# Suggestions! How can Apple better penetrate the PC Market?



## jackdahi (Oct 23, 2003)

If Apple would hire you as a platform consultant, what would be your suggestion on penetrating the PC market?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Example: Porting over the Mac OS, so that it works with a x86 processor. (I WISH) You see this will give poor PC users the ability to switch to a superior OS!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## jackdahi (Oct 23, 2003)

Dont be shy everyone!!!!


----------



## bobw (Oct 23, 2003)

Lower prices


----------



## nb3004 (Oct 23, 2003)

allow customization in their BTO models, like more video cards and more choices.... (requires help from other companies too)

games apple needs a killer game that is only oh this platform, it prob will never happen unless apple themselves create it ...

most importantly lower prices and higher mhz speeds, the machines dont have to necessarily be faster, but mhz # has to be up there, these are the two numbers that casual pc users look at, they dont read mhz myth articles and such, the average user sees a computer that is 2ghz and 800 dollars thats it, so apple needs to get their specs up to those of intel and amd machines so the average user doesnt see them as inferior any more so many people ahve said to me "you use and apple, but arent those slow..." my two cents


----------



## bobw (Oct 23, 2003)

Why would Apple want to port the OS to PC's when their main business is selling the hardware.


----------



## fryke (Oct 23, 2003)

Everytime someone mentions Apple should port Mac OS X to the PC, I'm trying to imagine Steve Ballmer, who has a request from Steve Jobs on his desk. Steve Ballmer: "Hmm... They want us to recompile Office v. X so it runs on Mac OS X on the PC platform..." And then you hear Steve Ballmer's associates, sitting in the same room, laughing.


----------



## Giaguara (Oct 23, 2003)

Put Airport wireless services to main airports. Like the services are there now .. and make the people using Macs be able to surf on those free. With big signs "This wireless network is offered by Apple, you are using Apple Airport..".

Sell Macs and iPods even at airport stores. They have a marginal sales probably, but macs would be more visible. Many people browse there. Being able to buy an iPod in an airplane would be really cool. And technically fine, as now the pc and mac ipods are the same.


----------



## nb3004 (Oct 23, 2003)

i never said that apple should port there os to pc's i meant that they should get the mhz speeds up as high as they are in the pc world, i def dont think that they should use intel or amd in any apple machines.  Just have mhz speeds that are similar to entry level pc's.  This is something that would not be happen overnight obviously.  sorry for the misunderstanding


----------



## bobw (Oct 23, 2003)

I like Macs. I don't give a rats ass if PC's are faster, or if Bill Gates would come to my house to fix the PC when it broke down.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Oct 23, 2003)

I think the move to port iTunes to Windows was genius.  People whine about the fact that it only works with the iPod, but supporting many different hardware platforms is a daunting task -- this'll make more of them WANT an iPod.

Apple has made a maneuver such that market share is no longer dependent on the OS of the machine -- Apple no longer has 3% market share... they have 60-70% with the iPod.  Getting people to switch to the Macintosh was a bold move -- and it semi-worked, as I'm sure a few PC users took that bait and went out and bought a Macintosh.  But with iTunes for Windows, more people will own Apple hardware -- not necessarily a computer -- but some sort of Apple hardware that will make them think about Apple the next time they decide to purchase.

I don't think Steve Jobs is a God -- just close.  He's a great visionary, and I have faith that his team can continue to do the right things over time.  People expect the market share to simply jump up to 10 or 15% over the course of a few months, and then call the effort a failure because it didn't do so... that's just lame thinking.  

It's similar with laws, and I'm going to bring up a controversial topic -- legalization or decriminalization of marijuana.  People want it decriminalized NOW.  That's not gonna happen in my lifetime, as far as I can see -- it takes time to change peoples' minds, and what would the world be if laws just changed overnight?  We'd never know what's legal and what isn't.  Plus, what if it's the WRONG decision?  People would support and applaud the government for a quick decision and action, and if it turned sour, blame them for the damage it caused.  Change takes time, and we have to make sure it's the RIGHT change.

The same goes for Mac OS X on the Intel platform.  Sure, it'd be cool, but that's all we can say now -- we can't say if it's plausible right now.  You can't say for sure whether it would be good or bad for Apple to do that, short of your own preference.  What if you wanted it, it happened, and it backfired?  What if it had more bugs than Windows due to processor differences and the amount of code that had to change?  You want it to happen?  Stop and think about it.  People know what kinds of damage rash and ill-thought out decisions bring.  We can't hope for it tomorrow.

I think Apple's right on track -- turning heads and puffing out their chests like the big boys do because they can now.  I think there are some good ideas in this thread -- more exposure, like Apple-branded WiFi in airports sounds neat, but would need some thinking through.  Maybe by 2005.  Apple prides themselves on the perfection of their products, and rushing something to market is just a bad idea all the way around.

I think we need more partnerships, like AOL and iTunes, Pepsi and iTunes and VW and the iPod.  But not TOO much -- not so much it looks like Apple is selling out and can't exists without the partnerships.

Get the Apple logo and brand into people's heads.  Make them think twice the next time they walk into a Circuit City or Best Buy.  I like the idea of being able to purchase an iPod at an airport... maybe Apple stores at the airport?  Maybe iPods sold through the in-flight catalogues?  Just imagine a wealthy businessman making his red-eye flight home on the 20th of December without a gift for his son in college -- until he opens the catalog and is presented with the Apple iPod.


----------



## tree (Oct 23, 2003)

I would be the first to introduce a harddisk videocamera and NOT concentrade me ONLY in a musiccomputer
I would also be more serious about Java ,make my mailapplication more userfriendly and use larger fonts (pcusers  are very sensible for this argument).


----------



## Dlatu1983 (Oct 23, 2003)

Give it up...Mac OS X on the x86 will NEVER HAPPEN. Apple isn't a software company...the only reason they make OS X, or any other software, is to sell their hardware. Who in their right minds would buy a $3,000 G5 when a $1,000 x86 PC could run the same OS and all the same programs? Does Windows stink? Yes. Is Mac OS x FAR superior? Yes. 

You want OS X, cough up the money for an Apple computer. Porting OS X to x86 will do only one thing...kill Apple.


----------



## RacerX (Oct 23, 2003)

Personally, I don't think that Apple can do much of any thing to change this. This is a public perception problem that is more the publics' problem than Apple's problem.

Is there any thing that Apple could do that hasn't been done by any of the other computer operating systems out there to compete with Windows?

Clones hurt Apple sales and didn't increase overall Mac OS sales. Rhapsody for x86 couldn't even get developers coming from x86 to write for it in numbers that could compete with the PowerPC version. Apple has had the fastest personal computers in the market a number of times without it getting Wintel users to switch. Apple has had prices that match or beat Wintel prices for equivalent hardware/software a number of times with no noticeable effect. 

And in today's computer world, Wintel is now a chore to run and keep secure, yet people still use Windows.

What would help Apple, Red Hat, SuSE, and any other OS would be if Windows was sold only as a separate product... that is, not preinstalled. It is a fact that most computer users will not change the OS on their hardware once they buy it (including applying patches and updates as can be seen with the virus problem of late). 

Apple has faced this too. Many Mac users don't follow the latest developments and just use their systems unaware that anything has changed until they buy new hardware. Same with PC users. What ever was on their system when they bought it is what is on their system now. If it is Windows 95, Windows 98, or Windows _whatever_, the odds are it'll remain unchanged while that system is with the original owner.

No x86 OS has a chance to make it in that type of setting. The BeOS tried to get preinstalled and Microsoft made sure it didn't happen. The BeOS! Be wasn't even as much of a threat to Microsoft as Linux, but they took the time to stop preinstallation of the BeOS by hardware makers.

How does that effect Apple? Even if Apple never again makes another x86 OS, Apple's main problems is the same as any other non-Windows x86 OS, getting past the public's perception that the only way you can be productive with computers is with Windows.

Imagine this... people go to buy a PC. It comes with nothing on it. They go to a shelf of operating systems, Windows is three times as expensive as any of the others. They go over to a shelf of office products, MS Office is three to five times as expensive as the others... and only runs on Windows. 

People are _cheap_ and _lazy_. Microsoft plays to _lazy_ by getting Windows preinstalled on every PC made. Ending preinstallation would help alternatives play to _cheap_.

When software is bundled on PCs, it is very hard to get pass that and use anything else. Once people see they can use something else, then they would be open to trying Apple's computers.

When people see their neighbors using things other than Windows (even if it is because their neighbors are cheap), they would be willing to try something non-Windows, even an expensive Apple computer.

None of this would make the Mac OS or Linux take over the world. Windows might even maintain a majority of market share. But at least there would be choice.


----------



## RacerX (Oct 23, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Dlatu1983 _
> *Who in their right minds would buy a $3,000 G5 when a $1,000 x86 PC could run the same OS and all the same programs? *



Here is a question: _Who in their right minds would buy a $3,000 G5 when a $800 eMac could run the same OS and all the same programs?_

No one is going to run an operating system with little or no software. Mac OS X for x86 wouldn't have nearly as much software as Mac OS X for PowerPC which in turn doesn't have nearly as much software as Windows for x86.

Platform switching always comes down to the Applications Barrier. Even Microsoft couldn't get past it with Windows for PowerPC, what makes you think Apple would have an easier time with a Mac OS for x86?


----------



## RacerX (Oct 23, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jackdahi _
> *You see this will give poor PC users the ability to switch to a superior OS! *



What is stopping them now? PCs run a ton of operating systems that are superior to Windows... and none of them are made by Apple. Yet they use Windows. I own three PCs, I own almost every version of Windows from 1.0 to 2000 pro, I own copies of Office 97 and 2000, and yet *not one* of my PCs has *any* Microsoft software on them.

What is stopping them from switching to a superior OS?


----------



## pds (Oct 23, 2003)

> _Originally posted by nb3004 _
> *games apple needs a killer game that is only oh this platform, it prob will never happen unless apple themselves create it ...
> *



Funny enough many people here in Cairo remember the iMac as the computer that ran Nanosaur at a local version of Comdex a few years back. 

Not being a platform consultant, I like Bob, Gia and Tree's ideas. Lower the prices, push wifi in the places that people can see it (public spaces like airports) and create and license new spokes for the digital hub. 

Make an interface to program people's VCR


----------



## lilbandit (Oct 23, 2003)

people are lazy and play safe when it comes to investing in a computer. It doesn't matter what OS comes preinstalled. Macs come with os x, X86 come with windows. The mistake was letting MS build up such a massive marketshare in the first place. Consumers operate on word of mouth ie. discussions with family/friends/neighbours. Odds are they all have Wintel so thats the first barrier that a potential mac buyer meets. The customers peer group all use windows and are ignorant of anything else. Outside of traditionaly strong creative markets the mac suffers from a hangover. Apple cannot be trusted to ship on time and crucially they are the only game in town. If a company hired someone in the morning and I needed a computer on his/her desk as soon as poss, Apple would not be the company to deliver and I could not contact another manufacturer as a backup. If you need a Wintel machine you can call Dell, Compaq.....the list goes on. I think Apple have already done everything in their power to convert windows users. It must be frustrating for them, they have good products and brand recognition that they cannot translate into sales. Shame really.


----------



## ApeintheShell (Oct 23, 2003)

*giggles* he said penetrate

I agree with Racer X.

My brother uses Windows causes it's available, i don't think he has a preference for what system he is running as long as he can keep doing his artwork in photoshop and chat online. 

Although, we didn't get a software bundle. i'm sure many people receive them with their dell, hp, sony pc's.


----------



## Ripcord (Oct 23, 2003)

> _Originally posted by RacerX _
> *What is stopping them now? PCs run a ton of operating systems that are superior to Windows... and none of them are made by Apple. Yet they use Windows. I own three PCs, I own almost every version of Windows from 1.0 to 2000 pro, I own copies of Office 97 and 2000, and yet not one of my PCs has any Microsoft software on them.
> 
> What is stopping them from switching to a superior OS? *



"Superior" is probably pretty subjective.  Do you mean in the server space?  Linux has a huge market share.  Do you mean on the desktop?  I think only a small percentage of Linux users would consider it "superior" overall on the desktop.  I definitely wouldn't.

BeOS?  It was great desktop, but it's dead.  Was killed by anti-competitive practices.  OS/2?  Dead.  FreeBSD/Solaris?  Feh.  Which "superior" OS are you talking about?

My opinion, there are currently two desktop OSes being produced - Windows and OS X.  Linux is a distant third, though it still hasn't made it (except in very limited circumstances).

Rip


----------



## RacerX (Oct 23, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ripcord _
> *"Superior" is probably pretty subjective. *



There are a number of Linux distros that are as easy for the average user to use as Windows XP, in fact easier as they would be spending more of their time working then patching or update antivirus software. In every operating system way, they are superior.

And yes, Solaris is superior to Windows.

Yes, the BeOS was superior. Why didn't people make that move?

Yes, OS/2 Warp 4.0 was superior. Why didn't people make that move?

And when there was NEXTSTEP and OPENSTEP, why didn't people make the move then?

_Why do people continue to use Windows when there is no shortage of superior operating systems?_

*Applications.*

_Why would Mac OS X on x86 fail?_

*Lack of applications.*

Subjective or not, the applications barrier is the primary barrier for many people using other operating systems. Superior operating systems exist, but the best OS in the world with applications does little more than keep a system on.



> *Do you mean on the desktop?  I think only a small percentage of Linux users would consider it "superior" overall on the desktop.  I definitely wouldn't.*



Why? KDE, Gnome and Mad Hatter are all as good as Windows ME/XP in my book. And CDE is about even with Windows.

And where did you get the idea that only a _small percentage of Linux users would consider it "superior" overall on the desktop_.


----------



## hulkaros (Oct 25, 2003)

And never forget the FUD that M$ people spread around about anything non M$  And I'm talking about the high ranked Pros in the M$ industry here!


----------



## Arden (Oct 25, 2003)

Apple should buy a piece of Windows, in which they can put up whatever they want, and it will appear on Windows machines.  They could put up "Go Yankees" and it would show it in a box on all Windows machines connected to the Internet.  Then Apple could start invasively advertising directly to Windows uers.

::ha:: Like Microsoft would go for that!


----------



## Ripcord (Oct 25, 2003)

RacerX said:
			
		

> There are a number of Linux distros that are as easy for the average user to use as Windows XP, in fact easier as they would be spending more of their time working then patching or update antivirus software. In every operating system way, they are superior.



Again, I like Linux, I think it's "easy to install" and easy to run a few apps, maybe move some files around, but the easiness stops there.  It's just still way too kludgy.  More on this later.



> And yes, Solaris is superior to Windows.



In the computer room it can be superior in quite a few ways.  On the desktop?  Give me a break.  Solaris is definitely NOT a consumer OS. I thought that's what we were talking about =)



> Why? KDE, Gnome and Mad Hatter are all as good as Windows ME/XP in my book. And CDE is about even with Windows.



Wow.  I think KDE and Gnome have come a long way, but I still wouldn't say they're on par.  CDE hasn't changed much since 1992, and it wasn't terribly user friendly at the time.

When grandma goes to install that video conferencing/sharing app, I think she's going to be a bit peeved when she finds out she has to install it from source.  But it will only work after she's run ./configure and edited the Make files.  And then when she goes to install the new OpenOffice, she has to run this thing called "RPM" and then figure out what "package depends on libXFRenderConf1.2.4-5rc4 which cannot be found" means.  She'll be a tad bit concerned when she finally figures out where she needs to go to change her desktop color resolution from 256 colors to "Millions of colors", and when she does, the screen turns into a flurry of out-of sync lines.  To fix it, she finds out, she'll need to use pico or vi in console mode to edit her /etc/X11/XF86Config file.  Sharing files between her old computer and new will require her to edit her Samba config file.  The constant crashing of Nautilus and/or Konqueror would be a little unsettling as she's just trying to copy files from place to place.  Now she's having problems printing - Mozilla appears to just be continually spitting garbage out of her printer.  So which "Start" menu submenu does she go to, to kill the job?  "System Tools"?  No...  "System Settings"?  Not there either.  Ah!  Under "Preferences".  No, not there either - that's for the OTHER type of print queue.  She should have gone under "Accessories".

Grandma's video card dies and she has to buy a different model as a  replacement.  The new model doesn't come with dynamically loadable video drivers, because they've been written into the latest kernel.  But grandma's system is about a year old and doesn't have the latest kernel (what's a "kernel", anyway, she wonders?).  Redhat's up2date program, which she paid $70 for, stopped working properly about 6 months ago, nor would she be able to access it at this point, nor would it likely HAVE the latest kernel.  To get her video to work properly, she'll need to download and build the latest kernel, enabling the right driver.  Whew!  Hope she remembered to extract the files to /usr/src, not to /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin, /lib, etc.

Now grandma wants to hook up her digital camera.  Her head explodes, and I have no more grandma.  Thanks Linux.

I'm just trying to illustrate a few of the system deficiencies that make it "not superior" to Windows XP.  It's not so much the app support (though I agree, that alone is a killer, and much much worse on Linux than on MacOS), it's shared library/dependency hell, immature system tools, hardware support problems, "pretty" interfaces only somewhat obscuring what is still mostly a hacker OS (though a very nice and well-done hacker OS - and by hackers I mean the smart, ultra-savvy computer programmers and tinkerers, not the "bad guys") and still suffers from a ton of hacker mentality.

Linux is getting there, slowly.  It's making strides year-over-year.  However, I'm a pretty seriously technical guy and even *I* won't run it on the desktop.  All the little inconsistencies, problems, poor/immature design, etc just aren't worth it - I spend more time trying to make the system work than working with the system.  I believe that it can work on the desktop in several corporate situations (dedicated workstations running Mozilla and OpenOffice and a few other apps, maintained by an IT department), but in most other situations it's just not there yet.  I believe it WILL be there eventually, but not for a while.

Incidentally, BeOS was killed by:
- Anticompetitive practices by Microsoft
- Lack of app support
- Lethargic consumers
- Small company that eventually decided that it needed to find a way to make money and started building embedded software
- Bad business decisions

OS/2 was killed by:
- Anticompetitive practices by Microsoft
- Lack of native app support
- Lethargic consumers
- Product managers that had no CLUE what they wanted to do with the product
- Castration by VPs that didn't want to risk angering Microsoft and getting their Windows license pulled



> Why do people continue to use Windows when there is no shortage of superior operating systems?



- Lethargy (or not knowing any better)
- App support
- Lack of any current-day "superior" OS that will work on their hardware - i.e., no choice
- Price

Rip


----------



## Ripcord (Oct 25, 2003)

BTW, I love Grandma.  That's why she has a Mac


----------



## RacerX (Oct 25, 2003)

Ripcord said:
			
		

> In the computer room it can be superior in quite a few ways.  On the desktop?  Give me a break.  Solaris is definitely NOT a consumer OS. I thought that's what we were talking about =)



Maybe it is your lack of experience using Solaris. When I installed it on Sun hardware it didn't seem that much harder then installing any other OS. On Intel hardware it wasn't that bad after you get past the X configuration part.

More to the point, in the real world of average users, average users don't install these things anyways. But more on that later. 



> When grandma goes to install that video conferencing/sharing app, I think she's going to be a bit peeved when she finds out she has to install it from source...



Depends, average users tend to be behind the curve on these things. Why would your _grandma_ be more adventurous then an average user?

More importantly, many distros of linux are coming with these types of things preinstalled. Even my 10 year old SGI which came with video comferencing hardware didn't require me to do anything to use it. It is becoming a standard to install as much as possible right from the start. You should get out and try some of these releases. Boxed versions of Linux aren't nearly as bad as you seem to think.

Plus, if she is out of her depth, she should get someone else to do these installations for her.



> And then when she goes to install the new OpenOffice, she has to run this thing called "RPM" and then figure out what "package depends on libXFRenderConf1.2.4-5rc4 which cannot be found" means.



Most distros (boxed) have OpenOffice preinstalled. Hopefully you aren't the one sending your _grandma_ off looking for parts and pieces that come with most boxed distros you can get at the store. You aren't that cheap, are you?

The last time I installed StarOffice... on my Sun, it was as easy as installing MS Office on Windows. Maybe she should pay a little and get StarOffice.



> She'll be a tad bit concerned when she finally figures out where she needs to go to change her desktop color resolution from 256 colors to "Millions of colors", and when she does, the screen turns into a flurry of out-of sync lines.  To fix it, she finds out, she'll need to use pico or vi in console mode to edit her /etc/X11/XF86Config file.  Sharing files between her old computer and new will require her to edit her Samba config file.  The constant crashing of Nautilus and/or Konqueror would be a little unsettling as she's just trying to copy files from place to place.  Now she's having problems printing - Mozilla appears to just be continually spitting garbage out of her printer.  So which "Start" menu submenu does she go to, to kill the job?  "System Tools"?  No...  "System Settings"?  Not there either.  Ah!  Under "Preferences".  No, not there either - that's for the OTHER type of print queue.  She should have gone under "Accessories".



That is more problems then any users I've seen (except those who tried to hack together a system that is... are you talking from your own experiences??). Maybe you need to research this more. Sounds like you've had some hard times with Linux that you really didn't need to have (and that the average computer user wouldn't have).



> Grandma's video card dies and she has to buy a different model as a  replacement...



WOW!!!!! Your _grandma_ cracks open her own computer?!?!?! This is one of the stranger then fiction stories isn't it.



> Now grandma wants to hook up her digital camera.  Her head explodes, and I have no more grandma.  Thanks Linux.



I've got news for you, your _grandma_'s head was going to explode anyways... Linux had nothing to do with it.



> I'm just trying to illustrate a few of the system deficiencies that make it "not superior" to Windows XP.



Very poor illustration. You need to get out and play with current Linux/Solaris more. You need to work with average users more.

As a consultant, the one thing I see is how people use their systems. Most are not going to do anything beyond the standard work/browse, and most have someone with experience do installations and configurations. I work mainly with Mac clients, and most wouldn't consider doing half those thing to their systems that you had your _grandma_ doing.

When set up correctly to begin with, Linux and Solaris are wonderful systems. You sound like you hacked together systems, of course you had... sorry, your _grandma_ had problems. The standard installation of Red Hat or SuSE out of the box on standard hardware installs most of the applications and features that the average person would need (matching the applications and features of that average Windows system... most of which go unchanged by their original owner).



> It's not so much the app support (though I agree, that alone is a killer, and much much worse on Linux than on MacOS), it's shared library/dependency hell, immature system tools, hardware support problems, "pretty" interfaces only somewhat obscuring what is still mostly a hacker OS (though a very nice and well-done hacker OS - and by hackers I mean the smart, ultra-savvy computer programmers and tinkerers, not the "bad guys") and still suffers from a ton of hacker mentality.



Only the hacked together versions suffer the way you are talking about. when packaged correctly and not hacked after that, Linux can be used and maintain just as easily as Windows. When someone steps out of their depth on any OS, it is a quick ride to computer hell.

Don't tinker if you don't know how to tinker.

And for god sake... keep _grandma_ away from the tools and the inside of her computer. I can just see the headlines now:

_ Woman's head explodes because of poor computing advice from grandson_


----------



## malexgreen (Oct 25, 2003)

jackdahi said:
			
		

> If Apple would hire you as a platform consultant, what would be your suggestion on penetrating the PC market?
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ...



I really wish they would hire me as a consultant.  If they did, I would give them this advice:

They need to continue incorporate PVR functionality into their G5's and Powerbooks. Or they need to come out with a digital set-top box based on the Apple platform that is a Tivo Killer.

When 3G/Wimax becomes a reality they need to encorporate it into their computers.

They need to provide coporate services to companies that switch to mac. They need to lower their prices for organizations that buy in volume from Apple.

They need to improve Ink such that it is competitive with Windows XP tablet addition. They then need to come out with a tablet powerbook.

They need to push standards harder. Windows is trying to get Windows Media 9 to become an open standard that Hollywood would buy into for video stream generation. I think Apple needs to cut them off at the pass. They need to push MPEG4, AVC, AAC, H.264 like their lives depend on it.

They need to come out with an XServe that is based on the Power4/5 processor with an Enterprise MacOSX OS. This will put them in competition with people who are selling Sparc and Itanium based enterprise servers. They also need to quickly move their current XServe line to G5. But this may put them in competition with IBM, who makes servers based on the Power chip. I think IBM wouldn't mind selling more chips, though, seeing their microelectronics division is suffering.


----------



## nervus (Oct 25, 2003)

Ripcord said:
			
		

> BTW, I love Grandma.  That's why she has a Mac


Of course that is her best bet. However, should she ever need to use a x86 then let her install the latest SuSe Linux distro: it is really a piece of cake.


----------



## Arden (Oct 26, 2003)

Ripcord said:
			
		

> Now grandma wants to hook up her digital camera.  Her head explodes, and I have no more grandma.  Thanks Linux.


 ::ha::  ::ha::  ::ha::  ::ha:: Hilarious!


----------



## rubicon (Oct 26, 2003)

I've been a long-time PC person, recently acquired a PowerBook.  Wow, now I understand.

A few things Apple should consider:

1) A Mac is a Lexus, Windows is a Toyota.  Maybe it's time to market a "luxury" computer?  Dunno.

2) Apple has an elitist attitude.  No problem, it works for celebrities, politicians, etc.  However, Apple users come off as cry babies, zealots, and less sophisticated than their Windows counterparts.  Maybe I'm generalizing, but the Mac user community needs to get with it.  Not sure how...

3) Apple needs to really highlight that OS X is UNIX with all the convenience of retail software.  Linux is nice if you never want to run Photoshop natively.  Windows is fine if you never want to have the power of UNIX.  Essentially, Apple needs to market the Mac as a powerful computer that includes all the goodies of UNIX and interoperability with UNIX, Mac, and Windows.  BTW, most PC users could care less about the G5, they only understand Pentium and Athlon.  The fact that CPU speed isn't an absolute values makes it even harder for Windows users to understand G5, Pentium, and Athlon.

4) Get the Linux crowd to convert.  Linux geeks love the command line crap and tweaking that OS X can offer and Windows can't.

5) The price of hardware.  I don't think Apple hardware is overpriced, it's that PC hardware is underpriced.  If PC people realized just how compatible the hardware and OS is with a Mac, they'd jump ship in a minute.  My Mac doesn't give me nearly the hassles that a PC does.  However, that's what put Apple into the predicament they're in now.  Closed hardware, high prices, little adoption.

6) Promote the fact Macs don't come with all the annoying bundled crap like Windows does.  OEM copies of WIndows are filled with junk like AOL, AT&T WorldNet, and a host of other junk.

I think Apple will increase its market share through its user base.  Or rather, PC to Mac converts like me.  Seriously, a Mac user can't convince a WIndows user to switch.  But a hard core Windows user can convince their colleagues to switch because they have the credibility.  In my world at least.


----------



## macnewguy (Oct 26, 2003)

Lower Prices Definitely.  I am with bobw


----------



## macnewguy (Oct 26, 2003)

Make commercials


----------



## MDLarson (Oct 26, 2003)

Umm... make the two-button mouse standard and relegate the one-button mouse as a build-to-order option.  C'mon Apple, there are a TON of PC users out there who just curl up their lips at the one-button mouse!


----------



## Maximus (Oct 27, 2003)

RacerX said:
			
		

> What is stopping them now? PCs run a ton of operating systems that are superior to Windows... and none of them are made by Apple. Yet they use Windows. I own three PCs, I own almost every version of Windows from 1.0 to 2000 pro, I own copies of Office 97 and 2000, and yet *not one* of my PCs has *any* Microsoft software on them.
> 
> What is stopping them from switching to a superior OS?



I think Apple should have, and should now buy or create an emulator package that provides native access to Windows programs on the desktop.  I was disappointed when Microsoft bought Virtual PC and Apple had no response and did not anticipate it.  I think one thing that Windows users need is more reassurance that it will be easy to switch and that they can bring the stuff they need, along with them.  For most people with Word and Excel documents, It may never really be necessary, but it's one of those reassurances we all want, when we buy a new computer - that we can still access the old stuff from the old computer - on the new computer.  It might just require too much effort to create and maintain, but it seems like a worthwhile effort.  

At the very least, perhaps Apple should have bought Virtual PC, up to 51%, so that Microsoft couldn't just take it over.  

Otherwise, I think they are doing a great job, despite the decline, supposedly, in marketshare.  I would imagine that "decline" is something specific to some factors other than increasing acceptance of Windows.  There are more and more "naive" users buying computers as the prices go down.  Virtually all of them have been brainwashed into believing that they NEED Windows machines.  I would imagine that this, more than a decline in acceptance of Apple, is the cause of Apple's declining (though not loss of) market share.  As users get more sophisticated, and realize that a box that does not work - is not a computer - Apple's share will improve.


----------



## fryke (Oct 27, 2003)

Microsoft does quite a good job in advertising Office v. X along with Virtual PC 6.1, I think. I like those ads in WIRED, for example. Of course, their main interest is not in converting Windows to Mac people, but still... Now: Apple is on the verge of improving compatibility themselves. Open/save MS Word documents with TextEdit (free with Panther!), presentations with Keynote. Excel's missing, and the PowerPoint import/export could of course be better in Keynote. But still... I don't think Apple should've bought Virtual PC. Unless they would create a RedBox kind of thing into OS X that 'seamlessly' opens Windows applications like Classic apps... But that's a bit difficult to achieve, I think, or Connectix would have long done this with VPC... (Yes, you could double-click win-apps with VPC, but they didn't open in their own windows, just in VPC...)


----------



## kalantna (Oct 27, 2003)

Apple's biggest problem lies in their advertising. They ran this great ad about the G5 in all the techie magazines that was a hard sale and made many coworkers of mine stand up and take notice, but they ran this horrible commercial on TV that has this kid get blown out of his house by the "power" of the G5. IT was stupid.

I liken the commercial to the G4's introduction. The government said that it was too powerful to be sold to any country that was not a friend of the US. You remember the commercial? Tanks surrounding the computer. If they had only said "supercomputer" instead of "superweapon" a lot of people would have understood the commercial. 

A good idea for a commercial for Apple would be one for their "Digital Hub/Lifestyle" concept. Start at someone's home where they are listening to music in the morning while getting dressed for work. They eat breakfast and walk over to their stereo system and unplug their laptop from the AV wires and iPod from it and pack it up in their suitcase. 

Outside in their car they hook their iPod up to their car stereo and drive to work. At work they sit down at their desk, pull out their laptop start doing email and office apps. May be they use it in a presentation. The day is over and they get in their car and come home to their kid's birthday party and start taking digital camera pics and video. The party's over and they plug in their camera and iPhoto or iMovie opens up. They upload their files and stuff and plug their laptop back into the stereo and watch a DVD on it through their TV. They go to sleep. Tag on screen "Welcome to the Digital Lifestyle." Apple Logo. Fade to Black.

As far as games go...Apple could benefit from a deal struck with companies like Bioware, Bungie, etc. to have them make their games hybrid (even if Apple has to pay them money).


----------



## Maximus (Oct 27, 2003)

kalantna said:
			
		

> A good idea for a commercial for Apple would be one for their "Digital Hub/Lifestyle" concept. Start at someone's home where they are listening to music in the morning while getting dressed for work. They eat breakfast and walk over to their stereo system and unplug their laptop from the AV wires and iPod from it and pack it up in their suitcase.
> 
> Outside in their car they hook their iPod up to their car stereo and drive to work. At work they sit down at their desk, pull out their laptop start doing email and office apps. May be they use it in a presentation. The day is over and they get in their car and come home to their kid's birthday party and start taking digital camera pics and video. The party's over and they plug in their camera and iPhoto or iMovie opens up. They upload their files and stuff and plug their laptop back into the stereo and watch a DVD on it through their TV. They go to sleep. Tag on screen "Welcome to the Digital Lifestyle." Apple Logo. Fade to Black.



Great ideas Kalantna!  You should be a consultant for Apple.  

Fryke, I see your points.  I was thinking more of an integrated product that could also be used to run other systems as well.  I think the real problem for many Windows users, many of whom would love to switch, but talk themselves out of it, is that they have this investment in software which, in 90% of cases, they don't need anymore - but which they fear to give up - because they bought it all and they'd have to start from scratch again.  Apple needs a way to address that hurdle - which - in reality is small - but in many minds is huge.  Thank God I never bought a windows computer myself.  I let my employers buy the junk, and I bought what I wanted at home.  Many people, however, have not operated that way.


----------



## MDLarson (Oct 27, 2003)

kalantna said:
			
		

> As far as games go...Apple could benefit from a deal struck with companies like Bioware, Bungie, etc.


Well, not Bungie.  Microsoft bought 'em!


----------



## kalantna (Oct 27, 2003)

they struck a deal with MS and still have it today. Why not the same for Bungie? I'm not saying a mutual beneficial agreement where Bungie makes their games for Mac out of the kindness of their hearts, but rather Apple pay them a sum to release their games on the Mac at the same time they are released for Windows.


----------



## JokerZ (Oct 27, 2003)

malexgreen said:
			
		

> They need to continue incorporate PVR functionality into their G5's and Powerbooks. Or they need to come out with a digital set-top box based on the Apple platform that is a Tivo Killer.



On the whole PVR issue, I can't say how others feel, but I personally don't wnat my computers anywhere near my tv sets. Having to jack my sat decoder/dvd player or other device into my computer just seems like a huge waste of a computer.  Any PVR device should incorporate a network, like 802.11g (or even gigabit ether), that way I could transmit all my info back to the primary computer in my house. That way I can use my remote to chat happily to the PVR and it has the smarts to talk to the Apple and show me what content I currently have online for viewing.

I have a feeling that doing something along these lines would also reduce the cost of the PVR as it's only real intelligence, needs to be to talk to my Mac. it doesn't have to worry about scheduling etc, coz my Mac does it all the PVR device just makes the communication and location of equipment a whole lot easier.


----------



## Arden (Oct 27, 2003)

rubicon said:
			
		

> A Mac is a Lexus, Windows is a Toyota. Maybe it's time to market a "luxury" computer? Dunno.


Excuse me?  Did you just compare Windows to Toyota?  Toyota makes some of the best consumer-grade cars on the market.  I'm not saying they're up there with BMW or Mercedes, but a Toyota is one of the best cars you can buy for the money.  (And they make Lexuses.)  A better comparison would be to compare Windows to Ford:  It might look good at first, but at some point down the road it has a good chance of failing you and breaking down.  Not all Fords do, but many do.



			
				kalantna said:
			
		

> they struck a deal with MS and still have it today. Why not the same for Bungie? I'm not saying a mutual beneficial agreement where Bungie makes their games for Mac out of the kindness of their hearts, but rather Apple pay them a sum to release their games on the Mac at the same time they are released for Windows.


Microsoft bought Bungie, meaning the Bungie we all knew and loved 3 years ago is now part of the games division of Microsoft.  Meaning there is no more Bungie.



> Outside in their car they hook their iPod up to their car stereo and drive to work. At work they sit down at their desk, pull out their laptop start doing email and office apps. May be they use it in a presentation. The day is over and they get in their car and come home to their kid's birthday party and start taking digital camera pics and video. The party's over and they plug in their camera and iPhoto or iMovie opens up. They upload their files and stuff and plug their laptop back into the stereo and watch a DVD on it through their TV. They go to sleep. Tag on screen "Welcome to the Digital Lifestyle." Apple Logo. Fade to Black.


Awesome idea!  You should send it to Apple.  I can imagine having an inset picture of a closeup of whatever Apple device the person is using at the time, like show him taking the iPod out of its dock and show a closeup of the iPod as he's doing this in a smaller picture.  That would be cool.


----------



## Maximus (Oct 28, 2003)

arden said:
			
		

> Awesome idea!  You should send it to Apple.  I can imagine having an inset picture of a closeup of whatever Apple device the person is using at the time, like show him taking the iPod out of its dock and show a closeup of the iPod as he's doing this in a smaller picture.  That would be cool.



I agree Arden.  I think that Volkswagen is doing this in their commercials now.  They have something built in that interfaces with the iPod.  It would be great if Apple made people more aware if there is some sort of device, for all cars, that we can buy to park and power the iPod for our other car's stereo system.  I would suggest that Apple do a deal with the top car stereo provider to create a special "iPod" model that will be widely available - for the rest of us.

More wireless connectivity to other devices in the house, and a seemless way to make it happen seems like a very good idea as well.  I would bet that Rendezvous is the means to this ideal.  However, Apple probably needs to get device manufacturers to support the standard.  That might go for a stereo provider - or perhaps Apple could come up with a deal with a remote control provider that would allow you to park your remote pointed at your home stereo, tv, etc. and then control it from your computer (via WIFI) - or remotely over the Internet.  However, that would not let you receive info back wirelessley from the television.  I'm sure that is doable too though.  Obviously it's doable if you want to deal with a little complexity.  The goal is for Apple to make it idiot proof and simple.

Hey, I have no doubt Apple will do a lot more great things - and I'm very optimistic about the company.  I look forward to installing Panther.


----------



## gwynarion (Oct 28, 2003)

I think that it's pointless to say things like get the speed up since I'm sure Apple will keep doing this as quickly as they can, as will the Intel world.  It's also pointless to say that Apple should come out with new and innovative designs since that's what they've always done.  I disagree with the people who say that Apple should lower prices and ad more BTO options.  I think the prices are fine where they are and I think that too many options will increase cost and decrease stability.

I like the suggestions by others who say that Apple should roll out Airport networks in places like, well, airports.  I also think that the idea of Apple working out more deals with companies like Pepsi.  Also good are the suggestions about pushing their supported open standards like ZeroConf and MP4.

So what else can Apple do?  Obviously they need a really good ad campaign.  I think that looking back some of the better commercials they've fielded were the original iMac ones with Jeff Goldblum.  They were direct, unambiguous, and they provided real information about the computers simplicity and ease of use.  They need to bring this kind of clarity to everything that makes them special.  They also need to show everyone using their products, from the common man to big name celebrities.  Pay Catherine Zeta-Jones to carry an iBook around with her when she goes out with Michael, etc.  Have you all seen the NWA commercial which is practically an Apple commercial?  More things like that can't hurt.

Another very important thing they can do is to continue pushing Macs out to schools, businesses and governments.  In fact I think this is *one of the most important things they can do.*  When a whole district of students are using Macs Apple has a good argument selling them to the parents for home use.  When they can further show that Macs will be a large presence at whatever college the children will attend their argument has brown stronger.  And if they can go on to show that the business or governmental agency that will employ the graduates their argument has become rock solid.  Talking about penetrating the home pc market is meaningless unless you include making major inroads into other markets.  Put a 15" PowerBook on every desk in Congress or Parliament.

They also need to push the digital hub even further.  I think that the things we have now are great, but they need more.  Work with companies to roll out cheaper and easier to use home automation software/hardware solutions that run on Mac OS X.  Work with digital cable and satellite dish tv providers to co-brand set-top boxes and some of the interactive features they provide.  Make it even easier for me to put my Mac at the heart of my entire AV setup.  Throw some sponsorship behind TechTV and get them talking about something Apple every single episode.

Finally they should selectively bring a few more Mac apps to Windows.  In this respect I think iTunes was a great choice, but Safari and iPhoto would not be.  The logical candidate in my mind would be iChat AV.  It's interactive and having it available to Windows users would get even more Mac users using it (not to mention selling more iSights).

That's all I can think of for right now.


----------



## Maximus (Oct 28, 2003)

gwynarion said:
			
		

> Finally they should selectively bring a few more Mac apps to Windows.  In this respect I think iTunes was a great choice, but Safari and iPhoto would not be.  The logical candidate in my mind would be iChat AV.  It's interactive and having it available to Windows users would get even more Mac users using it (not to mention selling more iSights).



Well said, in its entirety.  I agree with everything, especially the AV suggestion and the iChat AV suggestion.  We operate in a limited universe, so I have very few people I can use the features of iChat AV with - and that is a big drawback to the software's usefulness.  I don't know what the technical limitations are, but the practical opportunities are clear.


----------



## jackdahi (Oct 28, 2003)

I agree! Porting iChat would be a great thing for apple. It would help with the sale of iSight camaras and establish a good user base, imagine AOL adopting it as part of their software..... watch out MS!


----------



## hunt045 (Nov 4, 2003)

I agree with Rubicon statement that MacIntoshs are like Lexus and should be marketed as such.

  I would push for flashy ads using a celebrity spokes person demonstrating all the lates eye candy using the biggest display possible.  Sort of like Steve Jobs does during his presentations.  You got to get people excited about the product then all the other stuff is secondary like price; technical specs etc.  If the buying public falls in love with your product and it becomes trendy, they beat a path to your door regardless of the cost.


----------



## toast (Nov 4, 2003)

"I would push for flashy ads using a celebrity spokes person demonstrating all the lates eye candy using the biggest display possible."

Very bad idea from beginning to end, commercially speaking.

1) Apple has a tradition of sobriety and elegance, combined with relativie discrecy (is this word English ? noun from adjective 'discreet'). I don't see any 'flashy' ads coming up here.

2) Celebrity spokes are great to convince 30+ aged housewives to buy a new washign machine or a new insurance. They won't be of any effect on students, institutions and research centers. They may even have a counter-effect.

3) Eye candy and biggest display possible: Apple is not advertising superficial GUI tricks, Apple is selling reliable, powerful machines.


----------



## Maximus (Nov 4, 2003)

Interesting idea, except that, conrary to myth, Apple is not priced particularly highly as a luxury brand.  The computers, for their capacities, are about the same price for a similarly priced windows version.  On top of this, Apple isn't simply an equipment designer and marketer - they have to do R&D on both the boxes and the OS and all the other software, so their costs are much higher than for other computer cos you think of for the same business.

If Apple were to take this strategy, and price the computers as a luxury good with a really high margin, then none of us would have ever had an Apple.  And, I doubt that they would still be in business.

However, they do do a great job at marketing and accomplishing exactly this idea, just not by means of pricing themselves out of the market.  In fact, I understand that they often make more money on iPods than they do on the lower level computer products.


----------



## nb3004 (Nov 4, 2003)

i also doubt that most men who are in a mid-life crisis will buy a luxury computer


----------

