MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Feb 01, 08 - 01:21 pm Comment from: iDon't

That's high enough. Soon I won't feel special anymore.

those are impressive numbers. Up 54% from last year alone.

Who cares? Only worldwide share is relevant, and Apple need to keep that in mind... it's only about 3%.

The world is bigger than the US; You've got Europe, China, India, South America, a bit of Africa.

Wake up Apple.

Mac+,

Net Applications' is a worldwide measurement. Keep that in mind, you stupid fuck.

"Wake up Apple."

Sounds like you have it all figured out.

I vote that we make you CEO.

Feb 01, 08 - 01:35 pm Comment from: macaholic

hey, he is not stupid! Can't speak to the rest of your comment tho'

Feb 01, 08 - 01:37 pm Comment from: Mac n' Cheese

You forgot Antarctica.

How much of that Windows share is pirated copies?

At least 20%.

Wake up Microsoft.

Feb 01, 08 - 01:39 pm Comment from: deepdish

holy crap!!!

That is amazing.

But please, no higher than 20%.

Feb 01, 08 - 02:00 pm Comment from: Jay-Z

@ Tired of Retards:

Well said.

Feb 01, 08 - 02:05 pm Comment from: Micro Me

The 20% figure is often suggested as the most desirable Mac share, and I agree. Much lower than that and we're too easily dismissed or ignored. Higher than 20% and Apple might start to become Microsoftian.

No matter..

So long as only 20% of the 90% on Windows are very satisfied

and 80% of the 8% on Mac are very satisfied.

Let them toil in their unsatisfactory OS.

Have pity and be magnanimous in victory.

I think this simply shows that people are using Mac OS X more for websites,world wide. I know I dont trust my PC for this, since you may just end up at a pr0n site or something worse....

What is interesting is that the iPhone may push web developers to make things like IE centric (or restricted) .. and that should hopefully lead away from proprietary standards, to open standards such as Java, which is pretty good now a days (when done right), html, xml ... yeah html has been around awhile.

I would guess Linux and Solaris users (admins?) have something better to do than surf the web

That said, you can get some good info on the intrawebs these days.

@ Tired of Retards:

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA! Sorry Mac+, it says "worldwide" right in the MDN article. Stupid fuck is right.

It's so impressive that the stock is down 70 bucks from its highs.

Feb 01, 08 - 02:37 pm Comment from: ken1w

It's amazing how miniscule everything other than Windows and Mac are... Everything below "Mac" combined is less than 1%. I thought Linux would be a bit higher. Pretty soon, iPhone and iPod combined will be higher than Linux.

Is this market share or user base? It seems these guys cannot possibly measure market share since they cannot differentiate new users from existing ones.

Also, are the 40000 companies US based or not? If not, having a 6% user base worldwide is remarkable since Apple's worldwide market share is still less than 4%.

Does anyone have information that might clarify these things for me? Thanks.

@pete, tired of retards, Lollerskates

I don't know which '40,000 corporate and ecommerce websites' Net Applications are measuring, but there seems to be a very heavy U.S. bias and/or English language bias.

NetApplications lists for the first time ISP market shares, which makes it possible to put OS/Browser Market Shares in context.
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=18

Nine of the top 10 ISPs are U.S. companies, British Telecom is #8.

Comcast cable with 12.9 million subscribers has 9.80% NetApplications ISP MarketShare.
German giant Deutsche Telekom with 9 million subscribers has 0.95% NetApplications ISP MarketShare.

Internet subscriber numbers here:
http://www.isp-planet.com/research/rankings/usa.html
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/6420ap_germany_deutsche_telekom.html

If you are really interested, you can buy country-by-country views in here:
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=12

Feb 01, 08 - 03:24 pm Comment from: Brau

Hard to believe that nearly 5% of the market is still running completely outdated garbage like Windows 2000, 98, ME, NT, CE, and 95. However, despite Mac's rising share, these stats also clearly show the vast majority of users are staying with Windows XP and/or migrating to Vista. A mere 2% are switching. These may be big numbers for Apple but of little consequence to MicroSoft as overall Windows PC sales worldwide are growing at a rate that far outpaces a mere 2% of (relatively wealthy) current users choosing Macs.

