MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Dec 01, 08 - 12:04 pm Comment from: ericdano

Meh. When Windows falls below 75% let me know. Till then, it still is the "standard" even though it is crap.

- Windows XP: 66.31%
- Windows Vista: 20.45%

Wow!, the most advanced OS and the one that surpassed XP sales and also considered a total success for Microsoft, is 3 times below the old XP?

Microsoft really have a very distorted view of the shipments / sales balance.

Dec 01, 08 - 12:10 pm Comment from: Beaker

It's only going to get better.

Dec 01, 08 - 12:11 pm Comment from: R

OS X is already drawing more developers o the platform. 75% sounds like a magic number, but why not 74% or 73%? They're all arbitrary. The key is does the platform have adequate attention and development? Yes, it does. And, it seems the trend will continue for some time.

It'll be interesting to see if it continues to accelerate.

Dec 01, 08 - 12:12 pm Comment from: Dave H

Better yet is that Internet Explorer is now below 70% usage for the first time since the Netscape era, which means any web developers still sticking to IE-only code will find themselves losing even more potential hits.

and the more popular macs get the more unwanted idiots we get complaining about there is not mid level tower. i wish market share didn't matter. i hate listening to their whiny asses. damn pc wannabe mac people.

Dec 01, 08 - 12:13 pm Comment from: auren

"Wow!, the most advanced OS and the one that surpassed XP sales and also considered a total success for Microsoft, is 3 times below the old XP?"

THIS MEANS OS X IS 50 FREAKIN% OF VISTA !!!!!
Now THAT really says something!!!!!!!

Dec 01, 08 - 12:22 pm Comment from: WriterGuy

And the iPhone is half of market size of Linux?? What will the hard-core geeks at ZDNet say about that!!?

20% for Vista and only 9% for Mac?

Still looks like a long row to hoe.

I would like to see usage states for tech sites that indicate the cutting edge of users, like Engadget or ArsTechnica.

Dec 01, 08 - 12:55 pm Comment from: NCMacMan

Hmmm. I think that this speaks volumes as to why the Windows market is suffering in terms of recent sales. With such a huge base of XP users, why change to Vista which has been blasted by reviews and Apple.

Another interesting view is the fact that the iPhone accounts for .37%. Wait another five years and how much will the iPhone account for???

It's only up from here!

SunOS: 0.01%

Now I know why my old SUNW shares, once worth quite a lot, are almost worthless.

Apple iPhone: 0.37% Apple iPod (Touch, I presume): 0.05%
Linux: 0.83%

So, within 2 years, iPhone/iPod share is already half that of Linux, which has been around some 15 years. Desktop Linux: the alternative that never was.

Dec 01, 08 - 01:03 pm Comment from: Mr. Peabody

Every little bit helps, but it just isn't fast enough for me. Can't we all just ask MS to voluntarily pull Windows off of the market?

Here, I'll start by sending an email to a friend of a friend who works at MS, and ask them to forward the message on to SB.

Sorry, but the rest of you will have to come by your own inside connections.

MDN wrote, "As always, the actual percentage numbers are not as important as the trends..."

Show us the mathematics then, given that the trends over the past year hold constant, which century and decade Safari would finally reach 50%.

Desktop Linux: the alternative that never was.
well you're right of course but I'm getting used to CentOS at work, at home I have two Macs.

Dec 01, 08 - 01:18 pm Comment from: Roger Knights

The increase over the past 16 months (from July 2007 to Nov. 2008) has been almost 50%: From just under 6% to just under 9%.

If that rate continues for another 16 months, then by March 2010 the Mac share will be just under 13.5%. Another 16 months and it will be 20%. (Or, I guesstimate, it will be 25%, if Apple cuts its prices by 15%.)

Apple is not seeking 50% share, though if it happens I doubt they'd complain. Apple is profitable and extremely influential. That's a strong position to hold. Market share is only one measure.

A long row to hoe?

I'd rather have 9 bushels of Mac OS than 20 of VIsta.

Dec 01, 08 - 01:53 pm Comment from: Cubert

I wonder if there is anyone out there still running OS 9 or earlier?

Dec 01, 08 - 01:55 pm Comment from: MacRaven

Still too much Blue in that friggin' pie.

But as they say, "How do you eat an Elephant? One bite (or byte in this case) at a time."

Dec 01, 08 - 02:06 pm Comment from: Mr. Reeee

Gee, what about UBUNTU?
How could not give it a category all it's own? How could this beeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.........

Hey, this is a great sign! I could see Mac OS X break 10% by this summer!

[I wonder if there is anyone out there still running OS 9 or earlier?]

My sister-in-law. On a Rev B iMac. Can you say pennyfather?

Dec 01, 08 - 02:39 pm Comment from: Buster

@Cubert

I work in a Research Institute and there are still some people with Macs that run OS9 that they keep around to run older BUT still highly functional, genetics software.

Dec 01, 08 - 02:44 pm Comment from: Martin

All time high ??

are you out of your mind ?

Apple used to be the biggest seller of personal computers, (2 years in a row), they had a market share of 15% back in those years.

Dec 01, 08 - 02:47 pm Comment from: HazMatt

Peruchito says…
"and the more popular macs get the more unwanted idiots we get complaining about there is not mid level tower. i wish market share didn't matter. i hate listening to their whiny asses. damn pc wannabe mac people."

Eff you, Peruchito.
I'm a long time Mac user who would LOVE the option of a mid-level tower. Options are good things, remember?

OS 9 — of course!

I got two running legacy programs and to use SCSI-bus and SCSI-disks.
And I have an old encyclopedia I use for crossword puzzles.

Licence osX and see how fast those numbers change.... do we have to wait another 5 years or so to hit 20% ?

Dec 01, 08 - 04:29 pm Comment from: ken1w

@ Viktor

> Microsoft really have a very distorted view of the shipments / sales balance.

That's because Microsoft now counts a sale of Windows XP as a Vista sale, even if the customer (or OEM) does a downgrade from Vista to XP.

This data is clear proof that Vista is very unpopular. Marketing Windows 7 as "like Vista only better" is a very poor move.

Dec 01, 08 - 04:31 pm Comment from: DLMeyer

P said: "the more popular macs get the more unwanted idiots we get complaining about there is not mid level tower"
Are you saying I'm getting a following? Why, thank you!
There is nothing "idiotic" about wanting a mid-level tower. Actually, it would be more like an "entry-level tower", as the iMac is not a tower. And, we are not asking for the sort of system you get for under a grand from Dull! We're talking about a tower system at about the same price points as the iMac, but with more flexibility and no "fixed" screen. Smaller than the Big Box, but with some choices, like eight or more GB RAM, a second HD or OD, graphics.

Dec 01, 08 - 04:34 pm Comment from: ken1w

@ mmm

> Licence osX and see how fast those numbers change.... do we have to wait another 5 years or so to hit 20% ?

Strong and steady growth is what Apple wants. Apple will no doubt hit the 10% (worldwide) and 20% marks at some point, but who's "waiting"? I'm happy with the current situation, and happier that the trend is accelerating for Apple. I'm not "waiting" in anticipation for any particular market share number.

Dec 01, 08 - 05:03 pm Comment from: Predrag

Raymond in DC:

Isn't Sun's ticker symbol JAVA?

And about the "All-time high" statement, in absolute numbers of users, it undoubtedly is.

Dec 01, 08 - 05:11 pm Comment from: January 24, 1984

"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect."

Mark Twain

Well of course if Windows starts to hit the low 80% mark I suspect that the box makers will find it very difficult to make profits at all in the resulting cut throat market place. At that point all sorts of big changes could certainly take place as buyers seek stability, some of which will certainly benefit the Mac.

skip the cliches... this isn't just about marketshare but mind share... give m$soft enough time and vista 7 WILL become the norm. I for one have waited long enough for some REAL change... tired of second rate sh*t being thrown out as 'the standard'. This really is an oppertune time to let all those non vista updaters have a chance to try something new. I was going to say better but change is the most important thing here..

Dec 01, 08 - 07:38 pm Comment from: derekcurrie

Baloney Statistics!
The actual relevance of Net Applications data remains in dispute.
As per usual, keep in mind that their data is taken from:

"operating systems visiting Net Applications' network of websites worldwide."

- The reliability and relevance of this data is what?
- How well distributed are their websites?
- How does this data break down for each country?
- How does this data compare with computer sales market share in the USA and worldwide?

The more reliable data comes from the likes of Gartner, who have been total jerks to Apple, and begrudgingly provide actual/factual numbers of computer sales in the USA, and separately the number of computer sales worldwide.

Huh, this doesn't show how many Windows machines are running Safari as their web browser

So Apple releases Safari for Windows to skew the Mac sales numbers?

Dec 01, 08 - 10:42 pm Comment from: Roberto

@ Martin, that was before the Macintosh was released.

Dec 02, 08 - 07:33 am Comment from: Ugh.

I'm still running OS 9 on my Pismo. I've got National Geographic on CD that won't run under Classic, and lots of other legacy programs that don't have (or will never have) OS X equivalents.

Dec 02, 08 - 07:33 am Comment from: twilightmoon

I'd love to see someone graph out the installed base of Vista compared to the installed base of Mac OS X over the past 2-3 years.

Dec 02, 08 - 07:34 am Comment from: Ugh.

@DLMeyer- not gonna happen. EVER. Buy a Dell.

R:

"Apple is not seeking 50% share,..."

OK, genius, what is Apple's goal for market share. Do tell.

"....though if it happens I doubt they'd complain."

Give the current trends from January 2008 to November 2008, how many years will pass before Apple reaches 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%?

"Apple will no doubt hit the 10% (worldwide) and 20% marks at some point, but who's "waiting"? "

Apple by their own numbers is only just over 3% worldwide market share. This survey must survey Mac fanboy sites and little else.

What's even more amazing is that 15% of the increase in Mac installed base came from brand new PowerPC Macs.

"The actual relevance of Net Applications data remains in dispute."

The one thing that is not disputed is that it does not accurately measure operating system installed base worldwide, browser use worldwide or anything remotely approximating either of those numbers.

What it measures is browser and OS usage on a small and biased sample of web sites.

Dec 02, 08 - 04:24 pm Comment from: derekcurrie

Not Disputed went 'DING!'

You are correct sir.

Meanwhile, however, isn't it hilarious how the trolls went in the completely opposite direction of ridiculous extrapolation? I have to giggle:

"Apple by their own numbers is only just over 3% worldwide market share."

Actually, current data say it's around 3.5%. Check this out:
http://community.winsupersite.com/blogs/paul/archive/2008/07/21/mac-worldwide-market-share-hits-3-5-percent-in-q2-2008.aspx

Apple Worldwide Market Share:
Q3 2007: 3.19%
Q4 2007: 3.12%
Q1 2008: 3.26%
Q2 2008: 3.50%

Meanwhile in the USA:
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2008/10/16.8.shtml

"Gartner: Apple's U.S. Market Share Reaches 9.5 Percent"

This same data estimates the Mac's current market share to be 3.4% worldwide.

More troll drool:
"This survey must survey Mac fanboy sites and little else."

Yeah, right. This troll's brain fell out.

Useful observation:
"What's even more amazing is that 15% of the increase in Mac installed base came from brand new PowerPC Macs."

Who said they were 'brand new'? No one. Instead this supports one of the reasons Macs are always considered cheaper than Windows boxes in professional price comparison reports: The Mac consistently has a longer lifespan than a comparable Windows PC. These PowerPC machines being seen on the net for the first time are likely to be machines that were used for previous purposes, then were either sold or moved over to Internet access usage. The estimated lifespan of a Mac is considered to be nearly twice that of a comparable Windows PC. This provides much better Return On Investment (ROI) which adds to the value of any Mac.

"Actually, current data say it's around 3.5%."

3%, 3.5%, that's within the margin of error of most PC installed base surveys. Just jokingly, It's actually statistically possible there are NO macs in use in the world. You can't make meaningful statements about your installed base when the total number is within the margin of error.

"These PowerPC machines being seen on the net for the first time are likely to be machines that were used for previous purposes, then were either sold or moved over to Internet access usage."

15% of the growth from old PPC macs being redeployed?, I doubt it. Occam's Razor says the measurement is flawed.

Dec 04, 08 - 02:39 pm Comment from: derekcurrie

Some generic person calling themselves 'Statistics' sez:

"3%, 3.5%, that's within the margin of error of most PC installed base surveys."

No actually. S is wrong. He provides nothing to support his incorrect claim.

"You can't make meaningful statements about your installed base when the total number is within the margin of error."

Indeed. But first we have to know what the margin or error actually is. S does not.

So what was the point of S's post? FUD mongering perhaps?

"15% of the growth from old PPC macs being redeployed?, I doubt it."

That's nice. But S provides no alternative explanation. That leaves my explanation standing. Criticism is pointless without offering a preferable alternative. Again with the pointlessness.

"Occam's Razor says the measurement is flawed."

Non sequitur. Occam's Razor (which is a misspelling of the original principle called "Ockham's Razor") is typically simplified into the dumdum phrase "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best" as used in the meagre film "Contact" for dramatic effect. This paraphrase of the principle is actually a gross over-simplification to the point of making it utterly useless.

The real principle of Occam's Razor is an expression of the usefulness of removing extraneous data from any scientific results, analysis and conclusions in order to provide focus. Thus S again has not made any point. One would think he was a troll.

You can read about the real concept of Occam's Razor at Wikipedia.

:-Derek

"But S provides no alternative explanation. That leaves my explanation standing."

The alternative explanation is simple. Since it is known that Net Applications data is flawed, nothing more is needed to assume that their PPC usage statistics are flawed.

That's where Occam's Razor comes in.

You need three things to be true to support your argument:

1) Net Applications Mac share data is flawed (This is known)
2) Yet in the case of the PPC usage statistics, the data is not flawed.
3) Because no new PPC Macs are being produced, the increase is due to the re purposing of old Macs not previously used for web browsing to be now used for web browsing.

I only need:

1) Net Applications Mac share data is flawed (This is known)

So, given that I have provided a simple explanation based on known facts, and you say this explanation is too simple to describe the system, how do you intend to prove those last two things that are required for your explanation to be true?

Look up Occam's razor yourself, BTW either spelling is accepted, Occam being the more commonly used one.

Dec 04, 08 - 07:32 pm Comment from: derekcurrie

Again quoting pointless generic human 'Statistics':

"The alternative explanation is simple. Since it is known that Net Applications data is flawed, nothing more is needed to assume that their PPC usage statistics are flawed."

I was the one who pointed out that historically the relevance and accuracy of Net Application's data is questionable. I made a point. I still don't see any relevant or accurate point on S's part. I guess his point is to be pointless. That means I stand correct. This generic human is NOT a troll. He is a Berzerker. Thus I yawn and move on to useful endeavors. I think I need a shave. Where did I put my razor?

"Where did I put my razor?"

It's probably up your ass, along with your head.

And I bet that ass is hurting from the logical reaming Statistics gave you to which you had no logical response. Who's really the troll here derek?