How do apple stay in business?

Please compose all posts in Emacs.

Moderators: phlip, Moderators General, Prelates

Woegjiub
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:22 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Woegjiub » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:51 am UTC

cerbie wrote:Apple only sells OS X for Apple computers. If you took a Dell Windows disc, found a way to install it on a non-Dell, and did so, would that be kosher?

Well, yeah.... it's only windows.

"Only slightly," so you admit they might have had some degree of inferiority? Can you find one you can be guaranteed is as good for significantly less?

Well, I can't see much of a difference between the picture on my $200 asus monitors and the $2000 apple ones at uni, so I don't think I'm the one to ask about that.
I'm certain you would be able to, you appear to know heaps about monitors.

Why yes, it is. If you prefer *n*xes, it'll be nicer to use than Windows, but I couldn't handle it. Xorg (and other freedesktop.org things) breaking regularly is a small price to pay.

I don't get anything breaking... ever.... (I used to in arch, but even kubuntu 9.10 alpha never breaks for me)

2 gigs of 800MHz ram, 24" 1920x1200 display, 2.8GHz C2D, radeon HD2600 (not the limiting factor here, the windows macs in the room next to it are faster at 512MB 667MHz ram, 2GHz C2D, and an X1600)
Huh, OK. Except for the RAM (8GB and no swap is nice), I wouldn't mind having that. On far lesser hardware (G4, G5, 8000 and 9000 series Radeons), I have not noticed OS X to be all that slow, though, except for the animated-ness.

Then I'm clueless as to why it crawls, the admin has assured me there's nothing running on the osx pcs that aren't on the windows pcs, so....
Also, I'm buying an i7 rig with 12 gigs of ram (2GB sticks of 1600 for $80 :) )

If they price too low, they don't make enough money. If they compete on the same terms, they get forced to price too low. That's kind of the point. They don't make the same thing you build, and they don't make the same software you use. You can always buy cheaper, but Apple does offer consistent value. They do so largely by not offering what other computer makers do. They are not trying to satisfy most computer users.

But their market share will not penetrate more deeply unless they can cater to those who do care about value....

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Amnesiasoft » Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:03 am UTC

Woegjiub wrote:But their market share will not penetrate more deeply unless they can cater to those who do care about value....

You're under the impression that they care about market share.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Zamfir » Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:57 am UTC

Berengal wrote:Now I'm idly wondering how much it would cost to make an equivalent open source alternative to FCP. If all post-production studios pooled their money and retained a software-shop to continually develop a free alternative, would they save money?


Looking on the website, FCP costs $999. If that's the price for businesses too, it just isn't a lot of money, even if it's per year. How many good software developers would it buy you? 1 man-day or something like that?
Of course, if enough people pooled their resources, they might pull it off. But if you're going to set up a company payed for by the contributions of many companies to develop software,you could just as well call your company Apple and make it a commerical business. You still wouldn't want it to be freeware, because in that case the freerider pressure is just too large, and you won't get those loads of other companies to share your cost.
Usually, open source replacements for professional software is developed by university projects, and targeted a bit more at the niche market of people who do need lots of functionality but less userfriendliness.

Berengal wrote: New employees would also have more experience using it, most likely, since it's freely available.

That's a good point. My personal experience is that truly professional software is usually not that well protected agianst pirating. The companies don't care a lot if individuals download it and use it at home, exactly because it leads to a base of experienced users. That's basically how Photoshop got its market share, and Adobe only started worrying about pirating when they began targeting the amateur photo market themselves.
And of course companies sell very cheap licenses to universities.

User avatar
OOPMan
Posts: 314
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:20 am UTC
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby OOPMan » Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:09 am UTC

Wow, this topic is getting quite steamy :-)

I think I'll add some more fuel to the fire...

Ultimately, for all the fanboy praise and marketing hype, most of the "Money" apps on Mac are, in fact, present on Windows. There may be one or two here or there that are represented on one platform only, but most of the key apps in most of the key areas exist on both platforms.

This actually puts a rather nice spin on things when we consider that piracy is rampant on Windows and that, despite the potential consequences, many businesses do use pirated software at a variety of levels.

So, officially, there are X deployments of Photoshop for OSX and Y deployments of Photoshop for Windows. In reality, however, the figure for Y is grossly out of synch with reality while that of X is not.

Me, I'm guessing that while the apply fanboys will continue to rave about how "Life is better on a Mac", the majority of the work out there is being done on non-Apple systems, most of them sporting pirated software left, right and centre.

Personally, I hate Apple as a company even more than M$ because, while M$ at least has a bad image, Apple has is still under the radar in this regard.
Image

Image

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Endless Mike » Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:45 pm UTC

Woegjiub wrote:It's a major university, so it's all updated to the latest version of leopard (not SL yet), and my comparison is between the 2008 aluminium imac and my home pc with kubuntu.
I can't see how they'd be bogging the computers down with background processes, because the polycarbonate 2006 imacs wunning XP actually run quickly - they do EVERYTHING faster than the superior aluminium imacs running osx.

This seriously makes no sense, so the only conclusion left was that osx hogs more resources, and is therefore rubbish.

Wait wait wait wait wait wait. A nearly ten year old operating system uses less resources than a two year old one? I have seen the light! *Installs Windows 3.1 on everything*

Endless Mike wrote:That is actually kind of a dumb reason when 160 GB will give you enough music such that you won't hear a song repeated for, what, a couple weeks of constant play? There's far, far better reasons to not want an iPod specifically (such as the fact that they don't play FLAC).

It will with rockbox. Custom firmware fixes all its flaws apart from capacity (maybe hardware too, but I've never owned one so I don't know how accurate the battery complaints are).

That still doesn't explain why you think you need more than 160 GB of music with you at any given time. Is it just an e-penis thing at this point? (And, of course, if you're just installing alternate firmware on it, why even bother in the first place, but you've already basically said you're not.)
Endless Mike wrote:Think of it this way:

I am a production studio. I can a) hire a guy full-time to do nothing but build and service computers running a hacked version of OS X that is never guaranteed to work with anything for, let's say, $50k/year if I'm lucky and then hope Apple doesn't notice and sue me for a portion of everything I've made using unlicensed software or b) pay a relatively small (in the scheme of things) premium per machine that comes warrantied with full technical and customer support from the company that makes them who will come to me and fix or replace anything that breaks and fold the responsibility of dealing with it into the general IT staff.

You seem to be missing the point that outside development studios (and very possibly even those), building their own machines is not something businesses do because it is cheaper in terms of manpower and less of a hassle to pay for a service contract.


or c) buy windows / GNU/linux / unix with support.

So, which businesses need OSX? Really need it?
Graphics design? Photoshop is the leading app, and runs on windows.
Web design? Same, but with dreamweaver.
Modelling? 3DSMax and maya run on both windows and linux.
Video design? possibly, but final cut pro isn't the be all and end all, adobe premiere, cinelerra, avid etc all exist and I've done some googling since my last reply - it's all preference for the interface, FCP has no extra features the others don't.
Audio production? protools works on windows.
Obviously servers should be running linux, so it's not there either.

All in all, apple is still the inferior choice.

Which businesses need Windows? Which businesses need any hardware newer than five years old? It's not a matter of needs, and as has been pointed out numerous times, it's rarely even a matter of cost, since a new computer, Apple, Dell, home-built, is a relatively small portion of operating costs, anyway. It costs way less to buy a machine using a program people already know than to train them on something new.

Not no experience, just not that much. And it's not all about apple vs FOSS, because there's the microsoft option as well.
And I couldn't care less about dreamweaver, I was unhappy with the ugly, slow pile of crap which is OSX.
The original computer is quite similar to what I'm buying at the moment, and out of curiosity (see if I could get a pc booting osx, win7, kubuntu, freebsd and solaris), I'd decided to check the price difference.
Eleven grand is heaps, and this was intended to be a HOME COMPUTER - which it is, a professional computer which needs to render etc should have something better than a mere HD4870.

You're confusing realtime game rendering which is incredibly imprecise when compared to professional level prerendered work. 3D rendering on a professional level is a CPU process. GPUs are not precise enough for it. The GPU is only needed when working on a project and is sufficient.
Why do you keep assuming it's for a business?
This is the kind of computer a mac user would have to buy if they wanted to game, the laptop components in the iMacs just don't cut it.

People aren't buying Macs to game, and the games that are purchased run fine, just not in super high mode which no one but a portion of the computer market smaller than Apple's share care about.
People can pirate Windows, too. Most businesses (including the self-employed) tend to not like that idea, too much.

I didn't mean pirating. I meant purchasing an osx licence and then installing on say an amd computer.

It's a license violation and someone building their own machine is probably a gamer and wants Windows, while businesses, again, like being able to call the manufacturer and having them fix stuff.
One would think that with a lower market share, and an alien operating system, apple would want to price competitively.

Apple is one of the top 5 computer manufacturers overall in the US market (actual placement depends on who you ask) and number 1 in computers over $1000 with 91% according to the NPD (aka the market segment they want).

Woegjiub
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:22 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Woegjiub » Wed Sep 16, 2009 2:24 pm UTC

Endless Mike wrote:Wait wait wait wait wait wait. A nearly ten year old operating system uses less resources than a two year old one? I have seen the light! *Installs Windows 3.1 on everything*

Man, that's way too bloated. FreeDos all the way.

Endless Mike wrote:That still doesn't explain why you think you need more than 160 GB of music with you at any given time. Is it just an e-penis thing at this point? (And, of course, if you're just installing alternate firmware on it, why even bother in the first place, but you've already basically said you're not.)

Well, I have 400 gigs of flac (equates to something like 80 gigs of mp3s), and I'm constantly buying new music. I really like the idea of having everything with me, even though it's pretty much impossible - I sometimes get the urge to hear random stuff I haven't listened to in ages, hence wanting the entire library.

Endless Mike wrote:Which businesses need Windows? Which businesses need any hardware newer than five years old? It's not a matter of needs, and as has been pointed out numerous times, it's rarely even a matter of cost, since a new computer, Apple, Dell, home-built, is a relatively small portion of operating costs, anyway. It costs way less to buy a machine using a program people already know than to train them on something new.

But the program they know will most likely run on 2 or more OSes, so....
Yeah, alright. I get the point. For some reason, there are people out there that actually like a dumbed-down os.

You're confusing realtime game rendering which is incredibly imprecise when compared to professional level prerendered work. 3D rendering on a professional level is a CPU process. GPUs are not precise enough for it. The GPU is only needed when working on a project and is sufficient.

Hold on.... OpenCL, etc.... I'm pretty sure the whole idea is that the GPU does a heap of work, and if not... why do ati/nvidia make overpowered cards like the tesla?

People aren't buying Macs to game, and the games that are purchased run fine, just not in super high mode which no one but a portion of the computer market smaller than Apple's share care about.

So mac user and high-end gamer are mutually exclusive tags?

Apple is one of the top 5 computer manufacturers overall in the US market (actual placement depends on who you ask) and number 1 in computers over $1000 with 91% according to the NPD (aka the market segment they want).

NINETY ONE PERCENT????
Holy crap....source?
How did this happen?
The plague has spread that far?
Hmmm... maybe this will aid linux adoption by getting people used to different platforms, especially since linux is the easiest of the big 3 to use.

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Endless Mike » Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:12 pm UTC

Woegjiub wrote:
Endless Mike wrote:Which businesses need Windows? Which businesses need any hardware newer than five years old? It's not a matter of needs, and as has been pointed out numerous times, it's rarely even a matter of cost, since a new computer, Apple, Dell, home-built, is a relatively small portion of operating costs, anyway. It costs way less to buy a machine using a program people already know than to train them on something new.

But the program they know will most likely run on 2 or more OSes, so....
Yeah, alright. I get the point. For some reason, there are people out there that actually like a dumbed-down os.

Yes, a full Unix and POSIX-compliant system is dumbed down. :roll: Get over yourself.

Hold on.... OpenCL, etc.... I'm pretty sure the whole idea is that the GPU does a heap of work, and if not... why do ati/nvidia make overpowered cards like the tesla?

I'm not going to pretend to understand how OpenCL works, but it's my understanding that a typical GPU isn't going to be as good at high-precision calculations as a CPU since it's not intended for that use, so they can add *some* computing power, but not as much as a better processor. Ignoring that, it still requires programs to be built for it, and with Snow Leopard being the first OS to adopt it, nothing is going to use it, yet.
People aren't buying Macs to game, and the games that are purchased run fine, just not in super high mode which no one but a portion of the computer market smaller than Apple's share care about.

So mac user and high-end gamer are mutually exclusive tags?

I'll say no but only because there has to be someone out there with a Mac Pro he bought for gaming, or someone with a Hackintosh he uses OS X on for everything but gaming (which barely even counts). It's very atypical of Mac users, however.

Apple is one of the top 5 computer manufacturers overall in the US market (actual placement depends on who you ask) and number 1 in computers over $1000 with 91% according to the NPD (aka the market segment they want).

NINETY ONE PERCENT????
Holy crap....source?
How did this happen?
The plague has spread that far?
Hmmm... maybe this will aid linux adoption by getting people used to different platforms, especially since linux is the easiest of the big 3 to use.

http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/artic ... 1248313624

I don't think it's the easiest to use by a long shot unless you're assuming a user who has never touched a computer in their lifetime. Shit, wouldn't something you call "dumbed down" be the easiest by definition?

stephentyrone
Posts: 778
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 10:58 pm UTC
Location: Palo Alto, CA

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby stephentyrone » Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:15 pm UTC

Endless Mike wrote:I'm not going to pretend to understand how OpenCL works, but it's my understanding that a typical GPU isn't going to be as good at high-precision calculations as a CPU since it's not intended for that use


This is roughly correct. Current generation GPUs don't have hardware for double-precision floating point.
GENERATION -16 + 31i: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum. Square it, and then add i to the generation.

User avatar
ian
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 3:55 pm UTC
Location: Sealand

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby ian » Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:22 pm UTC

As someone who mainly uses windows, occasionally Linux, and pretty much never OSX, I'd say OSX is by far the easiest to use and the most intuative.

User avatar
Berengal
Superabacus Mystic of the First Rank
Posts: 2707
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:51 am UTC
Location: Bergen, Norway
Contact:

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Berengal » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:19 pm UTC

stephentyrone wrote:
Endless Mike wrote:I'm not going to pretend to understand how OpenCL works, but it's my understanding that a typical GPU isn't going to be as good at high-precision calculations as a CPU since it's not intended for that use


This is roughly correct. Current generation GPUs don't have hardware for double-precision floating point.

Mine's had DP for over a year, but it's much more crap at it than it's at SP.
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who are motivated by money: As potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.

stephentyrone
Posts: 778
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 10:58 pm UTC
Location: Palo Alto, CA

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby stephentyrone » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:05 pm UTC

Berengal wrote:
stephentyrone wrote:This is roughly correct. Current generation GPUs don't have hardware for double-precision floating point.

Mine's had DP for over a year, but it's much more crap at it than it's at SP.

Yeah, what I should have said was "current generation GPUs don't have hardware support for double-precision floating point at speed". Though to be fair, mainstream (i.e. not professional/enthusiast cards) still mostly don't have double-precision support at all.
GENERATION -16 + 31i: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum. Square it, and then add i to the generation.

User avatar
cerbie
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: USA

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby cerbie » Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:55 pm UTC

Woegjiub wrote:Well, yeah.... it's only windows.
I think Microsoft and Dell would disagree.

Well, I can't see much of a difference between the picture on my $200 asus monitors and the $2000 apple ones at uni, so I don't think I'm the one to ask about that.
I'm certain you would be able to, you appear to know heaps about monitors.
Not heaps. $2000? Is that the monitor in AUD, or a whole iMac? I don't know what all the iMacs have used for various displays. With my father being an admin, I've had the luxury of growing up on good leftovers, and got to use enough different early LCDs to begin learning what made up the very obvious differences. There's nothing wrong with monitors that aren't expensive--I'd get an HP w2338h, if I needed a new one right now (230 USD)--but others aren't much more expensive for no reason.

Why yes, it is. If you prefer *n*xes, it'll be nicer to use than Windows, but I couldn't handle it. Xorg (and other freedesktop.org things) breaking regularly is a small price to pay.

I don't get anything breaking... ever.... (I used to in arch, but even kubuntu 9.10 alpha never breaks for me)
I've yet to enough work on any *buntu for any length of time. ALSA or Pulse breaks, or X never works right, or I can't compile something, etc.. I try every version, and I've yet to have as smooth of an experience as with other distros (distros that exhibit no problems tend to have older software than I want, such as SimplyMEPIS). Ubuntu consistently seems to delicate.

Then I'm clueless as to why it crawls, the admin has assured me there's nothing running on the osx pcs that aren't on the windows pcs, so....
Also, I'm buying an i7 rig with 12 gigs of ram (2GB sticks of 1600 for $80 :))
No idea, then. Though, I'd have to go cheap and get a Phenom :).

But their market share will not penetrate more deeply unless they can cater to those who do care about value....
They do cater to those that care about value, just not the value you care about, or I care about. Particularly those that find the cheaper units from other vendors, with Windows as their main OS, to be poor values. Value is about what you get for what you spend, not absolute price. Something cheap is not always something of value. Something expensive is not always a good value. They don't need to get a large market share. They need those with a large market share to not bother to cater to the minority that may find Apple products to be superior.

Hold on.... OpenCL, etc.... I'm pretty sure the whole idea is that the GPU does a heap of work, and if not... why do ati/nvidia make overpowered cards like the tesla?
All that functionality is still somewhat limited, and is not terribly mature. AMD and Intel are, IMO, both going in very good directions for long-term wide adoption (nVidia seems to be trying to make chips that are too expensive for their own good). Right now, though, you'd want to know that the specific application you use can use it for the specific tasks you do, before you decide to buy powerful video cards. When about everything has support, and the GPUs can do every operation on every data type that your CPU can do, including doubles and all ints (read: Decimal, and Decimal-like bignum), with exceptional performance in highly parallel operations compared to your CPU (if the worst case is >4x of a good CPU for large matrices, you'll always want to use the GPU for them), then it will be guaranteed to matter.

NINETY ONE PERCENT????
Holy crap....source?
How did this happen?
I don't have a source, but really, it makes sense. Everything in my PC, all totaled, has cost me just about $1000, and could be replaced by quad-cores, with as much performance per core, and a decent fanless gaming video card, for under $700, including the above mentioned monitor, a high quality CPU heatsink, nice PSU, etc.. Most people don't buy PCs much above $500, these days. Apple, OTOH, doesn't have too much available under $1000.

Yeah, alright. I get the point. For some reason, there are people out there that actually like a dumbed-down os.
Yes, there are. It took me almost five minutes of interrogation, just a couple days ago, to figure out that what my mother wanted to do was rotate pictures 90 degrees and put text labels on them. Lots of people don't want to have know anything remotely technical about how to do things with computers. They want them to be magical appliances.
DSenette: (...) on the whole, even a trained killer cow is kind of stupid.

Woegjiub
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:22 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Woegjiub » Thu Sep 17, 2009 2:35 am UTC

Not heaps. $2000? Is that the monitor in AUD, or a whole iMac? I don't know what all the iMacs have used for various displays. With my father being an admin, I've had the luxury of growing up on good leftovers, and got to use enough different early LCDs to begin learning what made up the very obvious differences. There's nothing wrong with monitors that aren't expensive--I'd get an HP w2338h, if I needed a new one right now (230 USD)--but others aren't much more expensive for no reason.

Apple charge $1600 for the monitors, I got mine for $190 each (160 USD). I probably rounded up rather too far there.


I've yet to enough work on any *buntu for any length of time. ALSA or Pulse breaks, or X never works right, or I can't compile something, etc.. I try every version, and I've yet to have as smooth of an experience as with other distros (distros that exhibit no problems tend to have older software than I want, such as SimplyMEPIS). Ubuntu consistently seems too delicate.

I'm the opposite.
I'd been using debian, slackware, arch, suse, mepis, mint, pclinuxos etc, and refusing to use kubuntu because of all the naysayers.
I used to have heaps of problems, but kubuntu has run perfectly every time.
Sometimes ATi's driver has a fit, but that's the only problem, and actually hasn't much to do with the OS, but the hardware manufacturer.

No idea, then. Though, I'd have to go cheap and get a Phenom :).

I was originally going to get a phenomII, but the price difference between the two was so minimal (1300 vs 1600) that I figured waiting longer and getting an i7 was better. My problem is that there's always another step up that isn't too much more, so I keep saving... and then there's always new hardware around the corner, so I wait for that too.... I end up putting off getting a new pc for ages.

Endless Mike wrote:Yes, a full Unix and POSIX-compliant system is dumbed down. :roll: Get over yourself.

I know it's fully POSIX-compliant, and is unix, but it IS dumbed down.
There's almost no room for cusomizability, it's crippled. Every mac screenshot looks identical.
With windows and linux, one actually uses the os, tweaks the shell or WM, etc. I edit the registry and the config files to make it act precisely how I want.
mac appears to have people not use the os, but rather just the applications.

I'll say no but only because there has to be someone out there with a Mac Pro he bought for gaming, or someone with a Hackintosh he uses OS X on for everything but gaming (which barely even counts). It's very atypical of Mac users, however.

So... would you suggest that the number is smaller than even that of linux gamers?

http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Apple-has-91-of-market-for-1000-PCs-says-NPD/1248313624

That's so odd.
Here, it seems like nobody uses the damn things, excepting uni students with macbooks (that a large number put linux on).
Stores don't really sell apple computers, but windows is everywhere.

I don't think it's the easiest to use by a long shot unless you're assuming a user who has never touched a computer in their lifetime. Shit, wouldn't something you call "dumbed down" be the easiest by definition?

I am assuming someone who has not learned how to use any os.
In linux, you chuck the disc in, click next, next, next and it's installed.
Installing apps is as simple as searching for what you want in the add/remove software app.
It comes with office, picture viewers, the best web browser, torrent clients, a fully featured burning suite, and so much more.
Honestly, Linux with KDE is the simplest and easiest to use, the best looking, the most advanced, and the most customizable.

They do cater to those that care about value, just not the value you care about, or I care about. Particularly those that find the cheaper units from other vendors, with Windows as their main OS, to be poor values. Value is about what you get for what you spend, not absolute price. Something cheap is not always something of value. Something expensive is not always a good value. They don't need to get a large market share. They need those with a large market share to not bother to cater to the minority that may find Apple products to be superior.

The only people targeting apple are canonical, from what I can gather.
Microsoft stated not so long ago that the #1 enemy was piracy, and #2 was linux.
Mark Shuttleworth said that he wanted ubuntu to be as polished and unified as OSX.

All that functionality is still somewhat limited, and is not terribly mature. AMD and Intel are, IMO, both going in very good directions for long-term wide adoption (nVidia seems to be trying to make chips that are too expensive for their own good). Right now, though, you'd want to know that the specific application you use can use it for the specific tasks you do, before you decide to buy powerful video cards. When about everything has support, and the GPUs can do every operation on every data type that your CPU can do, including doubles and all ints (read: Decimal, and Decimal-like bignum), with exceptional performance in highly parallel operations compared to your CPU (if the worst case is >4x of a good CPU for large matrices, you'll always want to use the GPU for them), then it will be guaranteed to matter.

So, it's not quite there yet, but soon it will be.
You think NVidia are going to fall somewhat?
Opinions on larabee?

I don't have a source, but really, it makes sense. Everything in my PC, all totaled, has cost me just about $1000, and could be replaced by quad-cores, with as much performance per core, and a decent fanless gaming video card, for under $700, including the above mentioned monitor, a high quality CPU heatsink, nice PSU, etc.. Most people don't buy PCs much above $500, these days. Apple, OTOH, doesn't have too much available under $1000.

With cloud services becoming so prominent, I guess people really don't need to.

Yes, there are. It took me almost five minutes of interrogation, just a couple days ago, to figure out that what my mother wanted to do was rotate pictures 90 degrees and put text labels on them. Lots of people don't want to have know anything remotely technical about how to do things with computers. They want them to be magical appliances.

*facepalm*

User avatar
Vault
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 5:00 pm UTC
Location: Just past the event horizon
Contact:

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Vault » Thu Sep 17, 2009 2:46 am UTC

Just an observation, you're comparing Apple's high end 30" monitor to some 24" one that you purchased. Check other monitors in the same size bracket, and they're almost all similarly priced.

Woegjiub
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:22 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Woegjiub » Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:33 am UTC

Vault wrote:Just an observation, you're comparing Apple's high end 30" monitor to some 24" one that you purchased. Check other monitors in the same size bracket, and they're almost all similarly priced.

I'm comparing the 24" to another 24" actually. Resolution, response time and colour depth are all I care about

User avatar
Vault
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 5:00 pm UTC
Location: Just past the event horizon
Contact:

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Vault » Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:54 am UTC

Woegjiub wrote:
Not heaps. $2000? Is that the monitor in AUD, or a whole iMac? I don't know what all the iMacs have used for various displays. With my father being an admin, I've had the luxury of growing up on good leftovers, and got to use enough different early LCDs to begin learning what made up the very obvious differences. There's nothing wrong with monitors that aren't expensive--I'd get an HP w2338h, if I needed a new one right now (230 USD)--but others aren't much more expensive for no reason.

Apple charge $1600 for the monitors, I got mine for $190 each (160 USD). I probably rounded up rather too far there.

Woegjiub wrote:I'm comparing the 24" to another 24" actually. Resolution, response time and colour depth are all I care about


24" Apple Monitor: $900
30" Apple Monitor: $1800

I'm not saying that they're monitors aren't absurdly priced, but they aren't charging $1600 for a 24" monitor.

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7573
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby phlip » Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:03 am UTC

Woegjiub wrote:mac appears to have people not use the os, but rather just the applications.

You're saying that like it's a bad thing?

That sounds pretty ideal to me. Spend less time screwing around trying to get the OS to do what you want, and more time actually getting on with what you want to do.

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

Woegjiub
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:22 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Woegjiub » Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:36 am UTC

Vault wrote:24" Apple Monitor: $900
30" Apple Monitor: $1800

I'm not saying that they're monitors aren't absurdly priced, but they aren't charging $1600 for a 24" monitor.


24" Apple Monitor
Okay, looks like I was a little off. It's $1500 (Note: Australian Dollars.), compared to my $190 (AUD) for an acer.

I think it's more than a little unfair that we pay 1300 US, for the same item you get for 900. From the same vendor.

phlip wrote:You're saying that like it's a bad thing?

That sounds pretty ideal to me. Spend less time screwing around trying to get the OS to do what you want, and more time actually getting on with what you want to do.

Yeah, but where's the fun in that? :p
Not everybody wants the same dull, boring carbon-copy interface.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Zamfir » Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:48 am UTC

Woegjiub wrote:Not everybody wants the same dull, boring carbon-copy interface.

But most people do want that. Especially people who buy a computer to make money, instead of making money to buy computers.

Woegjiub
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:22 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Woegjiub » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:26 am UTC

Zamfir wrote:
Woegjiub wrote:Not everybody wants the same dull, boring carbon-copy interface.

But most people do want that. Especially people who buy a computer to make money, instead of making money to buy computers.

Image
Really? How strange.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Zamfir » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:31 am UTC

If I visit that link I am the 100.000st visitor. Is that the point?

Woegjiub
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:22 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Woegjiub » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:38 am UTC

Zamfir wrote:If I visit that link I am the 100.000st visitor. Is that the point?

It's just an imageshack link, so as not to take up room.
I've got adblock on, so I wouldn't be able to tell you.

User avatar
cerbie
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: USA

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby cerbie » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:13 am UTC

Woegjiub wrote:So, it's not quite there yet, but soon it will be.
You think NVidia are going to fall somewhat?
They've been having yield problems for awhile, yet keep trying to make monsters. They are adding whole swaths of processing units, instead of making all of what is there more flexible. They don't have categorically superior Windows drivers, anymore. If they can't pull off some good midrange and IGP chips soon, I don't see how they're going to keep up. Once Intel and AMD integrate IGP, then what? Discrete graphics aren't going away, but the market for them will certainly continue to shrink, and non-Intel/AMD IGP will be a redundancy.

Opinions on larabee?
I doubt Larrabee will be Radeon killer or anything, though I'm sure Intel will be competitive. The potential, I think, comes from a real C/C++ compiler, and hardware support for common data types at decent speeds. What if Matlab could transparently offload higher-precision work to one of these GPUs, complete with tweaked-to-hell assembly? Or, what if DB2, SQL Server, Postgres, etc., start supporting such offloading for tasks that are better suited to having more parallelism (will Intel support OpenCL?)? Even if it's not extremely fast compared to the CPU, with binary-compatibility of most of the data, the two could mix and match tasks with little overhead. Or, what about companies writing entire applications made to run on these things, that normally require more specialized hardware? It could take a few hardware generations for it all to pan out, but the potential is there.

(...) Apple, OTOH, doesn't have too much available under $1000.

With cloud services becoming so prominent, I guess people really don't need to.
There's also the bit where a current Celeron with 2GB RAM and IGP can do almost everything most home users want to do with their PCs.

Yes, there are. It took me almost five minutes of interrogation, just a couple days ago, to figure out that what my mother wanted to do was rotate pictures 90 degrees and put text labels on them. Lots of people don't want to have know anything remotely technical about how to do things with computers. They want them to be magical appliances.

*facepalm*
People who aren't the least bit technically inclined, who have no interest in how things work at any level, still need to use computers on a regular basis.
DSenette: (...) on the whole, even a trained killer cow is kind of stupid.

User avatar
Naurgul
Posts: 623
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:50 am UTC
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Naurgul » Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:33 am UTC

Spoilered for unseriousness:
Spoiler:
This isn't supposed to be a serious forum anyway, is it? Still, I'm so sorry. :P
Last edited by Naurgul on Thu Sep 17, 2009 1:20 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Praised be the nightmare, which reveals to us that we have the power to create hell.

User avatar
Vault
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 5:00 pm UTC
Location: Just past the event horizon
Contact:

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Vault » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:45 pm UTC

Woegjiub wrote:
Vault wrote:24" Apple Monitor: $900
30" Apple Monitor: $1800

I'm not saying that they're monitors aren't absurdly priced, but they aren't charging $1600 for a 24" monitor.


24" Apple Monitor
Okay, looks like I was a little off. It's $1500 (Note: Australian Dollars.), compared to my $190 (AUD) for an acer.

I think it's more than a little unfair that we pay 1300 US, for the same item you get for 900. From the same vendor.


Okay, that's a bit absurd, I was expecting it to be the US price, adjusted for exchange rates.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Dream » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:59 pm UTC

Vault wrote:
Woegjiub wrote:
Vault wrote:24" Apple Monitor: $900
30" Apple Monitor: $1800

I'm not saying that they're monitors aren't absurdly priced, but they aren't charging $1600 for a 24" monitor.


24" Apple Monitor
Okay, looks like I was a little off. It's $1500 (Note: Australian Dollars.), compared to my $190 (AUD) for an acer.

I think it's more than a little unfair that we pay 1300 US, for the same item you get for 900. From the same vendor.


Okay, that's a bit absurd, I was expecting it to be the US price, adjusted for exchange rates.

While Apple do indeed charge differently in different territories, it's usually not that different. It's within the bounds of exchange rate adjustments and tax and duty variations. But getting anything to Australia is actually quite pricey. When I worked for a wine importer there, the differences were staggering, but of course wine requires quite expensive shipping methods. Thisrtyish per cent on something bulky like a computer monitor doesn't surprise me at all. My audio monitors cost me about AU$750, and were on sale in Europe later that year for €300. That's about the same discrepancy.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Endless Mike » Thu Sep 17, 2009 1:49 pm UTC

Woegjiub wrote:
Endless Mike wrote:Yes, a full Unix and POSIX-compliant system is dumbed down. :roll: Get over yourself.

I know it's fully POSIX-compliant, and is unix, but it IS dumbed down.
There's almost no room for cusomizability, it's crippled. Every mac screenshot looks identical.
With windows and linux, one actually uses the os, tweaks the shell or WM, etc. I edit the registry and the config files to make it act precisely how I want.
mac appears to have people not use the os, but rather just the applications.

I don't do any of that, and I'd wager few people really do much more than change their desktop image or task bar color or whatever. If it does what I need to do, why bother messing with things? The only thing I did in Windows 7 was turn the task bar green. With OS X, I just made the Dock hidden. Other than that, I can do everything I want without any effort in either of them, so I see no reason to do any more. The ability to twerk the number of pixels high the task bar is doesn't really do anything for me. (Or you can run in X all the time, which comes on the install disc, or install KDE on if you want. Oh right, you wouldn't actually know that since all of your actual experience is complaining about Dreamweaver.)

I'll say no but only because there has to be someone out there with a Mac Pro he bought for gaming, or someone with a Hackintosh he uses OS X on for everything but gaming (which barely even counts). It's very atypical of Mac users, however.

So... would you suggest that the number is smaller than even that of linux gamers?

I dunno. I've never looked into it. Again, I can only say no because there's more OS X users than Linux users.

http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Apple-has-91-of-market-for-1000-PCs-says-NPD/1248313624

That's so odd.
Here, it seems like nobody uses the damn things, excepting uni students with macbooks (that a large number put linux on).
Stores don't really sell apple computers, but windows is everywhere.

It's abundantly clear why if you read the article. The Mac Mini is the only new machine they sell under $1000. Every other manufacturer sells machines for less than that (and seem to be fighting for the low-end with netbooks).

I don't think it's the easiest to use by a long shot unless you're assuming a user who has never touched a computer in their lifetime. Shit, wouldn't something you call "dumbed down" be the easiest by definition?

I am assuming someone who has not learned how to use any os.
In linux, you chuck the disc in, click next, next, next and it's installed.
Installing apps is as simple as searching for what you want in the add/remove software app.
It comes with office, picture viewers, the best web browser, torrent clients, a fully featured burning suite, and so much more.
Honestly, Linux with KDE is the simplest and easiest to use, the best looking, the most advanced, and the most customizable.

Installing Snow Leopard and Windows 7 were exactly like that for me, what's your point? Not that it's terribly relevant, since most people are not installing their OSes. I didn't know Linux distros shipped with Chrome, though. That's a new one to me. And hey, it's that easy with Linux unless some hardware (wireless, anyone?) doesn't agree with it. Customizablability really has nothing to do with ease of use, and for someone with no knowledge of computing would actually confuse matters.

The only people targeting apple are canonical, from what I can gather.
Microsoft stated not so long ago that the #1 enemy was piracy, and #2 was linux.
Mark Shuttleworth said that he wanted ubuntu to be as polished and unified as OSX.

This will never happen since OSS projects can barely agree internally, forget with other projects to make a singular operating system.

Woegjiub
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:22 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Woegjiub » Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:03 pm UTC

Endless Mike wrote:I don't do any of that, and I'd wager few people really do much more than change their desktop image or task bar color or whatever. If it does what I need to do, why bother messing with things? The only thing I did in Windows 7 was turn the task bar green. With OS X, I just made the Dock hidden. Other than that, I can do everything I want without any effort in either of them, so I see no reason to do any more. The ability to twerk the number of pixels high the task bar is doesn't really do anything for me. (Or you can run in X all the time, which comes on the install disc, or install KDE on if you want. Oh right, you wouldn't actually know that since all of your actual experience is complaining about Dreamweaver.)

Now: first of all, please refrain from being so aggressive, I'm not trolling you.
Because the defaults are horrid?
I twerk the hell out of everything, to make the UI into what I want.
And I did know that KDE can be installed on macs, FYI. I've used apple computers more than you know, please stop talking about dreamweaver because I never even opened the damn thing in osx, as I knew from previous windows experience that I hated it.
I have been basically running osx with a tiledwm-like ui (firefox full left+centre, two tabbed terminals taking up the right 1/3)
As long as the menubar isn't able to be in the application window without running x, and the dock can't be replaced with a systray+task manager, it's not customisable enough.

I dunno. I've never looked into it. Again, I can only say no because there's more OS X users than Linux users.

In the US, maybe. Worldwide? no. Consider Europe, Africa and Asia - German SUSE Linux and Chinese red flag Linux etc. There are hardly any osx users outside of the US.

It's abundantly clear why if you read the article. The Mac Mini is the only new machine they sell under $1000. Every other manufacturer sells machines for less than that (and seem to be fighting for the low-end with netbooks).

So it's basically that apple overcharge, and the others sell the same thing for under $1000? ok.

Installing Snow Leopard and Windows 7 were exactly like that for me, what's your point? Not that it's terribly relevant, since most people are not installing their OSes. I didn't know Linux distros shipped with Chrome, though. That's a new one to me. And hey, it's that easy with Linux unless some hardware (wireless, anyone?) doesn't agree with it. Customizablability really has nothing to do with ease of use, and for someone with no knowledge of computing would actually confuse matters.

Chrome isn't very customisable, there are almost no addons, and where are the mouse gestures? Hell, there's not even an about:config page to twerk everything.
But yes, chromium is in the kubuntu repos.
Haha, you are aware that the old wireless thing just isn't true anymore? I've installed more copies of linux than I can count in the past year, and most of them on computers with wireless. I've not had a single instance where all the hardware wasn't detected and the appropriate drivers installed.
Hell, it does one better than windows there - it informs you of the manufacturer's proprietary drivers, and you can install them with one click, rather than going to nvidia or ati's website.
When I said that it was both the easiest and the most customisable, one did not infer the other.
It *is* the easiest to use, and it also happens to be the most customisable.

This will never happen since OSS projects can barely agree internally, forget with other projects to make a singular operating system.

Well, KDE is already superior in appearance and a unified look+feel anyway, so I guess you're wrong there.
And the diversity of GNU/Linux is one of the things which is so beautiful about it. The same kernel can power the roadrunner, or your ipod.

User avatar
sparks
Posts: 119
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 7:24 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby sparks » Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:55 pm UTC

lulzfish wrote:They stay in business by selling iPods and Macbooks which are slightly less overpriced than the Mac Pros.



This. And I'm nearly positive the people who DO dish out so much for Mac Pros it's probably because of the brand, be it because they trust Apple a lot or being it's "cool".
(icon by clockwork-harlequin.net)
Image
"An idea that is not dangerous is unworthy of being called an idea at all." ~ Oscar Wilde

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Dream » Thu Sep 17, 2009 4:06 pm UTC

Woegjiub wrote:There are hardly any osx users outside of the US.

I wonder what all those Mac stores here in the UK are selling? Vista probably. Ditto the ones in Australia and Ireland, the two other countries I've lived in. I bet those dozens of people I see every day with MacBooks are all running Ubuntu, and the entire of my uni department is running things that just look like Macs, but are in fact something else. The Mac based business I worked for last year was probably an anomaly, and the majority of photographers I've know running Mac hardware was probably just my imagination. Given this,
Woegjiub wrote:I'm not trolling you.
Looks a bit suspect, don't you think?
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Endless Mike » Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:08 pm UTC

Dream wrote:[
Woegjiub wrote:I'm not trolling you.
Looks a bit suspect, don't you think?

Seriously. Every "argument" is "LALALALALALALA LINUX IS BETTER BECAUSE I SAY SO AND I AM THE ONLY ONE WHOSE OPINION THAT MATTERS!!!"

User avatar
ash.gti
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:18 am UTC
Location: Probably a coffee shop.

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby ash.gti » Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:17 pm UTC

I don't know if you can read japanese (I only know a little) but in Japan Macs are more popular than any other OS http://bcnranking.jp/news/0711/071108_8930.html with a peak at 60.7% of the OS market.

But then again, Linux got all the way to what 6% when vista came out in Japan (its recorded peak) so, you know lots of people use it too...

Linux dominates the server market. I wouldn't put anything else on a server. It also does well on certain embedded systems, but its popularity overall (yes internationally) doesn't rival OS X. Take these numbers with a grain of salt, they only cover a limited amount of websites http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php . I am afraid most people don't use Linux on their desktop.

Another interesting point, i looked at a few hardware reports on Mac vs other name brand hardware provides and its kinda funny because the 'Apple tax' is the highest on their low end systems (ie, Macbook and Mac Mini) and actually the highest end mac's have the smallest 'Apple tax' see http://gizmodo.com/5065133/the-truth-ab ... -apple-tax

Lots of people don't like OS X's UI and thats fine, you don't have to, you seem perfectly content with KDE so whats the big deal anyway? You know if you want you can boot up without the OS X GUI at all, or you can run X over everything, there are even people who use "PureDarwin" which is the OS X kernel without all the proprietary OS X GUI parts. Most of OS X is completely open source anyway.
# drinks WAY to much espresso

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Dream » Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:08 pm UTC

Endless Mike wrote:
Dream wrote:
Woegjiub wrote:I'm not trolling you.
Looks a bit suspect, don't you think?

Seriously. Every "argument" is "LALALALALALALA LINUX IS BETTER BECAUSE I SAY SO AND I AM THE ONLY ONE WHOSE OPINION THAT MATTERS!!!"

"How dare Apple stay in business."
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
ian
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 3:55 pm UTC
Location: Sealand

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby ian » Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:15 pm UTC

More 'I don't like apple and other users must be just the same as me, so I can't understand why they go with apple'

User avatar
lulzfish
Posts: 1214
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 8:17 am UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby lulzfish » Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:15 pm UTC

I'm hearing, "If I argue against Apple hard enough, will people stop using it?"

And the answer is no. No matter how much any of us hates Apple, people will still buy their stuff, and making sound, logical arguments against them will have absolutely no effect.
You just have to treat Apple like quantum physics: You don't understand it, you don't have to, just try not to think about it.
Unless you DO understand quantum physics.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Dream » Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:36 pm UTC

lulzfish wrote:And the answer is no. No matter how much any of us hates Apple, people will still buy their stuff, and making sound, logical arguments against them will have absolutely no effect.
You just have to treat Apple like quantum physics: You don't understand it, you don't have to, just try not to think about it.

That kind of arrogance just makes you look like a prick. People who use Apple products looked at the choices available for their needs, and decided that Apple delivered the best solution. Even if their choice was "MacBook vs Vaio: Which Looks Cooler in Starbuck's?", they still chose on their own merit scale. You don't get to tell them that their choice is unsound, illogical or even hard to understand. You don't get to take them for fools just because you disagree with them.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
cerbie
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: USA

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby cerbie » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:30 pm UTC

Or, MacBook v. Viao: which will be easier to get the next OS running on (Sony loves to pull the, "we only support XP, bye," crap, whilst making some their hardware just oddball enough not to work with reference drivers)?
DSenette: (...) on the whole, even a trained killer cow is kind of stupid.

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Endless Mike » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:36 pm UTC

This thread probably should have just been ended with "because people buy their stuff and they have good management such that their profits are used intelligently."

Woegjiub
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:22 pm UTC

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby Woegjiub » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:51 am UTC

Endless Mike wrote:This thread probably should have just been ended with "because people buy their stuff and they have good management such that their profits are used intelligently."

Or with "They stay in business by selling iPods and Macbooks which are slightly less overpriced than the Mac Pros."
That was a good response.
Believe it or not, I've taken in most of what you have said. I do wish that you would refrain from using such aggressive and insulting tones though.
In an ideal world, OS share would be divided at the consumer level 30% OSX, 30% Win, 30% Linux, 10% *BSD and other, with most applications and games being developed for all 3 major platforms, and only a 20% surcharge over the purchase prices of hardware for assembly etc.
Software vendors should really rely on software sales rather than bundling with proprietary hardware :(.
I've learned much from this thread, and although it probably did seem like I was trolling, I was merely biased and misinformed.
So yes, linux is what I'll use, and what I'll recommend to people who want something easy without having to pay through the nose (I do free support), but I'll stop (audibly) insulting OSX - despite my internal opinion that they are just as evil as microsoft or google.

User avatar
ash.gti
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:18 am UTC
Location: Probably a coffee shop.

Re: How do apple stay in business?

Postby ash.gti » Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:38 am UTC

Woegjiub wrote:Software vendors should really rely on software sales rather than bundling with proprietary hardware .


Bah, Apple is a hardware vendor primarily that happens to make a few pieces of software to promote their hardware. iTunes is a source of revenue but iPods are a HUGE part of Apple's revenue. They are not a software vendor. The software they make is simply to promote their hardware. If its your hardware you have every write to control what software runs on it, I see no reason why if I made a robotic lawnmower that it should have to run some piece of software some one wrote so it can play the radio while it does it. Its my hardware and I say "X runs on it" then X goes on it. If Y and Z still work on it thats all fine and dandy, but as a hardware vendor there is no reason I should have to officially support Y and Z unless it was my original intent. (ie, linux and windows work just fine on any piece of mac hardware, but i doubt you'd get any help from the Genius Bar if your brought in a laptop with Ubuntu)

Thats like calling Nokia a software vendor because they built and maintain Symbain. Nokia is not a software vendor last time I checked.
# drinks WAY to much espresso


Return to “Religious Wars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests