Creative .... which way u'r goin...?

[Hommie]

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Home/D579148C-8563-4FFB-8E97-C2613215F98E.html
here's a really good one:
In 1980, Gartner reported Apple's worldwide share of the computer market at 15.8%. In 1996, they reported Apple's share as 4.6%. Last year, they reported Apple's market share at 2.2%. From those numbers, it would appear that Apple once owned vast control over in the PC world, and has been slipping ever since into a pit of irrelevance. That's the story FUD sprayers like to relate anyway. However, those numbers don't tell a very useful story without some considering their context.


In the ten years following Windows 95's release, the Mac market share appeared to wilt from 5% to 2%, but those numbers similarly betray reality without considering some context. Apple is quite obviously doing better today, and has a brighter outlook for the future than they had in 1996, when they were at their lowest point of operational, technical, and strategic failure ever. How is it possible they now have less than half of their 1996 market share?

Prior to 1996, the PC market had already grown to include many market segments that had little to do with Apple, as noted above. So while their overall share of the PC market is useful in comparing Apple's performance to IBM, Dell, or Compaq, it is not material in considering the value or utility of Apple's product or platform.

If Apple had tried to build Windows PCs, or to compete against Windows as an operating system on PC hardware, those overall PC market share numbers would be very relevant, but Apple didn't. Here's why.

Microsoft managed, with some difficulty, to migrate DOS users to Windows in the second half of the 90's by tightly bundling DOS into Windows 95. That killed off any competition from alternative versions of DOS, while also making it no more expensive to run Windows 95: it was free with every new PC.

This is another example of Microsoft using exclusive software bundling to cheat the market, by wielding price as a competitive weapon against commercial alternatives without actually lowering their own prices. This is exactly the type of monopoly the US had a history of battling, but Microsoft managed to evade the enforcement of laws against predatory pricing until their position was so absolute that no competitors could effectively enter the market.

So not only had the hardware side of the PC market grown to encompass areas far beyond the market Apple was competing in, but the software side of the PC market had entirely failed to operate as a free market. The failure of the US Department of Justice to uphold the law had served to effectively turn Windows, the software side of the PC market, into a government sponsored monopoly.

A monopoly is not just high market share, but rather an exclusive position with the ability manipulate the market to prevent the natural balance created by competition. By killing the markets for DOS and Windows alternatives, Microsoft continued to enjoy fat profits without having to lower their software prices: there were no competitors!

Low cost PC hardware tied to an expensive Windows software license created a closed market where demand for alternatives to Microsoft's software was suppressed by price dumping: potential competitors were competing against what appeared to be a free product.

The next time you hear market share numbers being thrown around, consider the context. Numbers don't speak for themselves, they require critical interpretation. Next up: more nails in the coffin of the Apple Market Share Myth: slippery numbers, quality vs. quantity, definitions of the market, and a closer look at iPod market share: Market Share Myth: Nailed!

I fail to gasp the article above centred mostly on Microsoft monopolised the PC operating market killed the competitors etc, etc Convince me when hordes of PC users are dumping their Wintel to Mactel and create another Apple Golden Age. Right now, we are not even close to the previous highest.

 

[garou12]

I fail to gasp the article above centred mostly on Microsoft monopolised the PC operating market killed the competitors etc, etc Convince me when hordes of PC users are dumping their Wintel to Mactel and create another Apple Golden Age. Right now, we are not even close to the previous highest.

see you're still failing to realize the fact that their percentages are constantly going up with regards to education, graphic and other users, MACs are now more widely avaliable than they used to be during the so called golden age that you're refering to that and the personal computer market size has grown by leaps and bounds and there are more computers in homes in general.All you're doing is comparing the present to a past time that can't even be used to compare figures because the context behind them has totally changed!...Apple stock price is way up, which shows that they're making money and not loosing at all. The numbers all speak for themselves. I've at least tried to provide some backup for my arguement that article talks more than just microsoft...go back and read it again instead of skimming it. If you want to convince me that Apple is hopeless at converting PC users over to their camp. please bring some evidence; statistics, analyst statements whatever, to the table to prove your point. Otherwise this is getting us nowhere and we're oted long enough.

 

[Hommie]

I dun have the stat but by observation, more and more people around me using Mac. Last time in school all using Windows, now got a few converting from PC to MacBook. Just go into any poly, you can easily see students using MacBook, last time very rarely do you see students using Mac notebooks.

For me, when I save enough, I am getting a MacBook Pro. I am just another PC user convert to Mac.

Twelve over years ago when I was in NAFA, most of most of the students were using Mac. Now most of them are using PC....... :bsmilie:

 

[hobbit6003]

Twelve over years ago when I was in NAFA, most of most of the students were using Mac. Now most of them are using PC....... :bsmilie:

Wah, where have you been for the past 2 years???

 

[Hommie]

see you're still failing to realize the fact that their percentages are constantly going up with regards to education, graphic and other users, MACs are now more widely avaliable than they used to be during the so called golden age that you're refering to that and the personal computer market size has grown by leaps and bounds and there are more computers in homes in general.All you're doing is comparing the present to a past time that can't even be used to compare figures because the context behind them has totally changed!...Apple stock price is way up, which shows that they're making money and not loosing at all. The numbers all speak for themselves. I've at least tried to provide some backup for my arguement that article talks more than just microsoft...go back and read it again instead of skimming it. If you want to convince me that Apple is hopeless at converting PC users over to their camp. please bring some evidence; statistics, analyst statements whatever, to the table to prove your point. Otherwise this is getting us nowhere and we're oted long enough.

I felt you don't understand or even trust what your figure provides. What I did was to use what you provided to prove to you, as a pie is still a pie despite the increasing numbers of people using Computers. You sited Mac being more popular in education & graphic market but your figures provided mentions the overall shipped computers, which includes eduction and graphics. They contribute to the highest figures quoted is a mere 7.6% and 6.1% of the overall PC shipped. Perhaps you could read the articles you provided yourself with more detail rather than skimming through.

I'm not disputing the fact that Apple's stock is up and that Apple Inc is earning some healthy profit from more sales of iPod and iTune and its iMac but there are no figures on converts are the contributers of the increase in Mac sales and the numbers are far from the historial high of 10% to 15% of the entire PC market. Am I convincing you, cuz I am using your figures that you provided? I'm just perplex that you mentioned that "The numbers all speak for themselves" and yet later mentioned "comparing the present to a past time that can't even be used to compare figures because the context behind them has totally changed!" be spoken in the same breathe. You mean to said that past figures cannot be trusted or are inaccurate, then what can? Tell me, what you use against as benchmark if not history?

Actually there is no debate between us because our point of view is differs. You said Apple is doing very well, based on the current stock performance and profit. I said, Not really, if you compare to their historical high. Used to be better.

 

[Hommie]

Wah, where have you been for the past 2 years???

Why? You are in NAFA now? :embrass:

 

[garou12]

what's nafa?

 

[Hommie]

what's nafa?

Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts

 

[swampthing]

My housemate went from Mac to PC, as well as two good friends I know who used to be die-hard about Macs. Seriously, strip away the marketing and the Mac really isn't a big deal.

 

[night86mare]

see you're still failing to realize the fact that their percentages are constantly going up with regards to education, graphic and other users, MACs are now more widely avaliable than they used to be during the so called golden age that you're refering to that and the personal computer market size has grown by leaps and bounds and there are more computers in homes in general.All you're doing is comparing the present to a past time that can't even be used to compare figures because the context behind them has totally changed!...Apple stock price is way up, which shows that they're making money and not loosing at all. The numbers all speak for themselves. I've at least tried to provide some backup for my arguement that article talks more than just microsoft...go back and read it again instead of skimming it. If you want to convince me that Apple is hopeless at converting PC users over to their camp. please bring some evidence; statistics, analyst statements whatever, to the table to prove your point. Otherwise this is getting us nowhere and we're oted long enough.

One problem with the post here is that stock price =/= profit-making.

Especially right now at the SGX, a lot of monkeys are putting money into stocks that do not have strong fundamentals, the stock price goes up even when the company is not necessarily making a profit.

UNLESS you insist that humans are definitely rational, and will only buy stocks of companies which are making profits; and this sounds very plausible but unfortunately it is not.

 

[garou12]

I felt you don't understand or even trust what your figure provides. What I did was to use what you provided to prove to you, as a pie is still a pie despite the increasing numbers of people using Computers. You sited Mac being more popular in education & graphic market but your figures provided mentions the overall shipped computers, which includes eduction and graphics. They contribute to the highest figures quoted is a mere 7.6% and 6.1% of the overall PC shipped. Perhaps you could read the articles you provided yourself with more detail rather than skimming through.

I'm not disputing the fact that Apple's stock is up and that Apple Inc is earning some healthy profit from more sales of iPod and iTune and its iMac but there are no figures on converts are the contributers of the increase in Mac sales and the numbers are far from the historial high of 10% to 15% of the entire PC market. Am I convincing you, cuz I am using your figures that you provided? I'm just perplex that you mentioned that "The numbers all speak for themselves" and yet later mentioned "comparing the present to a past time that can't even be used to compare figures because the context behind them has totally changed!" be spoken in the same breathe. You mean to said that past figures cannot be trusted or are inaccurate, then what can? Tell me, what you use against as benchmark if not history?

Actually there is no debate between us because our point of view is differs. You said Apple is doing very well, based on the current stock performance and profit. I said, Not really, if you compare to their historical high. Used to be better.

yea so i'm asking you to bring in the data from that historical high you keep drumming about! Not use my data, you keep talking about back then, show me the #s that they were doing better back than instead of now to prove your point. And for your information the size of the pie does matter: for example if 2 million people back then were the entire PC market and X had 1 million customers then they'd have 50% of the market share...but today if the market has grown to 10 million and X still only has 1 million customers, the same # as back then wouldn't their market share shrink then? . There's no point debating this with you since you refuse to do any leg work and back up your own claims about a golden age or even see past your bias. Enough with the OT...this thread's gone from talking about Creative to the PC market size and share of Apple and pc conversions...

 

[garou12]

One problem with the post here is that stock price =/= profit-making.

Especially right now at the SGX, a lot of monkeys are putting money into stocks that do not have strong fundamentals, the stock price goes up even when the company is not necessarily making a profit.

UNLESS you insist that humans are definitely rational, and will only buy stocks of companies which are making profits; and this sounds very plausible but unfortunately it is not.

thing about that is Apple stock isn't listed on SGX...is Creative though?

 

[night86mare]

thing about that is Apple stock isn't listed on SGX...is Creative though?

? Same applies everywhere. Not just SGX has irrationality.

 

[garou12]

? Same applies everywhere. Not just SGX has irrationality.

true true.

 

[Hommie]

yea so i'm asking you to bring in the data from that historical high you keep drumming about! Not use my data, you keep talking about back then, show me the #s that they were doing better back than instead of now to prove your point. And for your information the size of the pie does matter: for example if 2 million people back then were the entire PC market and X had 1 million customers then they'd have 50% of the market share...but today if the market has grown to 10 million and X still only has 1 million customers, the same # as back then wouldn't their market share shrink then? . There's no point debating this with you since you refuse to do any leg work and back up your own claims about a golden age or even see past your bias. Enough with the OT...this thread's gone from talking about Creative to the PC market size and share of Apple and pc conversions...

I did tried but found nothing on the internet of the historical high of Apple's percentage article I remembered donkey years ago, not that I didn't do any leg work as you claimed. Cause you can choose not to believe me but that doesn't mean it never happened.

And I thought my math was bad after reading your 'pie shrinking theory'! :bsmilie:

 

[Harry Potter]

I did tried but found nothing on the internet of the historical high of Apple's percentage article I remembered donkey years ago, not that I didn't do any leg work as you claimed. Cause you can choose not to believe me but that doesn't mean it never happened.

And I thought my math was bad after reading your 'pie shrinking theory'! :bsmilie:

Curious what make you so convinced of your own perception??? There must be someting which convince you...share to us leh!

 

[Hommie]

One problem with the post here is that stock price =/= profit-making.

Especially right now at the SGX, a lot of monkeys are putting money into stocks that do not have strong fundamentals, the stock price goes up even when the company is not necessarily making a profit.

UNLESS you insist that humans are definitely rational, and will only buy stocks of companies which are making profits; and this sounds very plausible but unfortunately it is not.

That depend on how you are looking at stock the fundamental analyse or techical analyse.

 

[Hommie]

Curious what make you so convinced of your own perception??? There must be someting which convince you...share to us leh!

Because I've seen the article before and I own Mac far longer than many here have before. My first PC is a Mac, that was close to 12-15 years ago.

 

[Harry Potter]

Because I've seen the article before and I own Mac far longer than many here have before. My first PC is a Mac, that was close to 12-15 years ago.

Is it that throughout this 12-15 years, more and more friends around you, who initially owned mac , have converted to PC???

 

[tchoonyong]

dont look at just the figures but the trends. Apple is all about lifestyle windows is all about monopolization. Figures can be recreate to make you think that is how the market fared. All pcs in the whole world are all pre installed with windows which consists of zillions of distributors so this make up the percentage as for mac they only distributed their own products that is one distributor so this make only a minor percentage of the markets.this is how the market calculated their percentage dont be blind folded by the market. They are great cheaters.