Phil Schiller on Windows 7: 'No matter how you look at it, it's still Windows'
By Nilay Patel 
posted Oct 15th 2009 12:39PM
posted Oct 15th 2009 12:39PM
Windows fans expecting Apple to let Microsoft have its moment in the sun next week when Windows 7 launches should probably know better by now -- the Mac maker is actually planning a marketing counter-offensive to hit alongside 7's debut. According to Phil Schiller, the convoluted upgrade path from Windows XP to Windows 7 represents a big opportunity for Apple, since users have to back everything up and reformat. "Any user that reads all those steps is probably going to freak out. If you have to go through all that, why not just buy a Mac?" Well -- we're sure most of you can think of several reasons. Of course, Microsoft has long said that most people will actually get Windows 7 when they purchase a new machine, which is one reason we're seeing such an absolute flood of interesting and innovative new PC hardware -- but Phil seems to remember that was also the company line about Vista, and homeboy isn't backing down. "We've been through these transitions before, and no matter how you look at it-it's still Windows." Harsh burn, amigo. Any last predictions? "I expect Snow Leopard will have an amazing upgrade rate, and Windows 7 won't." We thought you might say something like that. Good thing we're giving Steve Ballmer a chance to respond live on the air next week, no?[Via AppleInsider]
No matter how you look at it, it's still OSX.
Mac will get more and more virus eventually.
Its still Windows. Just how I want it. The most popular and widely used OS in the world.
Honestly, Balmer should just ignore him. He is a troll worse than the Paul A. Chapels, and the "first" guy.
Apple cant seem to sell their OS without having to behave like 7 graders.
But who even needs viruses when you have OS X (see: guest account bug)?
Phil Schiller is being a businessman, nothing more. That, or he's as much of a braggart as Steve Jobs.
This argument for or against Windows is kind of useless. The simple fact remains that you can't avoid Windows, whether people want it or not. 80 percent of Windows is sold directly to PC manufacturers and regular people mostly don't care what they use, as long as it's cheap and they can click on the blue internet thingy.
Macs are gaining though. According to latest statistics, they have between 9 to 12 percent of the market in the U.S. now. I think the iPhone has opened people's eyes to having a complete experience. If their stock reaches 300, their market cap will be bigger than Microsoft. It's already bigger than Google's.
@Detox: Though really, that only shows that people are starting to get both. The number of Mac-only households is at about 2% of all computer owning ones.
They are below 10% as they've been for years.
And with the attitude of Apple and their users, they will be there for a looooooooong time.
I don't think Apple cares about market share as much as profit margin. Apple has a bigger market cap than HP and Dell and yet, HP and Dell have more market share. Who would you rather be?
Michael Dell was even bashing netbooks the other day. Why? He knows he can't make much money on them. Yeah, he may be able to sell a butt load, but I could probably outsell the local Toyota dealership by selling a bunch of Fords for $1000 a pop. That doesn't mean it's a freaking good idea.
Apple is worth 170 billion with only 12 percent of the market. Microsoft is worth 236 Billion with 86 percent of the market. What is wrong with this picture? Shouldn't Microsoft be worth 10 times as more as Apple?
I still stay with Windows because when its crush its lets you know about what happen compare to Apple just crush letting you in dust think what happen without any explaining or error message:-) and look how many softwares are designed to work with Windows!
"They are below 10% as they've been for years."
Could you be any more vague? There's a BIG difference between being stuck at 3-4% versus more than doubling your market share in under a decade to just below 10%, which you're on pace to surpass by next year. It's called growth and it doesn't happen overnight.
Haha, they are still trying to sue anyone over anything.
Now they are targetting Woolworth's over logo abuse - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33280940/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/
@ Detox
You are talking the entire company. MS has a games division (including Zune) and the phone division that is starting to actually have a come back even tho its getting its ass kicked right now and the sell and develop much more software than Apple. MS makes money on more than just their OS
They are below 10% as they've been for years."
Could you be any more vague? There's a BIG difference between being stuck at 3-4% versus more than doubling your market share in under a decade to just below 10%, which you're on pace to surpass by next year. It's called growth and it doesn't happen overnight."
Pfffft. thanks for that.
Let's just call it what you iDouches call everything that's below the marketshare of an Apple product.
AN EPIC FAILURE.
@Detox:
That's why it is said that Apple's gear is overpriced. I know, I know, markets sets the price but the fact is that Apple profits big time on their customers, do they really get what they pay for? Are they paying for their systems or just the Apple experience?, is it even the experience or could it be just Apple's badge?
It would be interesting to make a demographics based computers systems market share analysis.
"Let's just call it what you iDouches call everything that's below the marketshare of an Apple product. AN EPIC FAILURE."
You're probably referring to the Zune, which I for one have never criticized for lack of market share.
But if you're mimicking the ideology of these so-called iDouches, doesn't that make you an iDouche as well?
Everyone is running off on irrelevant tangents, but won't answer any of my questions.
(1) Would you rather own HP, whitch has more market share than Apple, but has less market cap (113 Billion versus 170 Billion)?
(2) Would you rather own Dell, which has more market share than Apple, but has less market cap (30 Billion versus 170 Billion)?
(3) Why isn't Microsoft worth ten times more than Apple (236 Billion versus 170 Billion) when they have 86 percent market share versus Apple's 12 percent.
It seems to me that you guys are laughing at Apple, and Apple is crying all the way to the bank.
Detox... Its apples and oranges. If you want a good comparison, compare apple to microsoft + all the companies that sell complete pc's put together (realistically you could add all component manufacturers to the total as well.)
You can't compare a company that supplies primarily software to a company that provides complete computers AND software.
Find some way to separate out the profits that apple makes on OS alone and THEN you can compare it to Microsoft's OS profits.
Market cap doesn't even represent assets or profits... it represents confidence in the company. Apple is doing well, make no mistake, but it is in no danger of overtaking Microsoft.
@Detox:
What.
Your comments are irrelevant. Who cares about company shares and market caps? You bought it up.
Most mac users are too dumb to understand how the market works anyway.
Gaming software development environments like Unity3d to create games for PCs, Wii, etc. were born and built on Mac. Isn't that ironic?
Meanwhile, has anyone noticed that Microsoft doesn't use there own touted software development tools to build their latest and greatest software? I.e. did was MS-Office 2000 built with MFC and Visual Studio? Is Windows 7 built with .NET (I shudder to think of the ramifications if it were). Scary.
@ Detox
How much of that 173 billion do you think is associated with iPods and iPhones Detox? Apple also makes all the money on the OS doesn't it? Where as on the other hand you have HP and Dell you make 0 money on the software end and only make computers for the most part aside from a couple small gadgets here and there.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense does it?
Ya.....................
"Detox... Its apples and oranges."
If the comparison between Apple and Microsoft is apple and oranges, then why are you guys comparing the two companies? So it's okay to bash Apple when talking about market share, but not okay when someone wants to compare market caps? Let's talk about the whole picture, not just the part of the picture that makes Microsoft look better.
And if Apple is so inconsequential to Microsoft, then why did Microsoft start that whole Laptop Hunters campaign? You don't start a 300 million dollar ad campaign against a competitor that "doesn't matter."
You guys seem to want it both ways. Either Apple is irrelevant and a failure or they're aren't. That 170 Billion market cap tells me they're relevant.
"How much of that 173 billion do you think is associated with iPods and iPhones Detox? Apple also makes all the money on the OS doesn't it?"
Well, how much of that 236 billion do you think is associated with Office, Xbox, Zune, Bing, Surface, etc. I don't quite see what your point is. The fact that Apple has a diversified product line means what exactly?
If you use that criteria, that means we can't compare any two companies, because no two companies have exactly the same product lineup.
@Detox:
"I don't think Apple cares about market share as much as profit margin."
If Apple did not care about market share, then why do they bring out that pie chart every time Apple has a product that sells more than the competition? Why did SJ stand up there laughing about the iPod marketshare as compared to the Zune marketshare? SJ infamously sent mail around to the company bragging when their market value was higher than Dell's.
A person like SJ who is so concerned about the image of himself, his company, etc. is very concerned about the marketshare of their products.
"1) Would you rather own HP, whitch has more market share than Apple, but has less market cap (113 Billion versus 170 Billion)?"
Depends. For growth I'd pick APPL but be prepared to drop them if demand flattens. As APPL doesn't pay dividends I'd pick HP for revenue.
"(2) Would you rather own Dell, which has more market share than Apple, but has less market cap (30 Billion versus 170 Billion)?"
See above.
"(3) Why isn't Microsoft worth ten times more than Apple (236 Billion versus 170 Billion) when they have 86 percent market share versus Apple's 12 percent."
Because market capitalisation is based on projected growth. Microsoft do not have the growth opportunities that Apple have because they dominate their core markets (operating systems and productivity suites) to a ridiculous degree. Apple have far more potential for growth and thei market cap reflects this - whilst the iPhone does well and the Mac shows good growth it will increase but if demand flattens it will drop.
Basing value on market cap is a dangerous game because a lot of it is bolstered by futures - if you expect strong growth then you buy into that at a premium and rea the rewards, however if it goes wrong you stand to lose a lot of money.
I hope that clears things up and explains why market cap isn't a direct comparison and not relevent to market share which is a totally different measure.
is sick of people arguing that market cap between companies is relevant.
Just because one company has higher market cap than another doesn't make one or the other better. It does not correlate to revenue, cashflow, or profit. Market cap is simply a measure of the owners stakes (shareholders) equity invested in the company.
Hate people arguing about what they have no conceptual grasp of.
"If Apple did not care about market share, then why do they bring out that pie chart every time Apple has a product that sells more than the competition? Why did SJ stand up there laughing about the iPod marketshare as compared to the Zune marketshare?"
I didn't say Apple didn't care about market share. I said that Apple didn't care AS MUCH about market share as they do about making a profit margin. Maybe you should go back and read what I said.
If Apple cared more about market share, they could simply LOWER THE PRICE OF MACS. Do you really think that their market share wouldn't triple over night if they did this? They could do this in a heart beat, but I'm pretty sure they've done the research and concluded that they can make more money selling Macs with a 36 percent profit margin or whatever it is now, than selling at say, a netbook profit margin, which is essentially nothing.
And the market share comparisons between the iPod and Zune are relevant because as far as I know, Apple still keeps their generous profit margin. If you've seen any tear down estimates from iSuppli for an iPod and compare the profit margin to that of Macs, I think the profit margin is even higher than 36 percent. So in the case of the iPod versus Zune, Apple manages to keep their profit margin, while also having superior market share than the Zune. That's got to be exciting for stock holders.
DETOX put DELL, HP, ACER and etc. hardware and Microsoft's OS (don't forget winmo and their harware manufacturers) together to get the full cap of the market or whatever crap you want to compare and then talk your nonsense, alright? :)
"Because market capitalisation is based on projected growth."
No, it's not. You must be joking. Market cap is calculated as market price times public common shares outstanding.
Detox: A few years ago SUN had a share price around $260. VA Linux had a share price around $320. Both companies have both been threatened with being delisted since those highs. When you have a company that gets a lot of good spin behind it, people who get excited about the stock, it will go up in price. As these two companies have shown, just because the price jumps up it is no guarantee of prolonged success - it is all speculation. Companies like MS who have had high stock price over an extended period of time will level off without the price going much higher because the level of growth cannot be sustained.
Let's suppose company A makes $100 a quarter while company B makes $1000 a quarter. If company A grows 100%, while company B grows 10%, they both grew the same amount, but which one will intice investors to invest more, 10% growth or 100% growth. Same thing happens here - MS was reporting 20% growth a year ago which was $4.9bn increase, but it does not excite the regular guy investor when they see Apple posting increases of 35% growth and increased profits of $1.95bn a year ago. The more seasoned investors, while they know better, still get in because they know the regular-guy investor will be excited about that, which will drive the stock price up.
This is not a slam against Apple, because they have been legitimately growing, but just because the market value says one thing, does not exactly mean that they are at that value - as SUN and VA Linux shows.
@Detox
I don't see what you're not understanding. When i see most people comparing market share, they are comparing OS to OS. Not Market share/cap. Market share and caps have nothing to do with OS saturation.
You're logic about MS supposed to have market value 10x higher than apple would work if you compared OS to OS. stock index has absolutely nothing to do with software marketshare if both companies make more than just software.
@Detox
And share price is based on perceived value which is based on projected growth in this case.
Let me put it another way: Why do you think Apple's market cap is so high and what do you believe is driving it? You may want to reference PE ratio in your answer.
All that stuff you said NoHOne or whatever your name is, is just fluff. Microsoft is a publicly traded company too. Believe me when I say, if Microsoft only had a market cap of 30 Billion instead of 236 Billion, no one would give a crap about their market share. That's exactly why investors and stock holders are always complaining about Dell these days. The market share means nothing because the company isn't frankly worth as much as say, a company like HP or Apple.
But my bigger question is why every brags about Microsoft as if most people go into a store and buy Windows off the shelves? Microsoft's biggest customer is not regular consumers, but PC manufacturers. 80 percent of Windows is sold directly to the PC manufacturers. Only 20 percent is sold to actual consumers. Apple sells 100 percent of their computers to consumers and businesses.
They have 12 percent of a market where everyone else is low balling the price, making computers under $1000. That's remarkable. Compare that to a company like BMW, which only has 1 to 2 percent of the car market.
"Why do you think Apple's market cap is so high and what do you believe is driving it? You may want to reference PE ratio in your answer."
P/E has nothing to do with market cap either, except as it relates to how investors view potential earnings and that's a little high brow for the Engadget board, I think. Of course, you bring up a good point, but not in the way you think. The iPhone's non-GAAP measures haven't been used yet in Apple's P/E, but now that the rules have been changed, it will be exciting to see what that does to the stock price, which is why I'm predicting $300 a share in the future.
Of course, when Apple finally passes Microsoft in market cap, I'm sure you guys will find elaborate ways to downplay the news.
@Detox
Wow, an Apple fanboy who demands attention and answers, then when he gets it with explanation of how the markets work, examples from history, actual facts and figures, and a concession that Apple is actually doing well, if it does not fit into his narrow view of the world they stick their fingers in their ears and screams "NA NA NA NA NA I CAN'T HEAR YOU NA NA NA NA NA".
Call me surprised.
"P/E has nothing to do with market cap either, except as it relates to how investors view potential earnings and that's a little high brow for the Engadget board, I think."
Detox... oh, hell, let's stop pretending shall we?
Paul, you asked the question and I gave you then answer. It's not my fault you don't understand it or rather that you do, have created another tolling account and are up to your usual nonsense.
Enough. You were boring enough the first time round.
Well, NoHOne, I'm not clued into all the Fanboy angst here, so I apologize if I offended your delicate sensibilities. I just wanted to show that market share might be important, but not as important as you think. The market share IS THE ULTIMATE DECIDER meme is what is driving all this bragging about Windows and the bashing of OS X and it's really not as simple as that.
It's actually kind of childish.
@detox You say that Apple's market cap has ALREADY passed Google's, when Apple was started 20 years before Google. A better thing to say is that Apples market cap has finally caught up to Google's.
Stock price and therefore market cap are based on projected earnings growth. Obviously there are more growth opportunities for Apple than for MS, since the latter has like 90% of the OS market. I would think that the stock is overvalued since Apple has pretty much no growth opportunities in the developing world based on the price of their products.
People seem to forget that when Steve Jobs was not running Apple, it was crap. He came back and they brought out all of their best devices. The people I know who have worked there tell me its because he is deeply involved with the development of every single item, from the interface to the physical design. He is a micro-manager, which is great for Apple because he is obviously a genius, but what happens when he leaves? Micro managers create employees who need to be told what to do, and when a creative genius is no longer helping them, what are they going to come up with?
Ahh yes, now we see it. People who argue against Apple are childish because they like to bring up that Windows has a higher marketshare than OSX. Poor, poor, OSX, everybody just picks on you. And when Schiller tries to jab at Windows, then all these mean people start arguing against him. How dare we be so mean to him? He is The Job's heir, and thou shalt not treat him in this way, correct?
But then again, when Steve Jobs himself, Apple fan boys, etc. mock the Zune for having a lower marketshare than the iPod, they are just full of class and superiority.
Get over it.
"And when Schiller tries to jab at Windows, then all these mean people start arguing against him. How dare we be so mean to him?"
Boy, you are a child. I guess Phil should act more mature like Steve Ballmer. Because as we all know Steve Ballmer NEVER EVER says anything to besmirch the dignity of Apple or other competitors. It's not like he would pretend to stomp an iPhone if it came into his field of view or promise to "f*cking kill Google." No, he would never do such a thing, that saint. He would never say the iPhone would be a big fat failure, for instance or compare the Mac's growth to a "rounding error." No, that would be beneath him.
Oh crap, I just lowered myself to YOUR level. I apologize again. Forgive me.
Hey Detox,
Have you EVER thought that the reason that Apple has all those billions? When they make like a 200% profilt on every item they sell? I doubt that Microsoft makes that much on the OS that they sell. They not make the hardware and jack up the price like Apple does.
Wow, this Detox guy is really determined to make himself look a complete fool, doesn't he?
@yurly
beside your terrible grasp of language I have no ides why you got downranked. The OSX error messages are freakin useless, apple apps like iTunes are impossibly worse. It's like apple has the attitude "our stuff just works" so it doesn't need useful error messges.
The only thing worse is that the fix is usually that there is no fix, or the fix requires something close to hacking
Windows is Good!
....and Win7 is the best OS i've ever used.
The problem with his logic is that to upgrade to a new mac it costs $999 for an macbook, but its costs $464 to get a DELL with Windows 7 with better specs.
So, it is a WIN-WIN situation for WINdows.
Don't worry Microsoft, if Apple wants to stain your shiny window next week, I have my WINdex extra vinegar all ready.
@tikiteko: Those puns made reading your comment unbearable.
Not that I agree with Corporate Schiller or anything (thanks to Someone from the Internet for that name), but doesn't he have to say that he dislikes Windows? He is one of the public faces of a competing company. In the same way that Ballmer will most likely flame Apple next week.
I guess I just don't get why this is news. I get the sense that this relates to 2nd Grade arguments. "My trapper keeper is better than yours dooty head." "Nuh uh, mine is better."
"....and Win7 is the best OS i've ever used."
So you've used another OS other than Windows? Explain.
@Detox
I have used linux since 1998, and run Redhat, Gentoo, Ubuntu and Mandrake over that time frame. I have run every Windows version since 1993, and hated quite a few of of them. I own one Mac and run OSX on my netbook. So when I say that Windows 7 is one of, if not the best OS, that's saying something. Stop acting like it's impossible for Microsoft to come out with a great OS.
"So you've used another OS other than Windows? Explain."
I second ChillyCat's statement. By the way, I have used Ubuntu, Red Hat, SUSE, Slackware, Debian, GNU, BSD, Gentoo, Solaris, AIX, DOS, Win 3.11, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, Mac OS (I think both 8 & 9), and Mac OS X (10.4 & 10.5). I can't think of all the different OS's on phones I've owned/used.
So, unless you have anywhere close to the level of experience as I, don't raise doubt about my enjoyment when using Windows 7.
Thank you, and good day.
Yes, because things never change, do they?
D-bags will always be d-bags no matter what OS they run.
So true. Couldn't have said it better myself. :)
I think his last name is wildly appropriate; just put the word corporate in front of it.
Apparently, it seems they run on illusions, just like the illusion of your data being safe if someone logs into the guest account...
wow is that argument getting old already "oh your guest account deletes files" That is the ONLY thing that Microsoft can say about Apple. That is the only bad thing you can say about Snow Leapord. First all you EVER heard was how they're too expensive, now you have the guest account detail to go on and on and on and on about..... and thats IT!
@ Derrick:
How about the entire Adobe CS3 Suite not working in Snow Leopard? How about the fact that Snow Leopard is nothing more than a glorified (and broken) service pack.
The only thing Apple's ever had going for it is its interface. Period, the end. Microsoft should just straight buy Apple, make them their UI division and be done with it.
@Bakari "How about the whole adobe cs3 suite not working in SL"
Thats funny cause it works perfectly. What you heard improperly and was unable to process with your little brain is that adobe being the dicks they are, said they will not patch it if anything is wrong. But it works perfectly. This is a fine example of total and complete ridiculous FUD from ignorant little worthless fanboys like yourself.
@Bakari Obviously you know nothing about computers, end of story. Period.
..."if it takes that many steps, why not give us exorbitant amount of money?"...
Let the arguing commence...
Ohh God....
This comment section is going to be a war zone from all the flaming.
I don't see how.
This type of crap is the same stuff the fanboys would assail Ballmer over if he said anything even a 10th as douche-like.
What are they going to do, run in and defend it as sensible, just because the head Apple dick said it?
...Oh yeah.
He reminds me of an overweight Tim Allen.
Have you seen Tim Allen lately. Phil might be the smaller one........
Come on, being Santa more than once is not an easy job with all those cookies and gallons of non-fat milk!
Give the guy a break.
On the other side...
I'm almost certain all those Mountain Dew, pizzas, and hours of gaming, social networking, sitting down, etc.. will do a great job for your healthy bodies.
Actually I was thinking he looked more like Mickey Rourke...
I though he was Joe Piscopo at first.....
The best thing to do is to see how it plays out. I like macs but I can't wait for 7
And I'd like to let Phil Schiller know that my Mac Pro still freezes occasionally, and my Apple programs quit for no apparent reason.
Isnt that better than your whole operating system crashing?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel_panic
I think his Mac Pro freezing qualifies as his "whole operating system crashing," but who knows. Maybe it just doesn't think he's good enough for the perfect Mac Experience and likes to remind him from time to time.
98% of all computer crashs/lockups etc. are user error. I have yet to crash OS X or Windows (since 98 SE) a single time.
You remind me of Riley from National Treasure, you have to have the best car, computer in this case, but even when you have it you can't even use it (he was grinding the gears).
@Ahmed Karam
I can only speak from my experience with windows (i currently dual boot with XP and W7 rc 7100) and I can say for sure that BSOD are by far more rare than apple wants to make you believe because that is their last bid (along with the whole virus thing) to sell their product(s) instead of just telling their customers "it just works" when we here on engadget know "it just doesn't". I haven't had my PC crash in so long it isn't even worth mentioning.
@Ahmed: yes. yes it is. obviously. What was your point?
@sevenegend: 98%, huh? So 98 times out of 100 hundred, the user hits the "make computer crash" button on accident? It has nothing to do with hardware failure or a crappy video driver or poorly coded software? Please cite your references.
Yeah, when my Mac tells me I need to restart my system, it tends to be the whole system locking up. And then there's just some times it locks up without giving me the instructions as to what to do next.
As for me causing it, I guess you can always say the user causes it because without the user, the computer would not have been doing anything more than looking like a nice piece of aluminum in my office. People here assume a lot about how other commenter use their computers and their lack of computer knowledge. Some of my lockups are due to a common program (Motion), whereas others are random. Thanks for the accusations, though.
@Dustin:
Hey!, don't complain, Apple cares for you, they know that those horrible error messages are bad for your psyche, that's why they won't let you know if you had one. It's not that they don't want you know that your application had a fatal error or anything...
@7egend,
Um, no, an OS freeze/crash is NOT user error. There is no excuse for an OS hang. It should be able to handle the dumbest crap you throw at it without crashing. FWIW, my Tiger/Snow Leopard machine at home has hung maybe once every year or so since I bought it 3 years ago. My XP laptop only bluescreened when waking from standby, probably once every 2 weeks. Other than that, OS hangs/bluescreens while actually using it were approximately as rare as they were on my Tiger box.
@carl
The user is the one who chooses to install that video driver, most of the time improperly, and also to install that piece of poorly coded software without first reading a review on said software. Like I said before using OS X and Windows XP, Vista, 7, i have yet to experience a crash since 98 SE, and I know exactly what caused that crash, it was a driver modification I had made (user error).
I don't need to cite any sources, it is common knowledge, or at least it should be to anyone who has spent any amount of time around computers.
The person above probably isn't even went into disk utility and did a permissions repair since he has had the machine and has 50+ programs on it. It's things like this that causes system slow downs and crashes. Computers aren't no where near as perfect as you think they are, they don't auto magically maintain themselves, sometimes the user has to do a little.
As for Hardware, it does fail occasionally, but that is not what the term "crash" refers to, amazingly enough that's called a "hardware failure".
WHAT OMGZ?! BUT THEY TOLD ME APPLEZ JUST WORK!
@UnixSystemsEngineer
You're right...Apple has a better track record at creating a stable system.
But Microsoft supports many orders of magnitude greater hardware and software configurations. There's a reason Apple doesn't want hackintoshes around or Leopard on other hardware configurations. The moment you open up the hardware ecosystem, their model becomes inherently more unstable.
I am certain that if Apple and Microsoft were in reverse roles...where Apple tries to support thousands of devices and applications where a developer codes something poorly, that the OS would crash and hang.
I probably am a hyperspeed user with a hint of hyperactivity in the brain, so the FIRST time I used a Mac G5 that shit froze on me and I had to do a hard reboot because there was no way to Ctrl+Alt+Del and recover the session. The guy that owned it said it hadn't freeze on him ever, so I wonder how much of hardcore pc usage is there on an apple machine, at least that machine, which froze on safari and I couldn't recover. at all.
Good luck with that.
You had a 3 year window with Vista and still couldn't make a dent.
12 percent market share is not a dent? Would you say the same thing if the Zune had that sort of market share?
Well, no one is going to tell me why I'm wrong?
You can show me all the sales data you like but a few million computer in the grand scheme of things is next to nothing.
And their market share is nowhere near 12%. Maybe the laptop market in the US but not worldwide computer users.
And when you consider how much they had going for them on the back of the iPod, the negative view of Vista and their massive advertisement campaign they have failed to make a dent. They're still in the same place they were 4 years ago.
Just the kind of response I've come to expect.
pathetic.
Apple is worth 170 Billion versus Microsoft's 236 Billion. My question is, why isn't Microsoft worth more when they have 86 percent of the market? If Apple's stock goes to $300, they will effectively be bigger than Microsoft. They're already bigger than Google. You still don't see the dent?
"You can show me all the sales data you like but a few million computer in the grand scheme of things is next to nothing."
Yes, sales data that proves your ranting is useless.
The Mac business has doubled in every area over the past decade. But you know where Apple made the biggest dent of all? It's seen as a viable alternative to Windows by normal everyday consumers. That's where they succeeded the most.
You can argue that their growth over the past few years was a farce due to the Vista fiasco (and we'll know whether or not that's true by next year), but to claim Apple hasn't made a dent is a flat out lie.
I wish people would stop waving market capitalisation around as if it means something when, in this case, it doesn't. Apple's market cap is based on growth opportunities and when these flatten it's going to drop like a Catholic schoolgirl's knickers.
Apple have done relatively well but to claim they have a 9-12% market share is simply wrong. They may have that in the US consumer market but globally it doesn't hit 5% and they have still to break into the top 5 OEMs. I think it's great that there's some competition but let's not get carried away.
As foe Schiller, he's saying what he needs to say but it seems that nobody's really interested and, to be honest, he's opening up Apple to a huge can of whoopass by mentioning upgrades - if you live in a glass house you shouldn't throw stones.
@Mark Anderson: A big freaking AMEN to that.
Besides, it's not like Apple's current market capitalisation has much to do with its PC business. Without the iPod and iPhone in its product line, that huge market cap will turn to dust before you can say "overvalued".
"I wish people would stop waving market capitalisation around as if it means something when..."
Right, it means absolutely nothing to stock holders and Wall Street. Not a thing. Nada. Dude, please. That's got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
But okay, if that doesn't impress you, let's look at Apple track record for the last ten years. 225 million iPods sold, with 73 percent market share for MP3 players overall. 12 percent of the PC market. 75 million OS X users. 100 Million credit card accounts on iTunes. 50 million iPhone and iPod touch sold. 2 Billion iPhone apps downloaded. 8.5 Billion iTunes songs sold. 90,000 Apps available for iPhone/iPod touch. Number 1 music retailer in the world. 91 percent of the market for 1000+ PCs.
Yeah, I'm sure the people down in Cupertino are crying themselves to sleep on their pillows stuffed with hundred-dollar bills. If you don't see a dent, you're blind.
@Detox
Do you really need things spelt out?
Microsoft's cut from every computer sold is a hell of a lot smaller than Apples because Microsoft doesn't make the damn thing and brand it.
Really a fair comparison would be to take all those computers running Windows (Dell, HP, Sony, etc.) and add up those profits, which will leave your "OMG 170 Billion" crying like the little girl it is.
" stock holders and Wall Street"
Hey, aren't those the guys that ruined the world's economy? Are you one of them?
GET EM!
Apple charges based on software, not hardware. Optimized software comes at a price. How else could you get 'Aero' like effects, no even better, LIVE application effects such as Expose on less then spectacular hardware? Not on Windows. Bottom is that the resale value of a dated G5 versus a WinTel PC of the same year is way better then the PC. Sure you can try to run Windows 7 on a Pentium III but thats not a comparison by far.
MICROSOFT OVERCHARGES FOR BLOATWARE. We're just now getting Expose like functionality in Windows 7 but yet, you need a 3D accelerated NVidia or ATI card and last I checked, those aren't free. Yet a lonely Mac Mini with shitty graphic card (as in NO graphic card) just the stock Intel GMA can do optimized OpenGL and live HD video that rivals a beefed up Win7 with a graphics card. How is that overcharging?
You get what you pay for and in this case, "Its about the Software Stupid".
Steveorevo:
Pretty much all intel and other integrated cards since 2006/7 can do Aero quite nicely. You fail.
Class action lawsuits ruled otherwise.
Let the douchery of Apple spill forth. That all the will henceforth spew from the mouth of Apple shall be the waste of dirty douche-wash.