Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
TheKev

A Troll post on a Mac forum. Really?

This isn't WindowsRumors guys. If you love PC ...come with a bit of thick skin because you are the minority here. Not that that means what I'm saying is right or wrong.

Cheers.
 
TheKev

A Troll post on a Mac forum. Really?

This isn't WindowsRumors guys. If you love PC ...come with a bit of thick skin because you are the minority here. Not that that means what I'm saying is right or wrong.

Cheers.

Visiting MacRumors does not necessarily make you a Mac Fan. It just makes you interested in Apple's future. Look at me, I look at Samsung rumors even though I have always wanted to burn their HQ.
 
TheKev

A Troll post on a Mac forum. Really?

This isn't WindowsRumors guys. If you love PC ...come with a bit of thick skin because you are the minority here. Not that that means what I'm saying is right or wrong.

Cheers.

What are you hinting at ? Why does it have to be a black or white thing ? Both platforms have their ups and downs and frankly, being on a "Mac" forum does not mean we have to find fault in anything not made by Apple or vice versa.

There is no trolling here, except for the assinine comments about being trolls for not having a 100% pro-Apple against-Everything-Else stance.
 
What are you hinting at ? Why does it have to be a black or white thing ? Both platforms have their ups and downs and frankly, being on a "Mac" forum does not mean we have to find fault in anything not made by Apple or vice versa.

There is no trolling here, except for the assinine comments about being trolls for not having a 100% pro-Apple against-Everything-Else stance.

I see what you did there. :)
 
Visiting MacRumors does not necessarily make you a Mac Fan. It just makes you interested in Apple's future. Look at me, I look at Samsung rumors even though I have always wanted to burn their HQ.

I do primarily use Macs. Sometimes I bootcamp too though. I've also owned Windows boxes. In case you're wondering why the post, I just dislike bad information and absolute answers. Also in the scenario of someone on a tight budget, I think it benefits them greatly to understand their needs and be objective in their purchase. It's not like that equates to irrational hatred of Apple:p.
 
TheKev

A Troll post on a Mac forum. Really?

This isn't WindowsRumors guys. If you love PC ...come with a bit of thick skin because you are the minority here. Not that that means what I'm saying is right or wrong.

Cheers.

Nor is this MacFans. I like Apple products when they're good, I like other products too. Just because you're supporting Apple products on an Apple rumours site doesn't make your wrong information somehow correct.
 
Nor is this MacFans. I like Apple products when they're good, I like other products too. Just because you're supporting Apple products on an Apple rumours site doesn't make your wrong information somehow correct.


50% of new Mac users are coming from a PC. That's corroborated by Tim Cook himself with Apple data.

Neowin (not a Mac site) pages was from March this year.

All Things Digital article showing Apple dominance in computers over $1000 isn't a hoax either.

Apple is a good solution for those that have more money to spend on a computer and the Mac mini isn't a bad solution for people that don't have much money.

Calling me a troll just makes me happy because I didn't make anything up. Apple didn't just wake up as the #1 tech company in the world. They methodically followed their strategy and saw an opportunity with mobile devices and capitalized.

When PC fans prattle on about 85% marketshare they seemingly grow amnesia when it comes to divulging that roughly around 40% of this market is based on machines 8 years old!!

That, my Boss King Emperor Deity friend, is why Apple is worth more as a company. More of their user base is modern with the largest percentage being mobile users (an area where Apple had literally no presence just 5 years ago).
 
As market cap goes roadbloc

Very flawed logic if you ask me. I'd give an example, but to be honest, having looked at your other posts, I don't think its worth it. If you want to believe being worth the most £ makes you #1, then that is fine by me.
 
Very flawed logic if you ask me. I'd give an example, but to be honest, having looked at your other posts, I don't think its worth it. If you want to believe being worth the most £ makes you #1, then that is fine by me.

Logic is hard to flaw in this case Roadbloc. Apple has had something like 23 qtrs of hitting or exceeding their numbers. There is no snake oil here they are operating better than the competition.

"but to be honest, having looked at your other posts, I don't think its worth it"

speaking of Logic this is "Poisoning the well"


You should probably find an easier mark. Someone who thinks you know everything and won't question. I'm not that guy.
 
50% of new Mac users are coming from a PC. That's corroborated by Tim Cook himself with Apple data.

I would REALLY hope so, seeing as the only other large operating system is Windows ( most consumers aren't coming from a Linux environment. )

All Things Digital article showing Apple dominance in computers over $1000 isn't a hoax either.

No, it's not. That is due to a lot of graphic design departments and editors buying them, up.

When it comes to things like high end work stations, Apple doesn't have anything to go with that market ( The Mac Pro is a Joke ). Different Categories, the workstation market is pretty huge, and as far as I can tell, I don't think Apple has tried to compete.

Most home buyer's don't spend more than 1000 to start with, at least for a desktop. I wouldn't mind a MacBook Air, it would look nice next to my iMac.

Apple is a good solution for those that have more money to spend on a computer and the Mac mini isn't a bad solution for people that don't have much money.

That is not a blanket statement. It depends on what you need. Apple might be a good solution for some people who want to spend over 1000, and for some people Windows is the better way to go, its not a black and white " Apple is better than anything for over 1000 ". Or " Windows is better for over 1000 "

I'll use myself as an example.

Work: Most of the programs I use aren't even made for OSX, and even if I bootcamped an high end iMac or a Mid End Mac Pro, it wouldn't have enough power to do what I want it to quickly enough. ( no hot swappable hard drives, single GPU only, thats a no no for me ) So at work, Mac won't work for me. On the flip side. They can work for other people, just not me.

Home:

For me, my iMac is an awesome daily driving machine. Its an OK media machine, it looks good sitting in my living room ,its super quiet , its decently quick, and for basic stuff, it works great for me. And I think it could work great for a lot of people ( but most people just do super basic stuff, a 500 dollar PC will do that just fine, hence why they buy the PC ). Nice Computer.

However: I am a huge Gamer, Apple doesn't make anything with enough power to do what I do with that. Sure a Decked out Mac Pro could do OK, but I'm limited to a single GPU, and limited to what Apple says I can buy. The iMac chokes World Of Warcraft for petes sake ( ATI 5000 series Fail ) lol. I'm sure a decked out Mac Pro wouldn't tho.

I like running my games at a huge screen sized, at a high FPS, with everything cranked to the Max, most Macs can't do that ( I don't know what the best GPU you can get on a Mac Pro is, but I'm sure its pretty bad ).

So for Me, other than basic stuff, a Mac won't work at home for me. For alot of people it does, just not me.

This isn't black and white, its all about the users needs.

And a Mac Mini? How the hell is that a good deal? Its under powered, non expandable, loud as hell ( we have a newer one and two older ones in the department Im in ), if your going to buy an New Mac Mini, work harder and buy an iMac, or a gently used iMac. And the older one in the department was pretty hilarious in that it would get so hot, the audio jack deformed slightly, so the audio wouldn't work, quality ;) ( it wasns't that hard of a fix, but Ive never had anything else do that lol )

When PC fans prattle on about 85% marketshare they seemingly grow amnesia when it comes to divulging that roughly around 40% of this market is based on machines 8 years old!!

There is another reason for this: User Need

I won't get into it to much, but I've worked for some big companies. Do you know what most of them do? They use systems, workstations, desktops and laptops until they're basically turning into dust. Where I work now, it wasn't uncommon to see Pentium 4 Desktops still chugging away in a decent amount of cubes. They won't upgrade until they NEED to. That's why you see a lot of older machines still chugging away. We are just starting to see an influx of 7 machines, because the old XP machine's are no longer productive, companies keep things until they aren't productive anymore.

It was't uncommon to see a 8 year old machine still running in an area that just did simple stuff, now tho we are really starting to upgrade everything.

At home, I see tons of people who still run generic P4 and Athlon XP towers just because all they do is go on youtube, do email, do word processing, and browse. So they have no need to buy a new machine. Why the hell would you go blow 500-800 dollars on a brand new PC, or 1000+ for a Mac when the machine you already have does all of that? Most of them keep those machines until a major piece of hardware fails, most, but not all will go back to a Windows Machine again, because its what they are used to. Some will give Apple a shot, but I think most of them will stick with Windows. Because they can buy a decently powerful machine with a good operating system that will last a long time on the cheap.

The Apple Market has grown, but I really don't see it being a threat to Microsoft. It has grown slowly, Microsoft is the king of the corperate and enterprise market, and I think they'll stay that way.

I think Apple will grow, but I don't ever think we'll see Apple dominate the home/corporate/enterprise world.

And it wont because:

1: Enterprise/corporate setups do not like systems that are locked down like Apples, they don't like being limited in what they can do, Apple limits the hell out of everything, even the hardware you can buy and run, and stops supporting OS's SUPER fast. And randomly won't support new standards. Large business's don't like that. Apple also refuses to release road maps. Large business's again. Do not like that, they want to know where all this equipment they bought will stand in 5 years time. Apple is far to unpredictable.

2: A basic Home user who does the basic's is FAR more likely to go buy a Dell or HP or something along those lines for 500-700 dollars rather than an iMac at 1000+

3: A lot of people, like gamers for example, demand the latest and greatest hardware, Apple doesn't offer that. They offer good stuff, but they refuse to make something expandable besides the Mac Pro, which as it stands is a joke.

4: Its just to locked down for a lot of peoples comfort.

The way I see it, Apple's home computer market share will grow, but I don't think we'll ever see 50%, they just don't appeal to enough people I think. Still good computers.

Apple needs to target basic users, gamers, and the enterprise market and produce a product that those people want to buy if it ever wants to see 50%
 
Last edited:
50% of new Mac users are coming from a PC. That's corroborated by Tim Cook himself with Apple data.

Neowin (not a Mac site) pages was from March this year.

All Things Digital article showing Apple dominance in computers over $1000 isn't a hoax either.

Apple is a good solution for those that have more money to spend on a computer and the Mac mini isn't a bad solution for people that don't have much money.

Calling me a troll just makes me happy because I didn't make anything up. Apple didn't just wake up as the #1 tech company in the world. They methodically followed their strategy and saw an opportunity with mobile devices and capitalized.

When PC fans prattle on about 85% marketshare they seemingly grow amnesia when it comes to divulging that roughly around 40% of this market is based on machines 8 years old!!

That, my Boss King Emperor Deity friend, is why Apple is worth more as a company. More of their user base is modern with the largest percentage being mobile users (an area where Apple had literally no presence just 5 years ago).

Firstly, of course the percentage of people coming to Mac from Windows would be high. Where else are they meant to come from? Secondly, I didn't call you a troll, but its good that you jumped to that conclusion on your own. Thirdly, just because an article says Mac are good for people with little money to spend doesn't mean its true. Websites can in fact be just as wrong as people.
 
50% of new Mac users are coming from a PC. That's corroborated by Tim Cook himself with Apple data.
Where else would they come from? Are the other half of new Mac users really first time computer buyers?

Apple is a good solution for those that have more money to spend on a computer and the Mac mini isn't a bad solution for people that don't have much money.
Being able to afford something never makes it a good solution (sic). It makes it an option, then whether it's a good or bad option is based on other things.

When PC fans prattle on about 85% marketshare they seemingly grow amnesia when it comes to divulging that roughly around 40% of this market is based on machines 8 years old!!
On the other hand, if 40 % of the PC market consists of eight year old computers, it kind of kills the whole argument that Apple's computers last longer than PCs...
 
Excellent responses.


To me this is what this fora are for. Exchanging idea and whatnot.


@hafr good point about the longevity of XP based computer. I was surprised that there was still such a high percentage of XP based system in use.

Boss.King - I'd be interested to see how many people have moved from a single PC/Mac household to many PC/Mac.

steering a bit back on topic. How many people here think Apple may actually run "better" sans Jobs at the helm?

I think GS1989 is correct on so many level. Apple doesn't seem to care about the Enterprise in any aspect beyond iOS. Hard to say where Cook wants to take the company versus Jobs at this point.
 
I think GS1989 is correct on so many level. Apple doesn't seem to care about the Enterprise in any aspect beyond iOS. Hard to say where Cook wants to take the company versus Jobs at this point.

It's not that Apple doesn't make products either, they do. But, the problem with the Enterprise world, Gamers, and some high end workstation users. Is that Apple locks you into hardware, and that's NOT good for users like that.
 
It's not that Apple doesn't make products either, they do. But, the problem with the Enterprise world, Gamers, and some high end workstation users. Is that Apple locks you into hardware, and that's NOT good for users like that.

I've often said that Apple, despite being quite clever with software, couldn't do what Microsoft does with OS X. Namely delivering a working solution that covers literally thousands of different configurations. Sometimes I'm amazed that OS X has bugs considering Apple picks the hardware to support with their OS.
 
Excellent responses.


To me this is what this fora are for. Exchanging idea and whatnot.


@hafr good point about the longevity of XP based computer. I was surprised that there was still such a high percentage of XP based system in use.

Boss.King - I'd be interested to see how many people have moved from a single PC/Mac household to many PC/Mac.

steering a bit back on topic. How many people here think Apple may actually run "better" sans Jobs at the helm?

I think GS1989 is correct on so many level. Apple doesn't seem to care about the Enterprise in any aspect beyond iOS. Hard to say where Cook wants to take the company versus Jobs at this point.

For what it's worth, I grew up with parents who loved Macs, had iMacs as family computers for years. I now use Windows (7 and Phone). I'd be curious to see how many people move from Mac to Windows.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean about moving to a many Mac/PC household? Do you just mean how many people now have more than one computer in the house?

I'd say with Cook in charge Apple might loosen it's grip on restrictions (just a little) and hopefully listen to its customers more. On the mobile side of things, I hope Cook has the good sense to settle rather than waste every cent Apple has fighting a petty battle. In terms of desktops/laptops, I'm less interested. Apple computers haven't interested me (beyond aesthetics) in years. I simply cannot justify the price for the level of hardware they offer.
 
For what it's worth, I grew up with parents who loved Macs, had iMacs as family computers for years. I now use Windows (7 and Phone). I'd be curious to see how many people move from Mac to Windows.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean about moving to a many Mac/PC household? Do you just mean how many people now have more than one computer in the house?

I'd say with Cook in charge Apple might loosen it's grip on restrictions (just a little) and hopefully listen to its customers more. On the mobile side of things, I hope Cook has the good sense to settle rather than waste every cent Apple has fighting a petty battle. In terms of desktops/laptops, I'm less interested. Apple computers haven't interested me (beyond aesthetics) in years. I simply cannot justify the price for the level of hardware they offer.


Yes I think a lot of the growth is coming from people who had a shared family computer and slowly went to a computer per family member.

I too think Apple should take the Mac lineup and bring it down in price.

I think the iMac should start out at $999 and use integrated graphics. For what a lot of people are doing they just don't need a whole lot.
 
To me this is what this fora are for. Exchanging idea and whatnot.
This forum, these fora.

steering a bit back on topic. How many people here think Apple may actually run "better" sans Jobs at the helm?
As I see it, there are two major factors to consider here. One is that they are completely different people. Steve Jobs came across as having some kind of "dysfunction", given the complete lack of empathy he seemed to have towards just about everyone except for Ive, who probably talked his language being a designer. This ruthlessness and unwillingness to back down might have been the key to why Apple is what it is today, and Tim Cook might be more of a compromising kind of guy. I don't know, just saying what I think.

The other factor is that their position is completely different today. Having an immensely larger customer base, it means that they will have to outdo themselves more and more for each time to be able to continue on this journey. It might be that expensive computers and a limited selection of phones and pads have reached its max, or is close to. In that case, to grow they would have to start selling cheaper products (kind of like what they're doing with the iPhone 3GS). That might send trendsetters packing and Apple will be left with the core customers, a group that might have increased by now, and the grey mass that buys a MacBook Pro/Air to someone for christmas, graduation or whatnot.
 
I am really confused at why people are thinking this.

Before Steve Jobs, people described Apple as brilliant, but it was chaotic and they were losing control over their company. There were plenty of ideas in Apple before him, they just had horrible management. Steve Jobs took a lot of people's talent and produced a great body of designers and developers, and that impact on Apple won't fade in years. If there was a problem at all, I would expect there to be a lot of confusing product lines and attempts to do things that Apple wouldn't be able to pull off.
 
This forum, these fora.


As I see it, there are two major factors to consider here. One is that they are completely different people. Steve Jobs came across as having some kind of "dysfunction", given the complete lack of empathy he seemed to have towards just about everyone except for Ive, who probably talked his language being a designer. This ruthlessness and unwillingness to back down might have been the key to why Apple is what it is today, and Tim Cook might be more of a compromising kind of guy. I don't know, just saying what I think.

The other factor is that their position is completely different today. Having an immensely larger customer base, it means that they will have to outdo themselves more and more for each time to be able to continue on this journey. It might be that expensive computers and a limited selection of phones and pads have reached its max, or is close to. In that case, to grow they would have to start selling cheaper products (kind of like what they're doing with the iPhone 3GS). That might send trendsetters packing and Apple will be left with the core customers, a group that might have increased by now, and the grey mass that buys a MacBook Pro/Air to someone for christmas, graduation or whatnot.

Grazie on the fora/forum correction. I always seem to reverse them.

I wonder if Tim Cook just may be the guy that takes over after a guy like Jobs. Tim may not be able bring rise to a company like the Phoenix but he's certainly an X's and O's guy that can maintain. We'll see...it's going to be interesting to see what happens going forward.

I am really confused at why people are thinking this.

Before Steve Jobs, people described Apple as brilliant, but it was chaotic and they were losing control over their company. There were plenty of ideas in Apple before him, they just had horrible management. Steve Jobs took a lot of people's talent and produced a great body of designers and developers, and that impact on Apple won't fade in years. If there was a problem at all, I would expect there to be a lot of confusing product lines and attempts to do things that Apple wouldn't be able to pull off.

Yes ..how many times have we read "that project was Steve'd" lol
 
Last edited:
I think what Apple really has to do, if they ever want a decent amount of Marketshare, from " Wintel " boxes. Is make enterprise and basic users/gamers want to buy apple.

Right now, OSX/Macs do a worse job at Gaming, are not viable for enterprise tasks ( hell, Apple doesn't even make rack mounts, or any servers. Nor does it even support anything like that. ), and are to expensive for a basic user to consider/want. They are still niche machines.

Apple needs to follow more of a Microsoft like business model if they ever want to dominate the home computer market ( no, the ipad doesn't count. That thing is a joke, like most tablets in general ) . And I know apple won't do that.

Apples problem in the home computing market, Lack of open hardware, limited software compatibly, under performing hardware and all that fun stuff.

The other thing, OSX 10.7 only works on a handful of hardware configs, I expect it to work flawlessly. It does not, it has stability and GUI issues, at least for me.

I am NOT a Windows Fanboy by any means, otherwise I wouldn't own a couple of Macs, I've had FAR less issues with XP and 7 Machines than I have had with my 10.7 machine. So far, 10.7 has had more issues than my OSX 10.4 and 10.5 machines, more issues than my XP and 7 Machines.

So if in their current state, Apple can't get OSX 10.7 to work properly on a couple of configs, how the hell could they pull off a Microsoft? Because XP/7 will pretty much run on anything pretty well.
 
I think what Apple really has to do, if they ever want a decent amount of Marketshare, from " Wintel " boxes. Is make enterprise and basic users/gamers want to buy apple.

Right now, OSX/Macs do a worse job at Gaming, are not viable for enterprise tasks ( hell, Apple doesn't even make rack mounts, or any servers. Nor does it even support anything like that. ), and are to expensive for a basic user to consider/want. They are still niche machines.

Apple needs to follow more of a Microsoft like business model if they ever want to dominate the home computer market ( no, the ipad doesn't count. That thing is a joke, like most tablets in general ) . And I know apple won't do that.

Apples problem in the home computing market, Lack of open hardware, limited software compatibly, under performing hardware and all that fun stuff.

The other thing, OSX 10.7 only works on a handful of hardware configs, I expect it to work flawlessly. It does not, it has stability and GUI issues, at least for me.

I am NOT a Windows Fanboy by any means, otherwise I wouldn't own a couple of Macs, I've had FAR less issues with XP and 7 Machines than I have had with my 10.7 machine. So far, 10.7 has had more issues than my OSX 10.4 and 10.5 machines, more issues than my XP and 7 Machines.

So if in their current state, Apple can't get OSX 10.7 to work properly on a couple of configs, how the hell could they pull off a Microsoft? Because XP/7 will pretty much run on anything pretty well.

I can agree with this on some level. The MacBook Air product line wasn't really overpriced, just look at the UltraBooks. And I can say the same things about the Minis, the only other company I really see offering something like this is NorhTec, and their computers aren't quite as good as Apple's, even though the prices are amazing. But for their other products, I can see that they're more overpriced. And being Unix-based has at least given them some compatibility, and it's a good thing their kernel is open-source, whether that's intentional or not. I think once Apple gains enough Mac consumers, they can afford to license their OS like Microsoft.
 
I think what Apple really has to do, if they ever want a decent amount of Marketshare, from " Wintel " boxes.

They don't really. They're happy with their high margin and current controlled growth. Heck, I think the guy who the following was darn right :

If I were running Apple, I would milk the Macintosh for all it's worth — and get busy on the next great thing. The PC wars are over. Done. Microsoft won a long time ago.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.