Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 151
  1. #61  
    If the Macintosh is not dying, then why has Apple:

    1) Moved most developers out of OS X to iPad/iPhone/iPod;
    2) Canceled its Macintosh development department that found funding and tools for developers;
    3) Canceled its Macintosh product design awards for major developers;
    4) Canceled its "Get a Mac" advertising campaign?

    And if the Mac "doesn't compete" in certain markets, and that's the reason its share is so low, then why not simply apply that to every product with low market share and brand it a "success?"

    As for "trying too hard," I'm not trying at all. Just observing. I was once a big Macintosh guy myself, who bailed as the platform's death accelerated the last six years.
  2. #62  
    iPad didn't kill netbooks, saturation and a lack of innovation has killed them. Netbooks haven't advanced much the last 24 months, everyone who wants one already has one, and the latest models aren't significantly different in terms of performance and features from the ones sold 12 or 18 months ago.

    US statistics, BTW, aren't all that important. The USA is a tiny share (and shrinking) of the mobile device market.
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    If the Macintosh is not dying, then why has Apple:

    1) Moved most developers out of OS X to iPad/iPhone/iPod;
    2) Canceled its Macintosh development department that found funding and tools for developers;
    3) Canceled its Macintosh product design awards for major developers;
    4) Canceled its "Get a Mac" advertising campaign?

    And if the Mac "doesn't compete" in certain markets, and that's the reason its share is so low, then why not simply apply that to every product with low market share and brand it a "success?"

    As for "trying too hard," I'm not trying at all. Just observing. I was once a big Macintosh guy myself, who bailed as the platform's death accelerated the last six years.
    1. I just Googled what you said in many different ways of what you said and could not find anything from Apple about that. I asked last time please provide a LINK to back up what you said. I don't believe it and until you provide evidence other than what your brain threw up, it means nothing.

    2. Couldn't find evidence of that. Maybe you can show proof.

    3. They also don't do Macworld Expos anymore because they are not needed for them to get out their message. Do you still do the same old things that you were doing years ago. Or do you evolve with the times?

    4. Now, this one is stupid. Does Dell still show the commercials with the dude that said "Dude, it's a Dell"? When is the last time you seen the silhouette iPod commercials? You ever heard of companies retiring advertising campaigns so as to not over saturate people with advertising so that they ignore the advertising?

    Are you saying that Apple that made approx $40-$50 billion dollars in revenue last year is not a success? Tell me, how old are you? I think I used Ferrari and Rolex as two perfect examples of companies that have very low sales compared to the CHEAPER competitors and they to my knowledge would be considered successful in the markets they compete in.

    You're not a very god observer. Stevie Wonder would be a better observer than you. At least he saw that VW before Tracy Morgan in that VW commercial and he's blind.
  4. #64  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    iPad didn't kill netbooks, saturation and a lack of innovation has killed them. Netbooks haven't advanced much the last 24 months, everyone who wants one already has one, and the latest models aren't significantly different in terms of performance and features from the ones sold 12 or 18 months ago.

    US statistics, BTW, aren't all that important. The USA is a tiny share (and shrinking) of the mobile device market.
    Hold up!! Didn't you say earlier in one of your over the top posts that Windows was more innovative than Apple? How Windows had a 10 year path, etc. Oh, you didn't mean the hardware, just the software? So, if the hardware is slower than Windows in advancing. Then how are these netbooks that have not advanced in 24 months going to keep up with the faster evolving Microsoft?
  5. #65  
    Wow, the Mac jihad is out in force today.

    So, all those cancellations don't matter, because you either cannot Google them, or the fact that Apple has ceased investment in new developer programs and advertising is no big deal. Gotcha.

    Windows isn't advancing as quickly as the i-platforms -- please don't conflate the i-platforms with the Macintosh. The Macintosh is a walking dead platform, the i-platforms are the future. The fact that a new platform is developing faster than an older one is no huge surprise.

    For example, how many touch-screen Macintoshes have shipped? Where's the Macintosh convertible tablet? Where's the Macintosh netbook?

    Exactly. Mac is at a development standstill because it's a dead product. Apple's putting all their money and energy into the i-platform and allowing Mac to die. Windows will continue eating up Mac's marketshare as a result.
  6. #66  
    Dude, I'm done responding to you. You choose to keep saying the same old thing over and over again and you're not making any sense.

    When I post things I usually provide a web link as I have in many of my posts so that people can see that I am not talking out of my *****. You have yet to do that. Because you are making it up. So, as you would do a drunk family member, I'm ignoring you and your posts.

    Lata
  7. #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    But in smartphones, they use the exact opposite argument. App quality doesn't matter, it's all about quantity and the number of developers. Market share is crucial -- the smaller the share, the worse off the vendor. 50,000 boob jiggle and fart apps are better than 2,200 varied quality apps. Multitasking and other technical advancement doesn't matter.
    Wait a second... You're telling me that the iPhone has boob jiggle apps, too??!??

    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    If the Macintosh is not dying, then why has Apple:

    1) Moved most developers out of OS X to iPad/iPhone/iPod;
    2) Canceled its Macintosh development department that found funding and tools for developers;
    3) Canceled its Macintosh product design awards for major developers;
    4) Canceled its "Get a Mac" advertising campaign?
    The Macintosh is not dying. It's evolving.

    A Macintosh = iPad + Keyboard
    A Macintosh = iPhone + Screen
    A Macintosh = Personal Computing
  8. #68  
    Let's take a quick look at each OS X and Windows timelines:

    OS X
    • 10.0 - March 24, 2001
    • 10.1 - July 18, 2001
    • 10.2 - May 6, 2002
    • 10.3 - June 23, 2003
    • 10.4 - May 4, 2004
    • 10.5 - June 26, 2006
    • 10.6 - June 9, 2008
    • 10.6.3 - March 29, 2010 <- I count this because of the major changes it brought (64-bit and the grand central dispatch).


    Windows
    • XP - October, 2001
    • Vista - January 2007
    • 7 - October 2009


    Do I really need to even say anything? Oh, I'll go ahead and throw up Windows 8 too, which is slated for SOMETIME in 2012, whereas 10.7 is already slated for this year.

    With the exception of 2005 and 2007, Apple has released a major OS release every year for the past 10 years; Microsoft, well ... they average every ~4 years.

    The marketshare is easy to understand … of course subpar $300 netbooks and $600 laptops are going to sell more than $1500 - $2500 laptops. Apple doesn't compete in the low-end market, like I said elsewhere (I think even in this thread?) … there is no money to be made there.
    Last edited by barkerja; 05/12/2010 at 12:55 AM.
  9. #69  
    Quote Originally Posted by barkerja View Post
    Let's take a quick look at each OS X and Windows timelines:

    OS X
    • 10.0 - March 24, 2001
    • 10.1 - July 18, 2001
    • 10.2 - May 6, 2002
    • 10.3 - June 23, 2003
    • 10.4 - May 4, 2004
    • 10.5 - June 26, 2006
    • 10.6 - June 9, 2008
    • 10.6.3 - March 29, 2010 <- I count this because of the major changes it brought (64-bit and the grand central dispatch).


    Windows
    • XP - October, 2001
    • Vista - January 2007
    • 7 - October 2009


    Do I really need to even say anything? Oh, I'll go ahead and throw up Windows 8 too, which is slated for SOMETIME in 2012, whereas 10.7 is already slated for this year.

    With the exception of 2005 and 2007, Apple has released a major OS release every year for the past 10 years; Microsoft, well ... they average every ~4 years.

    The marketshare is easy to understand of course subpar $300 netbooks and $600 laptops are going to sell more than $1500 - $2500 laptops. Apple doesn't compete in the low-end market, like I said elsewhere (I think even in this thread?) there is no money to be made there.
    I don't really want to take sides in this argument, I think both platforms have advantages and disadvantages, but I just needed to point out something that you have forgotten to mention.

    Each windows release has had several major service pack upgrades. I don't have a link available to show the change logs, nor do I know exactly what each one had, but I think its safe to assume that these service pack upgrades are comparable to the OSX 10.1, 10.2, 10.3...etc. I think it is unfair to leave these out of the argument, and in my opinion invalidates your statement that I quoted.

    That is all.
  10. #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by voodoochild View Post
    Each windows release has had several major service pack upgrades. I don't have a link available to show the change logs, nor do I know exactly what each one had, but I think its safe to assume that these service pack upgrades are comparable to the OSX 10.1, 10.2, 10.3...etc. I think it is unfair to leave these out of the argument, and in my opinion invalidates your statement that I quoted.

    That is all.
    No, that's not the case. The only version of OS X that's even slightly comparable to Windows service packs was Snow Leopard...and even that had a ton of changes under the hood.
  11. urkel's Avatar
    Posts
    944 Posts
    Global Posts
    946 Global Posts
    #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by voodoochild View Post
    Each windows release has had several major service pack upgrades. I don't have a link available to show the change logs, nor do I know exactly what each one had, but I think its safe to assume that these service pack upgrades are comparable to the OSX 10.1, 10.2, 10.3...etc. I think it is unfair to leave these out of the argument, and in my opinion invalidates your statement that I quoted.
    I agree with that. Many times a 10.x release is mainly bug fixes (masked behind an overblown feature count number) and a Windows Service Pack hides a feature. With updates being pushed to the user more frequently then hese numbers don't mean anything anymore.

    As for the silly "Mac is dead" argument, it's partially true but not for the made up reasons listed here. The "Death" in question actually applies to ALL desktop OS. Windows and Mac have both reached a level of maturity where theres no true demand for "the next major release", so if Win8 or 10.7 get pushed back then it not going to really affect anyone. And this is why Apple, Google and MS are trying to develop and expand new markets with tablets and smart phones. That's where there's room for growth and a chance at making a difference again.
    Last edited by Urkel; 05/12/2010 at 02:39 AM.
  12. #72  
    So many mac fan-boys lol Keep worshiping your all mighty god Steve jobs, his demise will come in the future.

    -Toaster
  13. #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by Urkel View Post
    I agree with that. Many times a 10.x release is mainly bug fixes (masked behind an overblown feature count number) and a Windows Service Pack hides a feature. With updates being pushed to the user more frequently then hese numbers don't mean anything anymore.

    As for the silly "Mac is dead" argument, it's partially true but not for the made up reasons listed here. The "Death" in question actually applies to ALL desktop OS. Windows and Mac have both reached a level of maturity where theres no true demand for "the next major release", so if Win8 or 10.7 get pushed back then it not going to really affect anyone. And this is why Apple, Google and MS are trying to develop and expand new markets with tablets and smart phones. That's where there's room for growth and a chance at making a difference again.
    Actually, no. A 10.x.X would be comparable to a "service pack". I didn't include either, I can ... and it would make my case even more solid.
  14. #74  
    Quote Originally Posted by toasterthegamer View Post
    So many mac fan-boys lol Keep worshiping your all mighty god Steve jobs, his demise will come in the future.

    -Toaster
    Repeat after me:

    Oh praise the lord Jobs in our temple of iPhone. Eternal master iPhone's sales are down. Do not dismay my flock, for our eternal lord is strong. Our lord shall CRUSH this false idol of android, hpalm, window, for them are false - and weak. Gather round children, for our lord shall bless us here in this temple of iPhone, and we shall be touched by the dangle-ey usb appendage of our lord. Blessed be the glow of our lord's mighty 3.5" display - and we shall touch the holy body of our lord, and be enlightened by the mighty app of our lord


    Disclosure: Not mine lol
  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Black View Post
    Whats your input?
    HPre and others like Google/Motorola/HTC & RIM will do to Apple in the mobile space the same that was done to it in the personal computing space. It's only a matter of time and effort. So long as Apple continues to shoot itself in the foot (Flash, closed platform, etc) and not compete fully, it's decline into irrelevance is a foregone conclusion.
  16. #76  
    Quote Originally Posted by brmiller1976 View Post
    As for "trying too hard," I'm not trying at all. Just observing. I was once a big Macintosh guy myself, who bailed as the platform's death accelerated the last six years.
    I guess we live in some kind of opposite universe. Six years ago was when the platform first started to get interesting with the move to Intel chips. I still ended up building another Windows XP machine though. I actually installed my first Mac one week ago. My six year old XP machine needed an OS reinstall and I couldn't be bothered. Though my Windows experience dates back to 1988, I am not as impressed with Windows 7 as you seem to be.
  17. #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by toasterthegamer View Post
    So many mac fan-boys lol Keep worshiping your all mighty god Steve jobs, his demise will come in the future.

    -Toaster
    You do realize, don't you, that your comments make you sound like a huge homer for Windows and Adobe, right?

    I mean, you're one of the bigger "fan-boys" on here.

    I just thought I'd point that out; you've become what you dislike!
  18. #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by Treiz View Post
    HPre and others like Google/Motorola/HTC & RIM will do to Apple in the mobile space the same that was done to it in the personal computing space. It's only a matter of time and effort. So long as Apple continues to shoot itself in the foot (Flash, closed platform, etc) and not compete fully, it's decline into irrelevance is a foregone conclusion.
    You mean like all the competitors in the MP3 market? But, I will post below what I said earlier in another post in case you didn't read it on irrelevance. It talks about Apple's market share and the market share of other companies in different industries.

    The Apple community does not have a double standard. You and about 90% of everyone else interprets things incorrectly.

    You are including Apple in markets in which they do not compete. The largest market share that Microsoft has is in large and enterprise businesses. Two markets that Apple does not compete in. Apple competes in the consumer market, graphics and video industries, education market, small business market, home office, a lot of law firms use Macs, biotech industries. In all those markets Apple has about 20% - 30% market share. A share that any business that makes premium products would be more than happy with.

    So, in the markets that Apple competes in, they have a sizable share. Just like Ferrari doesn't sell nowhere near as many cars as Ford does. No one would say that Ferrari is a failure because they may sell 5,000 cars a year compared to Ford that sells a few million cars a year. But, I'm sure Ferrari has a comparable market to all the other car manufacturers that sell cars that cost over $150,000.

    Who sells more watches? Rolex or Timex? Is Rolex considered a failure because they probably sell less than 1% of the watches that Timex does? Then why is Apple? Seriously, use your brain and see what parts of these broad categories companies actually compete in and then compare those markets that they have in common before making statements like you did above.

    I will agree that there are software packages that are not on the Mac. That's why there is Bootcamp and VMware for those rare instances when a Mac user may need to run Windows.
    Furthermore, I don't see how any company that pulls down $50 billion in sales per year can be considered irrelevant. Apple is a premium product. They are not going after the cheapest consumer or going for the most market share. They are going for the most money they can make. HP, Palm, Dell, etc can have all you cheap people that all you worry about is cost and ignore user interface and quality designed products.

    Something else, that you and so many others that keep repeating that same ole tired saying of what happened to Apple in the past will happen to Apple again. There is this thing called iTunes, the huge ecosystem and the world's largest App Store that has consumers locked in, etc. So, until a competitor matches all that and one ups Apple, Apple has nothing to worry about in the smartphone market. Then Verizon starts offering buy one Android smartphone and get two free. Then you and the clueless will be touting that the iPhone is being outsold again.
    Last edited by SoFly; 05/14/2010 at 08:02 PM.
  19. #79  
    You mean like all the competitors in the MP3 market?
    I didn't say anything about that, but then, you would point to the only market where (Cr)Apple has had some success, which incidentally, is also the only market where they have no REAL competition. The closest anyone came to matching Apple's ipod offering was Microsoft's Zune, and even that was a half hearted attempt. Success by default is not really success IMHO, and this will of course only get worse as the smartphone market crushes the dedicated mp3 market led by google, Rim, Palm and who ever else can put out more than one phone per year.
  20. #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by Treiz View Post
    I didn't say anything about that, but then, you would point to the only market where (Cr)Apple has had some success, which incidentally, is also the only market where they have no REAL competition. The closest anyone came to matching Apple's ipod offering was Microsoft's Zune, and even that was a half hearted attempt. Success by default is not really success IMHO, and this will of course only get worse as the smartphone market crushes the dedicated mp3 market led by google, Rim, Palm and who ever else can put out more than one phone per year.
    I'm curious then, how do you measure success?
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions