
No monitor on either system
Apple: $7,449 firm
Dell: $5,575 before the infamous Dell discounting starts
One year warranty on the Apple, Three years Economy OnSite on the Dell
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Dual 3.0Ghz Xeon
4GB Memory (4x 1GB sticks on both, ECC on both)
4X 500GB SATA drives
512MB NVidia Quadro
DVD +/- everything drive
No monitor on either system
Apple: $7,449 firm
Dell: $5,575 before the infamous Dell discounting starts
You messed up something on Dell's page. I just configured it and got $6,960. I think you forgot to include the graphics card on the Dell - you do realize
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Apple
Specifications
Two 3.0GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon
4GB (4 x 1GB)
500GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
500GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3G
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
i think you used the Xeon 5050 3ghz chips, and not the Xeon 5160 3ghz chips....
huge difference as the Xeon 5050 are $930 less per processor on the Dell config
the 5050 is an old netburst (P4) chip, and the 5160 is the woodcrest (Core 2) chip
Re:I'm calling bullshit on ya (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I'm calling bullshit on ya (Score:4, Informative)
You are actually my favorite kind of control freak. You want high quality and you are willing to invest your own time and make sure you get it.
But then there are people like my Aunt Jeanne who can't do that. They have to rely on the computer sellers to get it right the first time.
One thing I've been telling people for a long time is that Macintosh computers last longer. I purchased my current Mac in 1999 and it is still very useful. I can run the latest operating system software on my Mac. There are two applications that I cannot run on it currently that are of interest to me: Motion [apple.com] and Shake [apple.com]. Motion requires a faster processor than the one I have (a Sonnet 1GHz upgrade) and Shake requires at least a G5. Final Cut Pro HD will run on my machine, though I'm not currently working with it.
All other applications that I might use do run on my Mac and probably will for the forseeable future, which will allow me to still use my computer for another year -- though I would like to upgrade after Apple has all of the kinks out of the early Intel boxes.
A seven-year-old PC cannot usually run the latest operating system or applications because you cannot put enough RAM into the box to get it to do those things. My argument is that one should take useful life into account when figuring costs.
And I value jmorris42 (1458)'s time -- perhaps more than he does. It takes him time to research and purchase all of the components he needs for his high-quality homebrew computer. It, then, takes him time to assemble it. Dell and Apple both charge for their research and assembly, which is why both will cost more directly than the unassembled components.
My question for Apple is, will the new Intel boxes have useful lives for as long as their Power PC-based ones.
I also question the basis for the suggestion that Apple is losing market share or that their market share is flattening out. If you are logging which operating system is hitting your servers, you have to take into account the fact that Apple's included browser, Safari [apple.com] may be set up to masquarade as Microsoft Windows-based Internet Exploiter, thus reducing the frequency of hits that are known Macintosh computers.
I think both Apple and Dell are doing good innovation. And, while Apple may be winning some kind of price war presently, commodity pricing may be manipulated by working on the supply chaining as well as putting together exclusive contracts with certain key manufacturers. Apple seems to have a price edge today. They may not tomorrow. Frankly, I didn't buy an Apple computer because it was cheaper. I bought an Apple computer because I knew it was made by a top-tier manufacturer that supports its product and because I wanted to run Apple's operating system which, I believe, is easier to use than Microsoft's.
Re:Macintosh = Dell PC = HP PC (Score:5, Funny)
Oh yes, oh yes I have. That new Mac smell, each little piece ready for the unwrapping, the soft white curves, the feel of plastic on my naked...
Re:Macintosh = Dell PC = HP PC (Score:5, Insightful)
Ummmmm, perhaps because I am not a nerd? Geek perhaps, yes. But not a nerd. Furthermore, it is not my job to build computers. Rather it is my job to do other things like generate and analyze data, teach, write grants and papers. I would much rather spend my time doing these things than building boxes, installing drivers, dealing with conflicts and such. I want my computers to work when I pull them out of the box. I want my computers to simply work when plugging in a peripheral without launching a wizard that says "I see you are trying to add new hardware". I want my computers to not constantly notify me in the middle of a presentation that my anti-virus software is out of date or than the computer suddenly discovered a new wireless network. (I've seen people who, for kicks when someone is making a presentation with a Windows laptop at a big conference, start creating new wireless networks).
When your time reaches a certain value/minute, you start to look for ways to optimize your life and for me at least, the Macintosh allows me to get work done without getting in the way.
WORK OUT OF BOX? LOL (Score:4, Interesting)
I want my computers to work when I pull them out of the box.
Having just bought my first "pre-made" computer in years (a new laptop from Compaq), I find this statement *hilarious*.
After taking this thing "out of the box", I spent no less than 30 minutes weaving my way through pre-setup wizards and registration dialogs. I then spent no less than *two hours* uninstyalling tosns of pre-loaded crap software I did not wan ton this machine - stupid toy games, trial versions of anti virus, trial versions of DVD burning software, trial this and trial that, all cluttering up my tray with 15+ icons.
In comparison, last time I built a computer, it took me about 30 minutes to put the pieces together, and 30 minutes to install the OS. Net savings of 1.5 hours and god knows how many hundred dollars.
Of course building your own laptop is not really an option, hence why I bought this one. But god, I buy pre-made PC's as little as humanly possible.
Macs on the other hand - I have not had any real experience with yet. From what I hear they funciton much better "out of box" - no pre-configuring, no trial craptastic software pre-installed.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah. You find this hilarous because you're talking about PCs. Dells, for example, get this absolutely crappy annoying Dell application that constantly reminds you of stuff that's supposedly wrong with your computer. Windows in general is annoying, with little bubbles popping up telling you about icons on your desktops you no
Re:You heard wrong, Macs have pe-config, reg, etc. (Score:4, Informative)
Actually at least OmniGraffle and OmniOutliner, along with GraphicConverter and a couple other things were extremely useful extras that came with my PowerBook (bought in 2003). They were NOT trial versions nor crippleware. I use them regularly, although I haven't updated them since then.
I'll sorely miss OmniGraffle when I eventually buy a MacBook Pro, since it's no longer part of the package. Not sure about GraphicConverter, but OmniOutliner sure is included.
Maybe you should have actually tried them before deleting them. And yes, if you don't like them you can just delete them, along with the trial version of Office and Quicken. My PoweBook didn't have any eReader nor
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Macintosh = Dell PC = HP PC (Score:5, Informative)
I know this can be a little confusing to computer novices. The 3.73GHz Xeon is slower and uses more power than the 3.0GHz Xeon, even though they use the same socket. However, you shouldn't be talking shit, especially about a subject you know little about.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
And here I thought that was the whole point of
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
About the same price. Oh, and Macs have no such thing as "driver installs." Peripherals work. Right Now. Instantly. No errors. No dialog boxes. No ding noises.
And OS X is the best operating system on the planet.
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, the 'no driver installs' holds true for any new prebuilt system.
Oh, but you're talking about custom systems. Well, I'll make you a deal: Build your own Mac using specs found from the OSX86 wiki and patch your copy of OSX appropriately as per their instructions. We'll assume this as an out-of-the-box equivalent. Now, tell me about your 'no driver installs'.
Oh,
SO I should not have switched back to CP/M? (Score:5, Funny)
Talking about using CP/M is funny, but... (Score:2, Informative)
CP/M is Control Program for Microcomputers, an OS used with 8088 microprocessors back before IBM thought of selling PCs. It was a dog of an OS, mostly because it was unfinished. Back then CP/M was sold by a company that thought printing the original of manuals on a dot-matrix printer with an old ribbon was acceptable practice.
The Morrow Microdecision came with a Command Line Interface l
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Crabby Prehistoric Man?
Woah, no need for buggy whip! It was just a joke.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2)
There was an 8088 version of CP/M and even nifty machines like the Compupro10 (1 8088, 4 Z80s) that ran MP/M and eventually Concurrent CP/M (or Concurrent CP/M 8-16 on Compupro hardware, automatically executing programs on the right CPU).
A Z80 could in no way
Re: (Score:2)
Pilot wasn't a command line interface: it was used to write a basic menuing system for the MD series.
The command line shipped on the MD series was good old "CCP", the "Console Command Processor".
ZCPR3 beat the DOS of its day, though, no doubt about it.
(And, yes, I still have my original MD3, and it still worked last I checked it. But, then it doesnt even have a fan. The only moving parts are the floppy drives.)
Article is untrustworthy (Score:2)
Core 2 Duo and Quads On The Way? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
They're the same right?
Tom
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Then I'm in luck! 99% of the computer buying population is not going to read my post.
HitsLink is teh bogus (Score:5, Interesting)
Let me explain a bit about HitsLink. Their reason for existence is to be a paid "hit"-man for publicity pros. Are you CBS-Viacom or the Radio Industry? Do you need to make it seem to the business community that Howard Stern is tanking on Sirius Satellite Radio? Have Hitslink provide a story saying that the number of Lycos searches for "Howard Stern" are down by X %. Forget the fact that everybody knows that you'd go to Sirius.com if you want to read about Stern. Forget that nobody uses Lycos any more.
Let's say you are Salem Radio Network and you want it to seem like conservative commentator, former Sec'y of Education and degenerate gambler Bill Bennett's morning show is really happening. Get HitsLink to create a story saying that he's "Number 9 in the nation". Forget that he's just been dumped from the third biggest market in America (Chicago). Forget that the actual listings show that there are 24 talk shows ahead of Bennett's. Let's just round the figures out so that there are 2 or 3 talk shows tied for Number 1, Number 2, etc. So you can say that Bennett is in the Number 9 slot when in reality he is number 24 out of 30.
It pays to know that nearly every story that you see or hear in the media has been placed there by a press agent or public relations department in the form of a press release, which gets reworked (sometimes) by a "reporter" (really a stenographer) into a "story" which is presented as "news". It pays to know that outfits like HitsLink exist just to spread manure.
You have to ask yourself if a story like this passes your own "smell test".
Is it just me, or is it getting hot in here? (Score:2)
Market fluctuates. (Score:3, Insightful)
Not at all reliable (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
quick, lets help these dudes: (Score:4, Funny)
set to os x
Nothing to see here, move along (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Sep 05: 3.74%
Oct 05: 3.87%
Nov 05: 4.11%
Dec 05: 4.35%
Jan 06: 4.21%
Feb 06: 4.30% (4.28 + 0.03)
Mar 06: 4.37% (4.29 + 0.08)
Apr 06: 4.49% (4.33 + 0.16)
May 06: 4.42% (4.19 + 0.23)
Jun 06: 4.32% (3.92 + 0.36)
Jul 06: 4.29% (3.80 + 0.49)
Aug 06: 4.33% (3.71 + 0.62)
The reported 0.02 decline by the Inquirer is the difference of Dec 05 (4.35) vs Aug 05 (4.33). I'm not sure why Dec 05 was chosen as the comparison m
But if the results proved otherwise... (Score:2, Insightful)
Yet if it proved the opposite they wouldn't question its reliability at all, and would bring it up every chance they get.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
$200 PC computers and $500 laptop PCs (Score:2)
The statistic is affected by the $200 PC computers and $500 laptop PCs that are being sold.
Time to bring back the B-word? (Score:2, Funny)
From a Mac User...GOOD! (Score:5, Insightful)
Why does OS X have to have an increasing marketshare to remain successful?
This argument has NEVER made sense. (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd prefer the platform to have enough marketshare that developers can make money and Apple to make a profit, but not big enough for Virus writers and spyware authors to care (the way it is now).
I honestly have never understood this idea that Macs would suddenly get more interest from Virus writers if they had market share.
If you were a cracker and you saw these pompous Apple commercials, saw the Apple trolls that say that Apple can do no wrong, and saw all
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Same thing with firefox. Initially it wasn't worth bothering with, and everyone sa
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There are a few important reasons for this (which may or may not all apply)
1. Return on Investment: Where is the benefit in gaining access to a machine only one out of every 100 people (roughly) uses and which is even more uncommon in business environments ?
2. Infection rates: Any "virus" infection is going to spread far, far more slowly on Macs than PCs. Heck, there's a pr
beleaguered (Score:5, Funny)
Something to do with Mac OS X only running on Macs (Score:2)
Anyone buying a Mac in the last year and a half got Tiger for 'free.' So who is left to buy a Tiger upgrade? If they waited this long, why buy it now rather than waiting for Leopard in a few months?
Statistics are worthless if they are presented by idiots who don't even know what the numbers mean.
----
www.roughlydrafted.com
Market share fascination? (Score:3, Insightful)
What's the thinking here? More market share must mean more sales and therefore more profit? Apple seems to be making plenty of money, so what does more market share gives you, or is it just a measure of how many customers you did not get?
IMHO, the problem is you can not make a product that will please everyone. Apple has decided to make a certain kind of product - looks cool, well designed, easy to use and at a premium price.
I guess it depends on how you classify your market. If you are talking portable mp3 players in the USA, then Apple has around 80% of the market (their figures).
If you mean "laptop computers" then the field is wide open to every man and his dog that can bolt a machine together - including the el cheapo models who compete on price alone. This is akin to putting Mercedes, Audi and Lexus in the "car market" and wondering why their share is so low (hint: you are including Hyundai and others). This is not the same market. Who are the premium computer manufacturers? IBM might be there, Dell isn't.
As long as Apple continues to focus on making their products this way they will have a following and will generate profits - to hell with market share.
What's "the market?" (Score:2)
The Mac has always had that problem. "Market share" depends entirely on how you choose to define the market. Among people who don't want Apple computers, Apple's market share is small.
Cessna has a market share of about 4% of the airplane market (Cessna has revenues of $3.5 billion, Boeing $
Re: (Score:2)
Not as disappointing as... (Score:2)
Not as bone chilling as the news that "Other" (that's French for Linux, boysngirls) has about as many users as WinME.
"Sloppy metrics" is the understatement of the decade.
Some expected a bigger dip... no big deal (Score:5, Interesting)
It is pretty obvious that the move was a wise choice and that both Macintosh users and Apple will be better off long term. The appeal of the new generation of machines can be expected to increase over time. In addition to new features in the OS, it is reasonable to expect that 10.5 will bring even better performance. It'll likely make better use of multiple CPU cores, use the GPU horsepower for other tasks, use the Core 2 supplemental SSE3 instructions (I've heard them called both SSSE3 and SSE4), and use of the 64-bit capabilities. The software for Windows support will also be more mature (Apple's utility is currently beta).
The release of Vista will likely bring an increase in the number of people pondering new machines instead of just an OS upgrade. With Apple being more visible than in the past some of those people will opt for getting Macs instead (either solely for the Apple experience, or to run Windows too). Some may also be playing wait and see with Vista. If it isn't really, really, wonderful, it'll help Apple.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Boot Camp Anyone? (Score:2)
Now given the recent release of boot camp, parrells and similar programs it seems likely that a significant percentage of OS X users will spend say 5% or more of their time in windows. If the growth in market share for OS X is usually less than the average percent of time OS X users have started spending in w
Statistical illiteracy (innumeracy?) (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Personal experience (Score:3, Interesting)
I wouldn't be surprised if that is what most everyone else here is seeing as well.
Sometimes these studies aren't an exercise in what the truth is in the real world, especially if they are funded by those who don't like what is happening in the real world.
Grabbing my popcorn and pulling up the Lazy Boy... (Score:3, Insightful)
Mod me OT on this one, It's fine with me.
I'm always amazed at the vitriol that spews forth on this subject. Although, frankly, post threads like those in response to this article are always interesting to read (and sometimes funny).
IMVHO, use what machine and OS you like, like what machine and OS you use (if you have a choice). It isn't the chip, the windowing system, the kernel, or the manufacturer... it's what it does for you personally. I like Solaris, Fedora, Mac OS (any, really), XP, 2000, Irix, HP/UX... well, just about any of them. The hardware is always a relative benchmark to me. If I like it, and it works great without kicking me in the pants every time I try to use it, then I use it. I enjoy my little Blade 100 as much as my VAIO as much as my iMac G5. Like what you use, and use what you like.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As to TFA, I have a question... There are lots of Slashdotters that can probably answer this for me pretty well: Isn't .02% statistically negligible, WRT a market trend report?
That information is not available. You see, the source data was not presented, only the results without and details of the methodology. This is PR, not science and is designed to influence people who pay attention to PR, instead of look at scientific data. The fact that you know what statistically significant means, is indication
Just have to remark here... (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.coolest-gadgets.com/20060919/is-apple-
If that is really a random sampling, it has everything to do with overall market share. But it isn't. It is a sample of the market which subscribes to HitsLink. That's not a random sample.
Does it matter, really? (Score:3, Interesting)
Unless you're Ballmer or Jobs or a Linux distro company, does it really matter? I mean, really, really matter?
Do I, as a OS X user, see any sort of effect if OS X usage goes up or down?
In case you're wondering...no.
I guess I just get tired of Linux fanboys declaring that "we must get this to the desktops of the unwashed masses" or the Mac fanboys stomping around saying how much Microsoft is copying from OS X into Vista, and the Microsoft fanboys sitting around all smug with their favorite OS enjoying a practical monopoly status.
You use what works best for what you want to do, market share be damned. I use OS X for some things and WinXP for others because they each have their strengths in different areas. If John and Jane Public can easily get their digital photos of Junior's 8th birthday party by simply plugging their camera into their Windows box and pressing a button, more power to them. If you develop the Next Great Thing in an Unbuntu environment, congratualtions.
If a WinXP platform did what I want it to do as well as, or better than, OS X for a better value then I would have stuck with WinXP. If the engineering tools I need to use every day worked on a Linux platform as easily as on an WinXP or OS X platform, I would have stuck with Linux.
I coouldn't care less if OS X market share changed 0.02%, up, down, or sideways.
I'm done ranting.
Re: (Score:2)
Yea I agree their commercials are full of shit, specially since the first thing I do with an x86 is install GNU/Linux on it. But at least they're silly.
Being told to talk to my doctor about yeast infections is not funny. It's just downright nasty.
Tom
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Core 2 Duo + CSI (Intel's name for HT, not the TV show) would probably be a good contender, who knows...
Tom
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
1) The Mini is a low-end machine, and Core 2 is a brand new processor. Even Dell is only fielding Core 2 in its higher end XPS and Precision lines, just like Apple is fielding it in their higher end iMac and Mac Pro lines. The only reason you got it in a lower-end machine is because you built it yourself, which 99% of buyers won't do.
2) Your "custom machine" includes no warrenty and no technical support. That's probably not a problem for you, but it is for App
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple is making money hand over first, so their strategy of not paying too much attention to marketshare doesn't seem to be a bad one.
They're not tagetting a rational market. More people would rather have a beige box than a tiny little cute espresso sipping elite box.
IYou're right in a way, in that what lots of people do want to buy is a cheap beige box running Windows. Sure, Apple would sell such a machine, but why would anybody buy it from them, instead of
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, more people want something that just works (and often in our consumer driven society something that looks 'cool' too). They don't want to munge around with drivers or kernel compiling. This is why linux and do it yourself PCs remain a niche market. These same people are also willing to pay more for something that just works. This doesn't make them stupid or lazy, it just means they think their time is better
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I am running Gentoo on it. I get your point, but it's moot once you hit the next revision of OSX. And anyways, for the price of "Apple Approved" memory [to at least match the GB I have] you could have bought an OEM copy of WinXP. So you're still ahead by ~$100 with the custom box. And yes, I trust the people I bought it from. The box works and if it didn't they'd make it right [not all shops are evil]
Tom
Re: (Score:2)
It costs you $0 if you don't upgrade, and the computer continues to work.
Re: (Score:2)
First, security updates continue, IIRC all the way back to 10.1.
Second, newer applications don't "stop working." What happens is developers start to take advantage of new features in the API--Core Data, Core Animation, Spotlight, etc which, yes, one has to pay to get. Applications that do not use these features will continue to work into the far futrue.
The only time the "links broke" was at the 10.2 switch, and hasn't happened since. This was a deliberate move that was plann
Re: (Score:2)
As for the Antec being "better"
- room for PCI/PCIE cards
- ventilation
- room for drives, e.g. RAID
- PSU that can handle the combo
And frankly this case actually
Re: (Score:2)
99% of the market want a simple box that works. I use my mini (Core Solo at that!) as a glorified KVM, web browser, mailer, skype box, and occasional photo munger. An appliance to do this wins every time against spending effort configuring another effing PC.
Re: (Score:2)
In general, I use my boxes for a lot of random tasks. One of which is TV watching which uses my 5 yr old Hauppage WinTV PCI card. It's passed through 4 or 5 diff boxes and it's just the way things are
But also I need a bit more horsepower than a core solo @ 1.6GHz. My build times affect how much work I can get done in a day and faster == better.
That and Core2 is wickedly
Re: (Score:2)
My dev time is too precious to screw around with getting appliance-level performance out of Linux.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As for what people want: if Apple could make money selling such boxes, they would be. If Steve Jobs is anything, he's good at making money. The simple fact is that even if they did, n
Re: (Score:2)
As for OSX/ilife/etc, I don't want that. Gentoo is free. I have all the tools I need as a developer, gamer, music listener, author, pron viewer, etc for free from the nice world of OSS.
I agree with your post though. I know the mini has a niche ma
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
And then there is malware!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
To me it is the same thing as having a bunch of strangers show up at a small get-together of friends. Sure, you could turn it into a big party and have lots of fun, but it'll never be that initimate get-together it once was. Is it wrong to prefer to keep a small party small?
Re:How to gain marketshare (Score:4, Interesting)
Home users are not desktop system builders in the numbers that matter. Fewer still even want to think about customizing a laptop.
Dual boot and virtualization are not (yet) mass market. They are for the enthusiasts who simply must be able to work in both the PC and the Mac environments.
OSX for the generic PC would require drivers for every random combination of PC hardware.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:My Mac Sucks (Score:4, Informative)