Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is there anything more shameful than the "ultrabooks?"
- Thread starter ziggyonice
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
An idea was still stolen; whether it is hardware or software makes no difference. Apple must have also committed grand larceny, in your eyes. See the X505 mentioned time and again in this thread.
I'm sure Apple's execs know that, but they also screw up a lot. Even then, the iPod was not a run away success (it took until the 3rd generation for it to actually make a dent in the market). Still, when they do it right they do it right
I'm sure Apple's execs know that, but they also screw up a lot. Even then, the iPod was not a run away success (it took until the 3rd generation for it to actually make a dent in the market). Still, when they do it right they do it right
Yet when it takes Microsoft a few attempts to finally get it rights, they're blasted as being incompetent buffoons.
Mostly because they don't, in fact, get it right. There are so many examples. The jury's still out on WP7, and Windows 8 looks . . . problematic (and that's being kind.)
I thought Windows 7 was really good, sure it's a little slow on boot and shutdown, but in the 2 years I used it I didn't see a single crash or virus. Plus, I thought Aero was just pretty. The downsides? Compared to the dock, the taskbar is kinda clunky. That, and of course no unix I still prefer OS X for that one reason alone, but I didn't mind Windows 7 otherwise.
Windows 8 pisses me off though. It's like they took all the last 20 years of innovation and threw it all out the window just because of the iPad. Really? You really can't do 2 things at the same time, unless it's 2 things that they intended to be done at the same time, and that's the problem with those kinda GUIs. I understand why Tablets have limited OSes/interfaces, but I think the windowed multitasking approach is way more powerful than people give it credit for.
The beef with that is now that website standards are pushing for fluid, dynamic interfaces.. we have phone and tablet OSes embracing bitmapped GUIs with no flexibility whatsoever. It drives me nuts!
I still prefer OS X for that one reason alone, but I didn't mind Windows 7 otherwise.Windows 8 pisses me off though. It's like they took all the last 20 years of innovation and threw it all out the window just because of the iPad. Really? You really can't do 2 things at the same time, unless it's 2 things that they intended to be done at the same time, and that's the problem with those kinda GUIs. I understand why Tablets have limited OSes/interfaces, but I think the windowed multitasking approach is way more powerful than people give it credit for.
The beef with that is now that website standards are pushing for fluid, dynamic interfaces.. we have phone and tablet OSes embracing bitmapped GUIs with no flexibility whatsoever. It drives me nuts!
That's based solely on you're preferences. Personally I find the trackpads on my new MBP's & MBA's so effective & fun, I bought a Magic TrackPad for my Mac Pro. So while we agree that Apple has the best input experience, that's not going to dampen demand for UltraBooks.
If we take into consideration the number of corporations that are centered on Windows systems, in addition to those in the public, home market sector, Ultrabooks will sell well. I highly doubt they will challenge Apple, nor do I care.
I happen to enjoy Windows 7, yet as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't provide the type of functionality and enjoyment I get from OS X. I've had years of great service from my Macs. Not until recently, with the advent of iOS & it's influence on OS X, have I ever been concerned.
Convergence of the two seems to be the direction Apple is headed, a thought I dread.
Last edited:
So.....Apple steals useful functionality, while others rip off superficial aspects of the iPhone, and yet you think Apple is only stealing "small"??
The MBA is an ultrabook. Ultrabooks are simply thin, lightweight laptops that use Intel's small form-factor, low power consumption/TDP chipset, and don't have a disk drive. The term "ultrabook" was probably invented by Intel just as a way of classifying/marketing a particular style of product, just like "Centrino" wasn't really a particular "thing" at all.
But anyway, we're only talking about the superficial stuff. The MBA is an ultrabook. I love it though.
I don't really see the issue with ultrabooks.
They're ALL going to use similar hardware. The only advantages my MBA has over others are:- Mine has an 11.6" screen, and there aren't many Windows-based ultrabooks that have this.
- My MBA has the nicest aesthetics.
- My MBA runs OS X, and that's what I prefer.
That's it. My housemate's Asus ultrabook also seems fantastic, but it's 13" and doesn't run OS X. If it ran OS X, I wouldn't be disgusted by the thought of owning it. It's not as pretty, but.....I suppose that's it. It runs well, and it feels well made.
Tell us about your experience with Windows 8. How long have you been using it? Is it difficult to get used to the new interface? Does the lack of a start menu make it hard for you to get comfortable with it? I'd like to hear about your personal experiences.
iMacG5....yeah they totally got that one right
----------
Microsoft never gets it right huh? They toppled the Playstation 3.
Windows XP, great stable operating system.
Sure, Windows Vista was terrible, but its mostly fixed.
Windows 7? Secure. Stable, usable,
There is a reason Microsoft holds 90% of the marketshare, and have maintained it. They make products that work for 90% of users. And almost all of the enterprise market.
I love Apple, I love my Apples, I love my Mac Computers, my iPhones, and my iTV. But Apple isn't Microsoft, Microsoft makes products that the majority of people like, otherwise everyone would go buy an Apple. Simple as that.
Just to quibble a little. MS Window's market is in decline. And they got to near 90% market share due to a number of reasons including: Recognizing that an open HW platform would reach more people; That cheap attracts more people than expensive, regardless of which is better; And through illegal marketing actions. (which is why they have a Consent Decree signed a decade or so ago with the US government, similar decrees with other governments, and paid IBM nearly a $Billion for pushing OS/2 to extinction).
Yes, lots of people like Windows, and there is a lot to like about it. But - that market share was at least partly won illegally. How much is of course open to debate. But it was not just because "... the majority of people like...". It's more complicated.
Actually Windows 8 will help ensure Microsoft's dominance in all "PC" form factors. Where else is HP/Dell/Asus/Lenovo going to go? Microsoft doesn't care who the OEM is or what the form factor is, they still sell a Windows license. Windows is like printing ca$$$$h.
You have to pay to play. And Apple doesn't compete on the low-end with $400 Dells.
The retail pyramid is narrowest at the top.
No one knows how W8 is going to do. MS has changed the interface enough that it may be more or less appealing. Absolutely MS is going to sell lots of W8. But when the initial buying spike is over will it start to increase market share or not?
I agree that MS doesn't care what the form factor is. And that includes Macs. MS gets to sell a full retail priced copy of Windows to a great many Apple users, rather than a heavily volume discounted copy to HP/Dell/etc. I'm Plus they get to sell a full retail priced copy of Office to those Apple users too, rather than the enterprise priced copy.
And what's your point? I don't buy a prime rib roast very often either. Should I try to make a point about something with that? There are lots of things people can't buy. We all know that.
My point is Apple is never going to sell 10s of millions of Macs, but Microsoft makes a healthy profit on PCs sold at $500 or less because while OEMs are in cuthroat competition with each other, they still have to PAY MSFT for the license. Now if Windows Phone ever gets going, watch out.
I hope MS isn't under the impression that the mobile market is anything like the PC market.
Actually, they probably are. It's a little too late to squeeze into Android's domination of the "other" end of the market, and there is absolutely no way MS can compete head-to-head with Apple. They lack the mindshare, the ecosystem, the "cool" factor, nearly everything that makes Apple successful. And Ballmer and Elop aren't going to magically put it there. They're amateurs in every way compared to the quality of leadership Apple enjoys.
Too little, too late. Microsoft's real and only hope is that Google gets blasted in the courts and by regulatory bodies to the degree that OEMs will find Android less attractive.
Last edited:
Well, if you scroll down a bit on the front page of MacRumours you will see that in fact Apple did sell 4 million Macs last quarter... a quarter that traditionally is the worst quarter in the year. So that equates to a minimum of 12 million Macs (or 1.2 "10s of millions of Macs...") not counting iPads. If you count an iPad as a computer then it was 11 million in the quarter, or a minimum of 44 10s of millions.
Apple also sells 66% of all computers priced over $1000 in the US. Apple may not make much money on OS X (or they may, we don't know) but they are making a lot of money on the hardware.
And ... I agree MS loves it when a PC is sold... Mac or otherwise. Except for Linux only machines, of course. They may sell more Windows licenses through Dell/HP/etc... but they make more money per license selling to Mac owners.
Just for fun.... Macs account for about 14% of the US market, was one number I read. Say that half those units also install Windows through a VM or boot-camp. MS probably makes 4x as much profit selling a full retail priced copy vs to an OEM. ( I am basing this on New Egg pricing. New Egg will sell an OEM copy of Windows for about 50% of retail. Most stores have a 100% mark up, so New Egg paid MS about 25% of full retail. This is all just back of the envelope scribbles).
So... assuming the above ... about 25% of MS's Windows' revenue in the US comes from Mac owners. Not counting MS Office, where a similar calculation can be made.
MS and Apple can coexist very nicely. Apple loves selling more computers, where their profit is, because now the Intel Macs can be used by people who need Windows. MS loves selling Windows licenses to Mac users because they make more profit. And unlike the HP/Lenovo's/etc Apple never comes to MS as an OEM and tries to negotiate a better deal.
The people hurting are the Dells/Asus/etc whose HW profits are razor thin. And who make no money at all selling the OS.
Where MS should be worried is the iOS market. No one is going to buy a Windows license for an iOS device. For MS this is a market they have to be able to do well in - because to do otherwise means no revenue at all from that market segment. Personally, I think they should just abandon the phone/tablet market and concentrate on apps for it that are OS agnostic. They can't win in this market agains Apple that ties iOS to the HW, and Android that can offer an OS for cheaper (free) than anything MS can introduce. In this segment they MS physically can't get their OS on Apple HW and their stuff will be more expensive on everything else.
Which is why Microsoft has been pouring energy and resources into building up Windows Phone. Heck look at all the awards it's won for the design. Now Nokia is making great hardware for it and the app store is nearing 85K. Apollo will bring WP in line with iOS/Android on software and Nokia will no doubt make hardware that will make us all drool. October can't come soon enough!
It's going to be a tough market for MS. There many many people who will buy iDevices because - well, for many reasons. But iDevices appear to be well entrenched and it doesn't look as if anyone is going to take that segment away. One of the advantages that Apple has is that they own the higher priced market. More revenue can be devoted to R&D, and still leave lots of $$ for marketing and profit.
MS is going to be competing with - free. And against everyone else. In the end even if they end up selling lots of winDevices, their profit margins are going to be thin at best. Not saying they shouldn't do it... but if their winDevice division was an independent company I wouldn't be investing.
Ironically, they may - in this case - end up being victimized by the same tactic that MS used to win OS share. Take an inferior design and grab as much market share as possible using whatever means possible (legal and otherwise) to smother the better technology.
In this instance they may be bringing a very good product to a market they can get a foothold in. (In this case I think the inferior product is Android, not iOS). The problem with winDevices at this point is that they have to compete on price with free, and on features with iOS devices. If someone wants a locked down and easy/controlled user experience they choose Apple. MS isn't going that route. If someone wants an open user experience.... well, there's free and there's MS. It's going to be a tough market. And MS has to grab a big share to make it worthwhile.
Really? MS has poured money into a platform that has negligible market penetration. Nokia's valuation is dropping like a rock for a reason - and it's not the awesome hardware. You have a white elephant and a "has been" company.
Any drooling would be related to the lobotomy on the part of anyone who'd purchase such a thing. But yes, there may be some drooling...