Missing from the stats: How much of this percentage rise is due to US usage which is historically much higher.

(Just the other side of the numbers for those who like to know)

Feb 01, 08 - 04:49 pm Comment from: Cubert

Yeah baby! Surfing the web on the Sun OS!

Who is that one person?

Sheeezzze. You said, "Who cares? Only worldwide share is relevant, and Apple need to keep that in mind... it's only about 3%.

The world is bigger than the US; You've got Europe, China, India, South America, a bit of Africa.

Wake up Apple."

OK, there are many more cockroaches in the world than people so I guess you feel that its more important to consider cockroaches than people. Fair enough.

PS, I like that old "Lemmings" commercial of Apple. PC lemmings matching off the clift, while the Apple guy stops, raises his eye coverings and backs away.

PS, you do sound so insecure about Apple numbers. Hmmmm, having any issues (say Vistas incredible flow?)??

en

@ Tired of Retards, Lollerskates, Jay-Z and MacRomancer.

I don't know how Net Applications got their numbers but Apple can't have 7+% of market share worldwide. 4% top.

End of discussion.

Meaningless information.
Half the Mac stats come from old computers (PPC).

And when one is using Windows on one´s Mac, where does that fit in these numbers? The person counted twice?

The only thing (as far as sales goes) is current market share sales data.

It's amazing that Mac fanboys gurgle and wank over a percent and a half increase in installed base when Vista has sold more copies in a year than all Macs in existence.

Feb 02, 08 - 01:23 am Comment from: LorD1776

"Vista has sold more copies in a year than all Macs in existence."

Only by default. Yes, I know, the same can be said for OS X.

Oops, sorry Mac+, I forgot you said "End of discussion."
Please forgive me.

"Only by default. Yes, I know, the same can be said for OS X."

So what's your point? If you buy Apple hardware you get OS X as the only choice out of the box. If you buy non Apple hardware you generally get Windows. Nevertheless people are choosing non Apple hardware in overwhelming numbers.

Is that your point?

Feb 02, 08 - 09:41 am Comment from: LorD1776

"Nevertheless people are choosing non Apple hardware in overwhelming numbers."

My point is that people are Amazing and ignorant.

"My point is that people are Amazing and ignorant."

Or they know what works for them and you are ignorant. 98% of the world's computer using population can't all be technology retards. It's a much more likely hypothesis that you are a tretard.

Feb 02, 08 - 10:34 am Comment from: MacFhearghaile

@Mac+
The world is like the ass as a hole, it will eventually be wiped out, and by the way I doubt if you could find the world on a globe. As for people being stupid, over 90% are running windows, according to questionable statistics, so 90% must be stupid, and finally who the F--K CARES.

Feb 02, 08 - 10:44 am Comment from: LorD1776

" It's a much more likely hypothesis that you are a tretard."

Hypothesis: "a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation"

"a proposition made as a basis for reasoning, without any assumption of its truth."

Thanks for clearing that up. And you truly are Amazing.

Feb 02, 08 - 11:00 am Comment from: macaholic

BTW: What's a Tretard?

Feb 02, 08 - 11:22 am Comment from: Ampar

Should the people running 10.5 be known as Leotards?

Feb 02, 08 - 11:25 am Comment from: LorD1776

macaholic,

I assumed "tretard" stood for technology retard. He's a witty little devil.

Feb 02, 08 - 11:29 am Comment from: LorD1776

Ampar,

I prefer the generic term MacTard. It fills the bill for any operating system version. Plus, it's kinda catchy.

If You have to choose between a Ford Taurus (PC) and a Ferrari (Mac).
Acording to PC lovers. They would argue that the Ford Taurus is better because there is not that many Ferrari out there. Right!

Imaging the market share of this "poors" cars (Very small)
•Ferrari
•Lamborghini
•Mercedes
•Ect...

"They would argue that the Ford Taurus is better because there is not that many Ferrari out there. Right!"

You miss the point. If Ferraris, Lamborghinis, BMWs and Mercedes cost the same to buy and run as Ford Tauruses then everybody would buy them. But they don't which explains the small share.

As Mac users frequently point out, Macs cost the same as Windows PCs. Any economist will tell you than when things cost the same, people choose the product which has the most utility (read usefulness) to them. How people determine utility is just not important for this discussion. For some people a shiny Apple logo might be most important. For others a free in home service plan for a year might work. For yet another group, compatibility with existing systems or software might be the overriding concern. For others price might be the dominant factor. Most people will weight many factors in making a decision. What matters is when they come to put down their cash, they weigh the decision and choose one product or the other and the market aggregates the results of these millions of voting decisions to decide which products overall consumers think, as judged by their own criteria, are best.


So by the Mac fanboy argument that PCs and Macs cost the same, we have a situation where the consumer is not picking on price, rather they are picking the product they think will do the best job for them.

And they overwhelmingly choose Vista and other Microsoft products. Not by a small margin. by a huge one.

That leads inevitably to one of two conclusions.

1) If we accept that both systems cost the same then consumers don't regard the total Mac offering to be any better than the Windows PC offering, in fact based on the ratios they choose to buy them in, they regard it as being substantially less useful to them.

2) Macs cost more, but to those buying PCs, the benefits of Mac ownership either don't exist or don't outweigh the extra costs.

Sorry guys, but unless you want to claim that Macs are the one product somehow governed by different economic rules compared to any other product like tinned beans, cars, houses, TVs, clothing or toilet paper then that's the way it is.

@RealityDistortionField
When you add the price of anti-virus software plus maintenance...
You maight have to change your opinion........It's very keeping a PC in shape is more costly than maintenance on a Mac....and also just check on ebay and see which machines hold their value better.

"Mac ownership either don't exist or don't outweigh the extra costs"

Tell Me which computer can run: OS X, Linux, Windows...is that is no valuable I don't know what is.

"Tell Me which computer can run: OS X, Linux, Windows...is that is no valuable I don't know what is."

""When you add the price of anti-virus software..."

"check on ebay and see which machines hold their value better"

As I said above, the things that go into people's utility functions are personal, you've picked three that a lot of other people may not even care about. But in the overall analysis they are somewhat irrelevant with respect to understanding the result.

What is clear is that the bulk of the world, even after analyzing all the Pro and Con factors for the Mac and all the Pro and Con factors for PCs, still makes the decision to buy PCs in overwhelming numbers.

Feb 03, 08 - 10:44 pm Comment from: twilightmoon

"still makes the decision to buy PCs in overwhelming numbers."

Actually you're lumping all PC sales together to get to those overwhelming numbers, not individual computer sales. That means POS (cash register) PCs, ATMs, large bulk computers for office cubicle farms.. etc.

More consumers are moving towards laptops than desktops, and Apple has much larger share of laptops than desktops, esp if you only factor individual computer sales to consumers (not bulk purchases by businesses).

Lastly, Apple's share among the younger college crowd is rapidly growing. This will likely have an impact on future business purchases as those college students graduate.

True, this trend will show up in the US first, Apple has its work cut out for it to become as wildly popular worldwide as in the US, but with the iPod and the iPhone gaining worldwide, the Mac has a reasonable shot at making a dent.

Bottom line is people that are actually making a decision in their computer purchase are choosing Apples by larger numbers than you suspect and that number is growing rapidly.

"Actually you're lumping all PC sales together to get to those overwhelming numbers, not individual computer sales."

As I said, it doesn't matter. In some cases the customer is a corporation buying cash registers. In some cases the customer is a consumer buying their latest home PC. If you want to analyze segments of the market to help yourself feel better, go ahead. But even in the home market, Windows dominates.

"people that are actually making a decision in their computer purchase are choosing Apples"

Are you suggesting that corporations don't make decisions in their PC purchases? In this case the customer is the corporation not the person who eventually uses the PC. Based on sales numbers, Apple does not have a product that appeals to them as much as Window PCs do. Sorry.

"This will likely have an impact on future business purchases as those college students graduate."

Maybe. Or maybe these people will get their first real world job and start using PCs. Apple has always been strong in educational institutions. Its been that way for decades. Plenty of people have come from institutions which use Macs widely then done the switch as they adapt to what the job market wants.

But the point is, it doesn't matter. Even in the segments you mention, Windows dominates. Maybe these effects you mention will show up in future years as people balance their computer purchasing decisions. Today they're not.

Feb 04, 08 - 01:46 pm Comment from: twilightmoon

"If you want to analyze segments of the market to help yourself feel better, go ahead. But even in the home market, Windows dominates."

This has nothing to do with making me feel better or worse, this is simply a different way of looking at the situation than simple "raw numbers" of the whole market. Apple doesn't try to compete in the low end commodity segment of the computer market which dominates POS, ATM, and bulk cubical big business.

As a result they are far more profitable per unit sold. This is a choice they have made and it seems to be working out well for them.

"Are you suggesting that corporations don't make decisions in their PC purchases? In this case the customer is the corporation not the person who eventually uses the PC. Based on sales numbers, Apple does not have a product that appeals to them as much as Window PCs do. Sorry."

Actually I kind of am. More specifically the person making the decisions on these purchases are NOT the person using the computer, so usability, user friendliness, are generally not factors. Most often they just look at the sticker price and go from there.

Apple's strength is in adding value to their purchases and make people love what they buy. These factors are largely irrelevant to a significant segment of the the total computer market. The bulk low end market shifts a lot of units, but it's not a profitable one.

Another factor to consider, is how much software gets shifted per unit. ATM machines for example are irrelevant for software publishers, they will generally ship with all the software needed or have some simple program installed but never anything past that. Market share after all is generally only relevant to determine where software gets published and what hardware is usable for which systems. Segmenting the market is very relevant for determining both these issues.

"Maybe. Or maybe these people will get their first real world job and start using PCs. Apple has always been strong in educational institutions. Its been that way for decades."

Your first point is very possible, it's possible that 40% of incoming freshmen to some of the Ivy League schools who bought Mac laptops will use PCs when they graduate. But unlikely the number will remain anywhere near as overwhelming as it is now. Apple has never sold the numbers to actual end users (note I didn't say educational institutions but end users, ie. students) that they do now. The numbers have skyrocketed in just the past few years.

"But the point is, it doesn't matter. Even in the segments you mention, Windows dominates. Maybe these effects you mention will show up in future years as people balance their computer purchasing decisions. Today they're not."

Windows does not dominate the segments I mentioned nearly as strongly as you suggest, and the numbers of Macs are growing almost exponentially. If you're only interested in a very brief snapshot of the computer industry, today, then there's no point in having this discussion. I'm looking at this from the standpoint of trends and the future as well as now. The trends I'm seeing seem to be accelerating and I expect them to have a broader impact in the next few years.

Perhaps I'm wrong and you're right. Even now Apple is tremendously profitable, so I don't have to worry about them going out of business, nor Macs disappearing. Which means I don't have to worry about being limited to PCs if I want to buy a computer. Come back in a few years time and let's see who's more right.

"Macs are growing almost exponentially"

You're right. Growth is showing an exponential decay since the burst of hardware updaters buying new machines after the Intel processor switch.

Apple has 100% of the market for Machines with a fruit on the case whose company is headquartered in cupertino and run Mac OS X.

We're number One! We're Number One!

"so usability, user friendliness, are generally not factors."

Give me a break. ALL corporations in the world intentionally choose machines which are much harder to use than the competition?

BWAHHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAHAHHAAHAAH.

That just wouldn't make any sense.

For years now Mac OS and Windows have been about the same in terms of ease of use. Joe Corporate User spends most of his time in applications anyway, not using features of the OS. Windows business productivity apps are always a half generation to a full generation ahead of the Mac versions.