🚀 go-pugleaf

On 7/16/2010 9:40 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article<KJ90o.17596$0A5.15709@newsfe22.iad>, John Slade
> <hhitman86@pacbell.net>  wrote:
>
>>> look at apple's sales numbers. they keep going up and up and they are
>>> outpacing the market as a whole.
>>
>>          But I still don't see the OS X market share growing.
>
> as i said before, apple's sales are outpacing the market itself, which
> means their market share is growing.
>
> here's another, from over two years ago:
> <http://www.cnet.com/8301-13505_1-9839886-16.html>
>
>    Mac's market share growth is 'nothing short of spectacular'
>
>    Web analyst Net Applications now puts the Mac's market share at 8
>    percent, up from 5.3 percent in early 2007. That is stunning growth
>    by any measure, especially when you consider that this is 18 percent
>    growth in its market share...just since November 2007.
>
> apple outgrew the market in 14 of the last 15 quarters, the only one
> they didn't was during the intel transition.
> <http://techthoughts.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/apple-laptop-event-0
> 11.jpg>
>

         Yea it WAS spectacular back in 2007. But it seems the 
worldwide share is still where it was. Bear in mind that OS X 
market share is what we're talking about since Macs run Windows 
now. Here is the same data but much more recent.

http://www.netmarketshare.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=11

         Here's another one for you if you still have trouble 
understanding.

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9

          Does that clear it up any?

>> Just for the record, Macs are now part of the PC market share.
>> We're talking OS usage here. It would seem that many of these
>> people who are buying Macs are running Windows at leas part of
>> the time. I always said that when Apple started making clones
>> their sales would go up.
>
> ignoring the fact you have no evidence of whether someone runs os x
> exclusively or not, so what if they run windows part of the time? that
> means that they run os x the rest of the time.

     So all we can go on is sales of Macs and OS usage from the 
same sources. The sales figures show Apple isn't even in the top 
five computer makers in worldwide sales.


>
>>>>           That 91% of computers over $1000 is a very small segment
>>>> of the market.
>>>
>>> actually it's a significant part of the market.
>>
>>       No it's not. The vast majority of computers sold are not
>> over $1000.
>
> cite a source to back up your claim.

       As soon as you cite a source that shows most computers 
cost more than $1000. I mean you saw the actual sales figures 
and you're still trying to spin this?

>
>>        Complete horse shit. Amazon represents a tiny portion of
>> all computer sales.
>
> maybe so but it's a good indication of what's selling and what isn't.

       No it's not, actual sales figures compiled from the 
computer makers themselves is the indicator.

>
>> I suggest you look at HP, Dell, Acer, Lenovo
>> and ASUS sales.
>
> where does it say that the vast majority of computers are under $1000?
>
>> http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS22421910
>>
>>         This clearly shows that Apple is not even in the top five
>> in worldwide computer sales. And the growth on the list is ASUS
>> at 83.6% growth.
>
> that's entirely due to netbooks.

        But the fact that their growth is phenomenal should tell 
you that Apple's 15% growth in the US is not much. Let me 
explain it to you in simpler terms for you. If a company that 
sells 100 computers a year has 75% growth, it is nothing 
compared to a company that sells 100,000 computers a year an had 
10% growth. Does that clear it up any?
>
>> 91% of the computers costing over $1000 is a
>> tiny portion.
>
> actually it isn't, but more importantly, it's where the profit is. do
> you think asus is making a lot of money selling $200 netbooks?

     OK what percentage of computers sold are over $1000 and are 
sold in brick-and-mortar stores?

>
>> Apple would have to sell many, many more computers
>> to catch any of the big boys. For them to capture significant OS
>> X market share, they have to convince people that OS X is better
>> to have around than Windows XP/Vista/7.
>
> and they're doing exactly that, as their sales numbers show.

     I've shown you they don't show that.

>
>> Since relatively very
>> few games and applications are produced for OS X(excluding UNIX
>> software), it's no wonder OS X has seen minuscule gains.
>
> why exclude unix software? one huge advantage of os x is that all linux
> and other unix software runs *natively* alongside all mac software, and
> also alongside all windows software with vmware. that means a mac can
> run far more software than a pc can, all on the same box.

      If you're bringing VMware into it, then you have to 
include Linux and Unix on Windows systems as well. I'm talking 
native Windows vs. native OS X software.

>
>>        Now if this info doesn't sink in, you'll never understand.
>
> and you'll believe what you want to believe, regardless if the facts
> show otherwise.

      I have the actual sales data to back me up. You have 
nothing but sales figures from a tiny portion of the computer 
market.

John