OS market shares
- Thread starter Rhisiart
- Start date
Hm.
2008: Windows market share drops below 90%.
2009: Windows market share drops below 87%.
2009: Apple announces Mac OS X for PC Compatibles. (199 USD.)
2010: Windows market share drops below 75%.
2011: The year we... Oh, I somehow got off track.
Seriously though: I guess it'll become more and more viable for Apple to release Mac OS X for "the any PC" now. Whenever we've talked about this in recent years, the argument was that Apple "still" was depending on hardware sales. But however hard you try not to see it, this is a curve that will some day come down to "It doesn't make sense *not* to sell OS X to non-Mac customers."
But I digress. First let's celebrate the overall trend. The windows are coming down.
2008: Windows market share drops below 90%.
2009: Windows market share drops below 87%.
2009: Apple announces Mac OS X for PC Compatibles. (199 USD.)
2010: Windows market share drops below 75%.
2011: The year we... Oh, I somehow got off track.
Seriously though: I guess it'll become more and more viable for Apple to release Mac OS X for "the any PC" now. Whenever we've talked about this in recent years, the argument was that Apple "still" was depending on hardware sales. But however hard you try not to see it, this is a curve that will some day come down to "It doesn't make sense *not* to sell OS X to non-Mac customers."
But I digress. First let's celebrate the overall trend. The windows are coming down.
Plus Mac users buying Windows licenses for BootCamp/Parallels etc. 
But of course you're right, the market share is highly different in different areas. However it won't change that fast in the corporate area - until Apple better "gets" that world. Pages-templates won't ever persuade accountants to go all-Mac.
But of course you're right, the market share is highly different in different areas. However it won't change that fast in the corporate area - until Apple better "gets" that world. Pages-templates won't ever persuade accountants to go all-Mac.
bbloke
Registered
Yes, it will be interesting to see what Apple does. I think the above is maybe a little too strong: I wouldn't classify anyone who thinks Apple may stick to their own hardware as simply deluding themselves.
Thinking out loud, how many precedents are there of Apple "deviating," as it were? I can remember the brief dabbling with the clones in the 1990s. Steve Jobs then put an end to that. On a related theme, Apple has made QuickTime, iTunes, and Safari available for Windows. iTunes could be seen simply as encouraging more hardware (iPod) sales amongst Windows users, though.
QuickTime, which also has links to iTunes, has been available for years as a competing standard for viewing graphical/video content, particularly online. Microsoft and Apple had their own standards for "media players" and it would have made sense for Apple to not keep QuickTime, which was an important part of Mac users' experiences, as a niche product that then risked dying off in isolation. There are various reasons Apple has ported Safari, some arguing it is about ensuring it is not an isolated product and that there is plenty of development focused in this area.
What do I think Apple will do? Genuinely, I'm not sure! Apple has long been a company which strictly controls both hardware and software together, and that has been part of their advantage. On the other hand, Apple is good at producing surprises...
If the curve gets to be 60-70% Windows, why would Apple see a benefit in selling for regular PCs? If it gets that low they're already probably taking that market with their own hardware. I don't think Apple wants to be at 90% of the market because when you have something like that then you can't change as fast as they are now. I actually think 30% of the market being Macs and the rest Windows and Linux+Other would be better for Apple than 90% where 10% is their own hardware and the rest is cheaper PCs that they don't make any money from besides the OS license.
Lt Major Burns
"Dicky" Charlteston-Burns
bbloke said:
This was also a time where Jobs put an end to a lot of things: the Newton platform, their server interests, their peripheral interests (quicktake cameras and stylewriter printers etc) and even a ton of macs (5500, 6500, 7200, 7300, 8600, 9600, TAM, 2400 and 3400 powerbooks)!
it was a time of belt tightening where a large percentage of apple's interests were quickly canned. they went from producing more than 30 odd different models to just 4 in less than a year, so i don't think you can rule out software licensing on pcs on the strength of "steve jobs did it 10 years ago".
however, my own opinion is that i'd treat it with a lot of uncertainty. i quite like the exclusivity of owning a mac, the fact that to get this wonderful OS you have to pay a nice premium and get some thoroughly well-designed hardware thrown in the bargain. more than half the problems i faced with PCs were all borne from fighting the shoddy cheap hardware in Dells and homebrews...
that said, my ideal next computer would be a lenovo x300 that looked and worked like a macbook air...
bbloke
Registered
Sure, I'd agree. One can't state that because a company once did something, it will always continue to do so (e.g. deliberate use of PowerPC processors over Intel chips, refusal to go into the phone market, etc.). Like I say, Apple is good at producing surprises.
On the other hand, regarding Jobs' sweeping changes at the time, Apple has not ventured back into digital cameras or printers, Apple did not go back to a PDA theme (although the iPhone and iPod touch have elements of that), and, while there is still a range of laptops and desktops, Apple's computer range is clearer than it was back then.
In related news, AppleInsider reports that Apple has finally hit Psystar with a lawsuit:
AppleInsider said: