toggle

AAPL Stock: 562.29 ( -3.03 )

MacNN News

Commentary on Apple market share/install base

updated 03:35 pm EST, Thu April 1, 2004

Apple market share

Kelly McNeill of osViews comments on the difference between as it relates to the computer industry. "When a research company reports that Apple's market share has declined and is at 2%, they may very well be correct, but this is not an indicator that Mac users are defecting to Windows. Instead, it indicates that the number of Macs sold during that time period didn't grow as fast as Windows did. The market share statistic doesn't indicate that the vast majority of Windows users are simply replacing their old systems or that Mac users don't typically upgrade their computers as often."

by MacNN Staff

(31)

TAGS :

Apple

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

Nostromo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2001

0

04/01, 03:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
Finally!

...someone has the sense to put this argument under the noses of the public. Let's just hope enough people see it, and that it sinks in. I'm sick and tired of hearing that "2% marketshare" c***.

cageyjames
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2002

0

04/01, 03:59pm | report spam | close Reply |
Meh...

Won't matter at all. Installed base can't be much higher than the marketshare. What is the installed base of OS X? That would be better than asking users how many IIcx's they have in their closet...

Ratm
Mac Elite

Joined: Dec 2001

0

04/01, 04:05pm | report spam | close Reply |
Love it

LOL @ cageyjames. It, it can't be!!!. I won't except the truth.... Apple is not dying......not going to die......dead!!!11.

Bryson
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2002

0

04/01, 04:05pm | report spam | close Reply |
This is good

I think that it's good that someone points this out. Market share is a statistic and cannot fully paint the picture of how people use their computers. Now, who knows if the stats given in this article are correct. To some degree it doesnt matter.

Ive said for years that:
A) Mac users replace their systems less frequently
B) Mac users are more active computer users on average. So many PC's are bought to be used as basically dumb terminals in corporate environments to use email, Word and surf the web. People using these systems.
C) Relative marketshare may not matter in terms of software due to the reason above. A developer will make a Mac version if they can profit from it, and a lot clearly can. A computer sitting on a desk over the weekend at someone office isn't being used as much as say a person's individual system at home. More software will be purchased for those in the long run and here is where Mac users tend to be very active.

chimericalone
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2004

0

04/01, 04:16pm | report spam | close Reply |
Apple vs. everyone else?

They also shouldn't compare Macs to everyone else. Of course PC's have an overwhelming "marketshare". Apple should be compared directly to individual PC companies like Dell, HP-Compaq, Gateway-eMachines, Sony, Toshiba... I'd like to see how much more "marketshare" or "installed base" each one of those companies have compared to Apple.

bobolicious
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2002

0

04/01, 04:37pm | report spam | close Reply |
My sad truth...

...is that from 1989 until January 2003 I used macs exclusively... Since that time I bought on a whim a cheap demo peecee to play with... within a month I had upgraded 3x to a full on laptop & sold one of my macs... I also recommended a peecee for my mother, so in the last 1.5 yrs it has been PC +4 & Macs -1...

While OS-X is finally hitting its stride (and is beautiful) a 266 pc still blows away a 400 G4 for basic speed of use - the delay in drilling down websites is so significant that I almost exclusively use the pc for browsing...

The XP that ships with a PC is still 'current' while Apple has slowly brainwashed the Mac community into now apparently 'annual' upgrade cash cow, with many features from OS-9 (ie file labels) are still beig implemented & some unbelievably basic features such as a 'system restore' option still reside only on the windows side...

I consider now that Apple's infamous & much ballyhooed 'dock' was basically ripped off from windows...

I still like Apple, but they really need to speed things up & have better basic functionality to impress me - when websites don't work or take 5x longer to load & data management is proprietary &/or almost impossible it gets difficult to stay enthusiastic...

;-)

Makosuke
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

04/01, 04:40pm | report spam | close Reply |
Good

Glad to see somebody finally pointing this out. I've worked with home users doing tech support and troubleshooting long enough to know that this is a fairly accurate picture of how things go; there are a surprising number of older Macs still doing active duty, proportionally higher than Wintels of the same age. Macs generally get handed down, PCs more often than not seem to just get junked.

I would very much like to see the installed base of OSX as a percentage versus Win2K and higher; it might be disappointing, but it'd be an interesting comparison.

I know that my high-traffic, highly platform-agnostic website (and actually, one that tends to get a younger, more PC-centric audience on average) sees about 2.6% of traffic from Macs, although depending on how many of the "OS Unknown" browsers are actually Macs, it could be higher.

JLL
Professional Poster

Joined: Apr 1999

0

04/01, 04:47pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: My sad truth..

I consider now that Apple's infamous & much ballyhooed 'dock' was basically ripped off from windows...

The Dock has been in NeXTStep since 1988 (Mac OS X is based on NeXTStep) - who's ripping off who here?

beeble
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2004

0

04/01, 04:58pm | report spam | close Reply |
bobolicious

Compared to OS X Longhorn is almost current but won't be out for a while.

Maybe a 400MHz G4 is slow if you're using an older OS like 10.1.5 (10.2 and 10.3 are significantly faster). It will run slower on a system that was designed for classic Mac OS. But show me a 266MHz Pentium of any type that'll run WinXP. Considering the machine can't actually boot, I'd say the G4, no matter how fast it operatres, would be more productive than a 266MHz paperweight.

Also try using Safari to view websites. IE is deliberately slow to make you think that macs are slower than PC's. I've always used another browser rather than IE because of this. Safari, for my needs, is the best one and it's at least twices as fast as IE.

A friend of mine bought a new PC a few days ago. It took her 6 hours to get it up and running because it didn't recognize her keyboard as the correct type. With in 12 hours of that, it had hard crashed 3 times. The last time, I was there to see it. She had no apps open and clicked the button to shutdown. Bang! Frozen! We had to pull the power cord out. Where was no software on the machine except pre installed titles.

After that little display of MS technical wizardry, I couldn't make myself buy a PC. It's not that they are harder to use (which they certainly are, constantly getting in your way when your trying to do something) but I simply don't have the time to deal with them. That's why I moved to the mac in the first place. I got sick of trying to keep my machine working in well. I have a friend who formats his system drive and reinstalls everything once a month just to keep his system stable.

I just don't have the time to waste on a less reliable, stable system with a slower workflow.

bfalchuk
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2003

0

04/01, 05:05pm | report spam | close Reply |
So well said!

This is so well said. I love the last point here about PCs getting in the way. There are so many times my Compaq (1 GHz PIII Win2K) at work or my Gateway (1.6 GHz PVI WinXP Pro) get in my way. They do nothing but make me angry. They are slow, can't multi-task for s***, and think they know better than me what I'm trying to do (like sometimes opening links in emails as new browser windows and sometimes taking over a browsing session I've already started).

I HATE Windows. It's the worst thing I deal with in my day. My PC at home is MUCH slower than my Mac at surfing, scrolling, etc. Oh, and don't even try to put a PC laptop to sleep. Good god, you'd think you were trying to end world hunger when you try to get it to wake up so you can, oh, I don't know, use it.

I am a computer wiz, and very well versed in the land of PCs, and I HATE them...they are terrible. This IDIOT who says a 266 PC will outrun a 400 mHz G4 knows nothing. The guy who said it won't boot is right. And, if it somehow does boot, it'll crash incessantly. How is that productive?

gudin
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2000

0

04/01, 05:24pm | report spam | close Reply |
266 pc

I don't know if it won't boot with XP, but it certainly won't be overly useful. At work I've installed XP on several 333 machines, and they work...but they're slow, and inconsistent. Not to mention the install process was a bear, and was like voodoo. However, they eventually worked...er...adequately.

At home I have an iMac G3 at 400 Mhz. It's running Jaguar, and it is WAAAAAAY more usable than the 333 P-IIIs, or the 450s or the 550s.

I don't know what the deal is with this guy's 400 G4, but I'd guess it's running OS X Public Beta or something for it not to blow the doors off a 266 PC in XP.

klinux
Senior User

Joined: Jul 2002

0

04/01, 05:27pm | report spam | close Reply |
Funny

"Market share is a statistic and cannot fully paint the picture of how people use their computers."

So, "install base" is NOT a statisc and CAN fully paint the picture of how people use their computers???

And here is what Steve cares - market share! Do you think Steve wants you to keep running that G4 400 and not upgrade so you will forever be be part of the insall base and not the market share?

Macman069
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2003

0

04/01, 05:29pm | report spam | close Reply |
wow

if your using a g4 400 with osx you WILL come up short. and i know your not using XP on a 266 machine because that would be dog slow. just as slow as my 300 that i had running xp. not a good choice. run an os thats built for a 400 mhz g4 and get all your speed back. dont try to run things that are just stupid to do. next youll be crying about you cant run panther on your se 30 because it runs too slow.(not to mntion it wont install)

and you have the nerve to talk about "The XP that ships with a PC is still 'current' while Apple has slowly brainwashed the Mac community into now apparently 'annual' upgrade cash cow" ?brainwashed? obviously if you stick with a pc that long, youare brainwashed by M$ when they keep telling you how stable and reliable the new OS is, while quietly slipping in those 40 + updates service packs, and security patches. they say that same c*** every time something comes out and its always bs. you dont have to upgrade anything on the mac or pc side if you dont want to. but at least skipping a 10.2 to a 10.3 upgrade wont leave your computer unusabale or unstable like not upgrading from 98 to XP. with that scenario, you either get a crappy crashy buggy and insecure OS, or you get a bggy crappy insecure OS with a bit more stability and a pretty OSX knockof interface. xp is way more stable than 98 we all know this. but talk about a cash cow. i know people who have lost quite a bit of money because clients could not wait any longer while the graphics departments got their pc's running right again, and having to get basic color correctionweel, correct, or fix a network clogging worm that halts production. and being that xp was what, 200 dollars when it came out? osx is usually 130 and at least when apple upgrades it, you are actually geting A LOT OF s*** . while MS doesnt really add much to their OS, they just constantlky fix it and patch it and update it and have you reboot 13 times because you have to instal one update after another after you hose your system and reinstall. with osx, you update with one main package and reboot and continue working again. and if my computer was constantly going through problems, and having system trouble because i uninstalled a program that stupidly erased some important shared dll or whatever, i would want a "system restore" too. but my new mac dont do that. its not stupid enough to just let a program install, then uninstall deleting system files or shared files ""that may interfere with teh operatin of othe rapplications, or teh system itself.""
I had this thing for 2 years and just got into panther and it runs like when i first bought it(accepts for teh new cpu i threw in there, its faster) but still VERY stable. but if i didnt upgrade, i wouldnt be left with a S***** system. and what do you have to go to if XP deccide sto c*** out onm you? yah thats right, windows 2000 that was made with a lax kernel that dont run nothing because so much was taken out just s

Macman069
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2003

0

04/01, 05:36pm | report spam | close Reply |
continuing...

so much was taken out just so it wold be stable. so you get back to 98 or ME and your stuck again. lucky for mac users they dont have to go back to c*** cuz teh stuff just works. and if your worried about web browsing, get apple's safari and get a new mac. cant expect old hardware to be able to keep up with new software pc or mac. and talk about speed things up!? hahahaha can we all say LONGHORN together now? that POS is not but what 2 years away? and they will have in two years, what OS x ha sNOW. then youll be saying how great it is and how much you love your computer. i like what i hav enow, not what i WILL have. and by then intels chips will be so overlcocked and underperformed that the Power4 line will complete eradicate anything intel can c*** out. (the power 4 line,yah,thats a G567 line) well im done blasting this idiot payce out

Nostromo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2001

0

04/01, 05:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
the sad truth....

...is that you're a TROLL.

Please, go back under your bridge.

To keep yourself occupied, why not scan for the 4 new viruses that came out today for Windoze!

z10n
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2003

0

04/01, 06:43pm | report spam | close Reply |
Blah, Blah, Blah

This story is basically a reporter figuring out what mac users have known for years. Why is this news?

I propose a better estimate of the mac install base: web browser statistics. Not perfect, but I'll gauge that any mac that is a halfway decent mac in this day and age is out there using the internet. Decade-old Mac Classics don't count in my book. So lets take a look:

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

Look about halfway down. The mac has about 2.5% install base, which has grown by about .5% since mid 2003.

This other website shows about 2.8% install base for the mac: http://www.cen.uiuc.edu/bstats/latest.html.

what can we draw from this? Answer: the mac install base is just as bad as the market share. So I don't know why we have to keep bringing up this argument that the install base is "so much higher" then the market share. We all know there's nowhere near as many people using macs as there should be.

The good news is that the install base appears to be going UP, not down. But it's going to be a long road.

Macman069
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2003

0

04/01, 06:49pm | report spam | close Reply |
personally

i could care less what market share my computer has. Windows users cover up their dissatisfaction and make up for it by having the "everybody else is doing it so i must be right" attitde. Your marketshare doesnt make your computer more secure or keep those virusses out. and that marketshare doesnt make your crappy OS any more stable either. Misery loves company so as long as everyone is having problems, its makes YOURS not seem as bad and you put up with it more. I , personally, love the ease of use built in with the full power of unix fo rmy geeky side. none of this windows XP home edition and pro edition. what i fi do wnat to go pro? then i gotta fork out more bucks for it when i choose to get more geeky. but no matter how geeky the windows guys i know are, they seem to rather like fixing things than actually having them work rock solidly all the time. each to his own, but cmon now, if you really want tobe a geek go get a linux box or a mac with osx and get geeky. YOU CANT becaus eyoru used to having to fix MS problems instead of actually exploring computers that do work correctly. most windows "techies" at my job think they are better than everyone because they can "fix their computers all by themselves when something goes wrong" when all they are really doing is downloading some app that does it for them. my point is , is that dont think that just because you ASSUME you are above someone else because of your geekyness, that you are on top. there is always someone above you and below you. not that this has anything to do with the topic, but i needed to vent. unix runs circles around ANYTHING M$ puts out, so being a unix developer, does that mean I run circles around you windows developers? no, it just means i am more powerful than you. ALL YOUR ASSES ARE BELNG TO ME. windows is just c*** when you really get into depth using panther AND xp. i use them both extremely in depth an dthe underlying clockwork in panther, while not perfect, is leaps and bounds over M's offerings. relatively speaking, osx is perfect in comparison to MS junk. funny how MS is so rotective over their code too. they must know that someone could do to them what they did you many other companies in term sof theivery. couldnt have that now could we.

nat
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 2002

0

04/01, 07:34pm | report spam | close Reply |
bubba ol boy

rubbish. i'm a developer, have 4 pc's, 2 mac's, 1 linux box. no way in h*** a pc 266 with windows xp is faster than a 400 mac browsing web sites. you can spout that stuff pal but without some kind of benchmark it's just that, you spouting. as for ripping off - bubba, my dear dear bubba, you need to go take a computer history class pal. better yet, load windows 3 on that 266 and play with it awhile then windows 95 and come back and tell us who ripped who off. you're just spouting.... NONSENSE!

IonCable
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Apr 2001

0

04/01, 07:55pm | report spam | close Reply |
it took them this long

duh, it took them this look to figure out. I guess Mac users ARE smarter than PC users.

Nostromo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2001

0

04/01, 08:55pm | report spam | close Reply |
Sorry Charlie...

"Look about halfway down. The mac has about 2.5% install base, which has grown by about .5% since mid 2003."

Browser stats are NOT the final word on the installed base.

You might as well have been reading bird entrails...what a joke.

kw99
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2001

0

04/01, 09:44pm | report spam | close Reply |
Bottom line...

is not any of these sales or user stats. It is Apple being financially sound. And Apple is doing just fine.

However, the point being made by the article, that Macs are replaced less often than Wintel PCs, is true without a doubt. Not only that, but when they are eventually replaced, they are often sold to a "second hand" owners who happily uses the Macs for many more years. Each used Mac that is "recycled" to a new users is one less sale for Apple. Just look on eBay at the prices for used Mac hardware. There are vendors that thrive on reselling used Mac hardware and companies that specialize in designing and selling Mac upgrades. This does not happen on the PC side (nearly as much) because you can replace your current crappy PC with another new crappy PC for $399. Why bother... just give Dell or HP another sale and send you old PC to the landfill.

bobolicious
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2002

0

04/01, 09:56pm | report spam | close Reply |
OMG u flamers...

...jump to such conclusions!

W98 & XP, OS-9, 10.1, 10.2 & 10.3 - so yes I'm pretty familiar with w98 & XP on a range of PCs from the 266-1.8ghz & am running Panther right now on the 400 mac... It looks great but is far far slower than any combo on the PC for basic day to day tasks... That is my own experience... Sorry Charlie...

If it is any consolation I put a few Mac backdrops on my PC...
;-)

mjtomlin
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 1999

0

04/02, 02:56am | report spam | close Reply |
lemmings are dumb

There's nothing worse than someone believing what they experience is how it is for the rest of the world. First of all, who cares if Panther runs like c*** on your 400MHz G4? The problem is obvious, you're a lemming. - Jaguar runs fairly decent on my 400MHz G3. Yes it is kinda slow, but it's still VERY usable.

Another thing I can't stand is when a Wintel lemming tells me that the Mac only has a tiny marketshare!?! Is that supposed to make me want to use Windows? Because every other moron on the planet uses it too? I understand the fact that stupid people need to feel like they're "normal" so they just follow the crowd, even if that means jumping off a cliff.

If there were only ten other Mac users, I would still prefer to use and own Macs. I also pay my $99 a year for .Mac, another $129 for each OS X update and will get around to buying iLife '04 for $49, not because I'm brainwashed, but because I'd rather help Apple profit, than see them go under and not have Macs to use anymore!

bobolicious
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2002

0

04/02, 07:10am | report spam | close Reply |
Lemming, troll...?

...my, my such harsh verbiage from those with such superior critical abilities - this IS a discussion board, no? - perhaps Mac users are as much about 'think different' (ego?) as anything...?

As a Mac fan for the longest time I finally decided to actually compare for myself when nothing was working well after supposedly 'upgrading' to OS-X 10.1 (Apple's term not mine!) - and so yes I still use my Mac for a lot of my work - I still like them - but I'm gearing everything to dual platform as a precaution... Right now the pc world has impressed me, and OS-X issues made my life h*** for about a year...

I understand now why the majority choose a peecee & am far less closed minded - and as far as browser speed goes yes I have tried IE, Camino, Opera, Safari, Omniweb & Mozilla - the last of which is my favorite browser even if it doesn't render all sites, because it is second in speed to Camino, has a newsgroup reader (OE replacement?), tabbed browsing & allows me to turn off my cache & history tracking (Apple can you offer this please?) & oh yes NB it is also dual platform, just in case I decide to fully 'switch'...

;-)

DaedalusDX
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Jan 2002

0

04/02, 10:01am | report spam | close Reply |
OS X issues?

OS X issues have made your life h*** for about a year? That's very nice...

I work at a university Helpdesk... it appears that viruses, worms, and general instability of Windows XP, 2000 and previous have made the lives of WINDOWS users h*** for the past 3+ years. This year, we have had the highest call volume in history... that's in the past 2 decades that we've had a contact center here for computing issues. The vast majority of the problems are virus issues...

Here is the story of one PC user's switch... his 2 year old Dell laptop up and crapped out on him a few months ago, so he went along the normal routine of reinstalling Windows XP. He hesitated in installing every security patch, antivirus, and whathaveyou immediately, and instead left his machine plugged into the network overnight... in the morning he had 3 or 4 worms running around on his machine on a fresh install of Windows XP...

that's h*** for you. not being able to use a machine functionally at all on a fresh install of the OS.

On top of that, our Resnet system automatically disables users who are detected having a virus on their system and spreading it... so we have thousands upon thousands of calls from PC users who have had their internet yanked away from them.

Viruses aren't a rare thing anymore on a Windows machine... they are the NORM. Its not a matter of chance whether one will get a virus if they are simply lax... it WILL happen. Viruses are better written and more destructive than ever, and the Windows platform has become significantly less attractive over the years because of it...

so do ANY of your "OS X issues" hold a candle to the collective h*** that everyone on my campus has been suffering with viruses and worms?!

DaedalusDX
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Jan 2002

0

04/02, 10:07am | report spam | close Reply |
majority.

You delude yourself by believing the the majority choose PC because browser speed is faster. The majority of PC users are PC users in every regard because they don't know any better or they are terrified of change...

It took me months to convince someone i knew to switch from Internet Explorer in XP to Firefox... she only did it because IE crapped out on her 100% because of spyware.

alpaca2500
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2002

0

04/02, 10:49am | report spam | close Reply |
well

from personal experience, people i know who own PCs arent replacing them faster than people i know who own macs. in fact, i think the opposite is true. the (few) mac users i know upgrade more often, because they're using their computers to do work (like, a guy i know who's a freelance photographer, and uses photoshop). most of the PC users i know dont use much more than web and email, so they dont really need to upgrade at all.

klinux
Senior User

Joined: Jul 2002

0

04/02, 12:00pm | report spam | close Reply |
Yawn again

1. People who use PC replace their PCs more often than they need to and that is bad.

Baloney, if Apple's HW is cheap enough that every couple of years you can upgrade to the latest dualie G5 or PB, you would say "no, my G3 400 is sooooo usable!" Why do PC users upgrade - because they can.

2. I have no sympathy for universities and businesses that are hit by worms and viruses. While Windows is to blame for many of the issues, a well administered network should not have to face these issues. The companies that I have worked for in the last 4 years (billion dollar in revenue range) have not been hit by any virus or worm. The problems are with your incompetent Windows administrators.

DaedalusDX
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Jan 2002

0

04/02, 06:32pm | report spam | close Reply |
PC Users upgrade...

Most PC users upgrade when their old computer stops working. Nowadays, the period that a computer stays completely problem free is shortening rapidly... especially for a novice.

Personally, I am a computer science major, and I have friends who are also computer science or computer engineers who use Windows... these are educated people who most would consider geeks who i consider the most competent people that I know.
. They manage to run windows alright... their secret? They regularly reformat their computers... every 3 months or so. My friends have made it a habit to reinstall Windows XP over the winter breaks, spring break, and summer breaks. Its a long time consuming process, but it must be done.

No one else finds this very strange that the only way to keep windows running properly is to wipe it clean every so often?

I argue that for a lot of people, when their computers fail, they simply don't have the patience or the knowledge to fix the problem by reinstalling, or worse yet, there may be a hardware failure... they shrug it off, and buy a new machine because they are so cheap now... the entire point of the article above is that while PCs are cheaper than Macs, if you consider the average time before a PC stops being used, the Mac has an advantage. Its a matter of TCO. Total cost of ownership... not only how much it costs to run a machine properly, but also considering how long said machine will stay useful. Apple has been the victim of its own success because their machines are TOO reliable. They do not fail as often, thus their installed base does not buy as many new machines as PC users.

And to the person who says "tough" to viruses and says his company has never been hit by a virus... this is a college network... dormitory networks. You cannot administer this network the same way you can with a private company LAN. Students are given much freedom. In a corporate environment, firewalls and other security features are in place, but lets be realistic... for a dormitory network? If anything, the ResNet is a truer measure of the security and reliability of the operating system than the isolated, private walled in community that are corporate networks.

I have a lot of sympathy for Windows users with serious problems with their computers. Its not fair to simply say that they should have been more careful or that it was their fault their machines don't work.

Xapplimatic
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Dec 2002

0

04/03, 07:55am | report spam | close Reply |
Statistics don't tell al

Well, seeing how Apple systems outlast most PCs by a factor of 2-3 times the lifespan, it is understandable to see that "more PCs are sold".. when many of them are junked by the end of one year's time.. Ever see an eMachine last more than 2 years on someone's desk?? I didn't think so.

bobolicious
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2002

0

04/03, 05:55pm | report spam | close Reply |
Well both my pc & mac...

...are connected through a router & have been so for well over a year without problems or viruses - of course I take reasonable precautions such as keeping the OS's 'up to date', I don't open attachments of dubious status & I found a free spyware disabler for XP that is an obvious help...

Installing the OS-X beta through Panther is always cause for anxiety because if something doesn't work, well hey just reformat your hard drive & start from scratch - if that isn't SO FAR BEHIND windows - I mean to design a beta OS without a 'restore' option would seem just plain daft to me?? I love some of the features of X but so many holes existed it really made me wonder who was at the switch in Cupertino? Intuitive - h*** no - not even a manual or decent tutorial... Yes I'm almost over it now & AAPL's stocjk is finally starting to reflect a more viable than not OS but it was absolute h*** for a LOOONG time - which is why many of my graphics biz friends still swear by OS-9...

I hope apple will continue to improve the OS - if I add up all the extras I have to purchase to equal what XP provides (backup/restore/fax/etc) and the repeat 'upgrades' - guess what windows IS less expensive - clever of apple to market that way...

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

05/26	Apple updates iOS 5.1.1 release for...
05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/25	Apple hiring new chip engineers for...
05/25	Third-gen iPad coming to Philippines...
05/25	Apple to integrate Baidu search into...

Show All

05/27	Manufacturing problems delay blue Samsung...
05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/25	Apple to integrate Baidu search into...
05/25	Google picks up webOS Enyo team, Open...
05/24	Apple submits surprise optical stylus...

Show All

05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/23	Google launches redesigned Search app...
05/22	Leaked next-gen iPod touch part hints...
05/22	Hulu Plus updates with iPad Retina...
05/22	TiVo Stream to push TV to iPhones,...

Show All

03/02	Save $330 on refurb. 15.4-inch, 2.4GHz...
03/01	Pre-owned 8GB iPod touch 2G, drops...
02/29	$150 off Nikon Coolpix S80 Compact...
02/28	Plantronics BackBeat 903 Bluetooth...
02/27	Refurb. Seagate 1.5TB GoFlex Portable...

Show All

toggle

Commentary on Apple market share/install base

updated 03:35 pm EST, Thu April 1, 2004

Apple market share

Related Articles

Recent Articles

Finally!

Meh...

Love it

This is good

Apple vs. everyone else?

My sad truth...

Good

Re: My sad truth..

bobolicious

So well said!

266 pc

Funny

wow

continuing...

the sad truth....

Blah, Blah, Blah

personally

bubba ol boy

it took them this long

Sorry Charlie...

Bottom line...

OMG u flamers...

lemmings are dumb

Lemming, troll...?

OS X issues?

majority.

well

Yawn again

PC Users upgrade...

Statistics don't tell al

Well both my pc & mac...

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace