Mac OS Market Share

There is some discussion going on about Apple's Market share.

I took a look at the numbers and from Fall 2007 to now, several things are going on:

2K went from 3.7% to 2%
XP went from 81% to 71%
Vista went from 6% to 16%
98, Me, NT went from 2.2% to 1.4%
All M$ went from 92.9% to 90.4% down about 2.5% in one year

Mac OS went from 3.3% to 2.9%
Mac Intel went from 2.8% to 5.25%
All Apple went from 6.1% to 8.1% up about 2% in one year, a 25% increase

Linux went from 0.4% to 0.8% up about .4% in one year, Doubled

To me this trend is a good thing and promises to finally bring competition to what has been a monopoly far too long. I hope to see these numbers to continue the erosion away from Windows. These market share numbers are useful because they reflect machines people are actually using rather than monthly sales reports.

The Linux numbers are also significant because while Linux has gained wide acceptance as a server OS, there haven't been a lot of users sitting down at a Linux box browsing the web. Until now. I'm sure all those low cost Linux based notebooks are helping the Linux market share numbers along.

If the current trend continues unabated, Mac will sit firmly in double digit market share territory by this time next year. This is the first time a competitor has ever limped back to life after being marginalized by M$. Go Apple! Go Linux, too!

 

Yea, but even though Microsoft lost marketshare, they still have 90% of the market. Vista and XP went in a wash, 10% loss from XP went completely to Vista. Where OS X made the difference is the guys who switched from much older Microsoft OS went to Mac, rather than Vista.

And now we have proof that Vista sucking is a perception rather than a reality: http://gizmodo.com/5028903/windows-xp-users-actually-love-vista-if-they-think-its-something-else

 

I don't think Apple will pass 20% market share though. I think over the years, Linux will take a chunk, Mac OS X will claim 20%, and while Windows will still be the dominant one, its not the "interesting" one anymore. I look at it similar to IE vs. Firefox.

 

So true that every satisfied Vista user tells 1 person and every dissatisfied user tells 10....it spreads like wildfire. I find it funny that most of the anti-Vista XP lovers I know haven't even tried Vista for over a year.

As someone who uses Vista 75% of the time, OS X 20% and XP about 5%, I can say that there really isn't anything different between the 3 OS's. Yes the way in which you tweak things is slightly different, but I don't know where the hate came from for Vista.

 

Well its the same for any product, really...most Apple bashers have never tried Apple products either. In fact, I used to be one too, thinking iPods were overrated...until I tried one.

 

Yeah isn't that the truth? Heh kinda funny, but I'm just the opposite. Grew up with my family all using Macs, and now I'm the lone Windows user. The good old days of me drooling over Napster and having to settle for 'Macster' lol.

 

MS will do anything to keep Windows way above the rest. I highly doubt either Mac OS or Linux will capture 20% on a global scale, let alone the US.

 

It's interesting you should mention this. There was an article recently citing M$ intention to create an "end to end" experience to compete with Mac. Competition is good. I don't doubt that M$ will try to stop Apple from reaching 20%, but it will probably wind up looking a lot like Detroit automakers trying to stop erosion of market share to imports during an oil crisis.

One poster cited "no difference" between Vista, OSX and XP. I would go a bit further to say that Ubuntu belongs in this group but I would also have to say that there are important differences.

Here is how I would rank them. Bear in mind, my Vista experience is limited but I have laid eyes on it... The scores are "ranking" style, from 1 to 4 where 1 is best and 4 is worst.

Ease of routine use:
1. OS X
2. Vista
3. XP
4. Linux
Ease of Administration:
1. OS X
2. XP
3. Vista (because it's new)
4. Linux
Availability of Apps:
1. XP
2. Vista
3. OS X
4. Linux
Reliability (uptime 99.999%)
1. Linux
2. OS X (Yes, theres a Unix kernel underneath but Apple places less priority on uptime than on ease of use)
3. XP
4. Vista
Design (logical well thought out)
1. OS X
2. Linux
3. Vista
4. XP
Bloat (overhead that ships with the OS that you really don't need)
1. Linux
2. OS X (3 gig of drivers is a bit much)
3. XP (most pc makers ship wildtangent and other bloatware)
4. Vista (the biggest exercise in bloat for its own sake to date)
Cost
1. Linux (free)
2. XP (oem copies on ebay)
3. Vista (new low-cost machines, price drops)
4. OS X (only with purchase of a Mac)
End to End Experience
1. OS X
2. XP
3. Vista
4. Linux

 

Really? Have you ever used Vista? I'm really starting to doubt it. I've not had Vista crash once on me yet due to the core functions of the OS. Even XP SP2 crashed really infrequently. Surprisingly, I did manage to crash OS X once. I forgot how, but it essentially just froze, so I had to hard-restart it.

So ironic that this comes like two posts after we talk about the perception of Vista. Use it some, it really isn't that bad.

iPods really are overrated now. There are far better alternatives to everything in the iPod line except for the shuffle, and the only reason the iPhone escapes the overrated tag is because all the good phones are really bleeding expensive compared to the iPhone (initial purchase price-wise) in the US, where the iPhone gets a vast majority of its sales. In my opinion, OS X is really overrated too. Its got its own flaws, and as much as His Jobsness would like to deny it, its getting bloated as well. Not Vista-bloated, but bloated nonetheless.

 

Whether Apple can get 20% market share or not will come down to how good or bad 'windows 7' is. If Windows 7 gets an as bad reputation as Windows Vista has you can expect to see whole lot of people who have lost patience with Microsoft convert.

 

I don't know too much about OS X administration, but...

Vista is actually quite a bit easier to administer than XP, because:
- Automated defrag by default
- Backup and Restore Center
- Spyware protection by default (real-time + automated scans)
- When a program crashes, Vista will (by default) go to the internet to look for a patch or a knowledge base article that might help with the problem
- New administrative tools including disk partition manager and memory tester
- System Restore is more robust than in XP.
- Search is built-in, so if you can't find anything, just type it in to the search box.
- More built-in features (such as search, sidebar, calendar, photo gallery, backup & restore center) means fewer third-party programs to maintain.


Also, here are a few other categories to consider (with my opinions of course)...

Customizability:
1. Linux
2. XP
3. Vista
4. OS X

Hardware requirements (minimum specs for acceptable performance)
1. Linux
2. XP
3. OS X
4. Vista

Hardware compatibility (components + peripherals)
1. XP
2. Vista
3. Linux
4. OS X

Performance (on adequate hardware)
1. Linux
2. OS X
3. XP, Vista 64-bit
4. Vista 32-bit

Ease of avoiding malware
1. Linux
2. OS X (a few trojans out there these days)
3. Vista
4. XP

 

im guessing you mean "leopard" when you say osx.

because you can run an earlier incarnation of osx that will be potent on aging hardware. the original osx was released before windows xp, and ran well on the hardware available at the time.

aside from the semantics (im sure you just meant leopard) i think that you "category rankers" are surprisingly accurate.

 

Actually the customizability of OS X is equal to that of Linux. Better in fact because so much of it is accessible through the gui. Then with the command line, you have just as much control as you would on Linux. This is something about OSX that is not well understood. It really is Unix. The gui can make it easier to administer but does not stand in your way. Of course OSX is at the bottom of the hardware compatability food chain. I think Linux and Vista should be swapped. The most drivers are available for XP. Then comes Linux. Then comes Vista. Way down in the weeds is OS X.

 

Windows 7 won't be as big a flop as Vista was, but even if it was i still don't think we will see 20% market share for OS X. By virtue of being tied to hardware, OS X is limited to the mid-upscale market, not the $500 desktop market. Plus, it is unlikely businesses or schools will convert.

 

"schools" won't convert (like elementary or high schools)

but universities do all the time.

 

Our local public schools did a bond issue some years ago for technology updates. Along with high speed internet and video in every classroom, they got hundreds of those brightly colored Macs. My kids were not impressed. They would freeze a lot and they would lose their work. Since then, the school picked up some windows boxes but there are still a lot of Macs in use. I would expect any future purchases in our district to go Mac.

Meanwhile, our son's high school took a different approach. They had a lot of old windows boxes in the computer lab and rather than scrap and replace them, they put Linux on them and they have been working fine ever since. The kids are expected to do their work in either MS Office or Open Office.

 

Well, its just the way traditions are...Windows is heavily tied to the corporate world, and while some corporations will be fine switching over, as long as Microsoft gets Windows 7 right, as long as it works, corporations don't want to be bothered by switching; just making money and spending less.

 

As Leopard is the latest version of OS X, I would assume thats what he was using in those comparisons.

Thats like asking which service pack of XP he was referring to...Maybe he was referring to the first release of XP, which was really unstable? Hmm....Its not explicitly stated, but logical conclusions are always a good thing to come to.

Speaking of which, do they still sell any previous versions of OS X in stores?

 

I agree, but I think that Microsoft has really been trying to change it's look and seem more appealing to the consumers, a job that Macs pull off much easier. On a tangent, I'm really excited about Microsoft 7, I only hope that it won't have a huge jump in requirements like we saw from XP to Vista. It will be much easier for people to upgrade that way, as they won't have to upgrade their whole computer, and only the OS.

 

Well, Microsoft doesn't do the "cool" part too well because design is one of the biggest factors in "coolness", and Apple does that spectacularly. Microsoft doesn't control the hardware, so they can't dictate how "cool" Windows computers look, and while Vista has lots of GUI improvements, the driver issues (I experienced a ton) make it frustrating for the average consumer who doesn't even know what a driver is or where it came from.

 

Now there's an understatement. Talk about design. Here are a couple of observations...

1 - reinstalling Visual Studio 6. Need to compile a binary for a quick demonstration. Insert install disk. Start install. Dig up key number. Type it in. Pick type of install. Wow. There are 12 types. Whoa. I musta picked the wrong type. It wants a reboot. Start over. Type in key number. Pick single product install. There. That's better. What? You want to upgrade my JVM? But the JVM on my machine is newer than the one on the cd. Ok. Quit install AGAIN. Go put msjava.dll in windows\system32 so the install won't put an obsolete JVM on my system and possibly break dozens of other programs. Start install a third time. Enter key number a third time. Install proceeds smoothly. All done. Do I want to reboot now? No. I have 12 windows open. You MUST reboot now. Click ok to reboot. No cancel. Just ok. Argh. Close 12 windows and click ok. Reboot.

2 - wiping my old Dell to give to my son. Insert Ubuntu 8.04 cd. Boot to the "Live" OS. It works fine. It sees my wireless. It sees all my printers. It played it's intro sound just fine. It just plain works. It comes with firefox 3 and openoffice 2.4. My finger hovers over the Install icon. I'm seconds away from raising the old Dell from the mediocrity of XP to the usability of Ubuntu. But I want it for gaming, he says. Ok. Fine. Reboot back to XP. Log in to my old account. Try to free up some space by wiping files. Pick eveything from a to my pictures in my documents and hit shift-delete. Are you sure? Yes. Are you sure you want to delete the system file thumbs.db? Yes to All. Are you sure you want to remove the read only file aaa.txt? Yes to All. Are you sure you want to delete bbb.exe? Yes to all dammit. Finally it finishes after clicking yes about 13 more times. Now pick everything after my pictures and hit shift-delete. Are you sure? Yes. Are you sure you want to delete the files thumbs.db? Yes to all DAMMIT! Are you sure you want to delete the readonly file ccc.txt? Yes to all YOU FRIGGING IDIOT OS! Are you sure? Are you sure you are really really sure? Are you sure? I'm soooo sure I'm glad I switched to Mac! Meanwhile, I leave XP on the thing for him but the Ubuntu cd is close by should he EVER make even the slightest sound like he needs my help 'cuz he can't print, can't get on the 'net, can't boot, froze up, etc, etc, etc. And when he asks me "are you sure [you wannt put Linux on here]?" I know the answer is heck yes.

 

This should be more like

1. XP/Vista
2. Linux
3. OSX

Windows had Group Policy Editor. Nothing else comes even close to the Flexibility, Integration, and Interface of GPO.

 

Not in any of Apples own stores (retail or online) as far as I know (except for the server version). You'd have to find copies on eBay or at a reseller somewhere I guess at this stage.

 

word...

most people think this is true simply because it is not more built into the OS, like they "think" it is in windows xp or vista.

there are not only far more customization possibilities with OS X, they are actually much more accessible to the average user, and don't require dependence on other people to create themes, icons, etc. the major issue is that people don't really take the time to really see what is possible.

not to mention many people are so much happier moving to the look of OS X, that most don't feel the need to customize it, its look is pretty appealing overall.

but saying it is the least customizable is far from true in my opinion.

 

I also have to add that on availability of apps OS X and Linux should definitely be above any itteration of Windows, not only is there almost always a Mac or Linux equivalent, it is also a much better and often free app.

especially on the OS X side of things, if you take a look at the quality of free apps available for each OS, I promise OS X would be on the top of that list, there may be more developers working on apps for the other OS's, but from what I have seen 1 OSX developer is worth much more than any other OS developer. It is just a much more elegant system to develop for, as it is more about the new idea you are providing, not all the technical aspects of programing the app, which makes much more interesting apps for the average user.

as far as market share goes, I would not be suprised to see a massive surge of people switching to mac, entirely based on the number of new iPhone users out there, and the fact that they are not selling them in stores. just getting a customer into an Apple store is usually enough to convince them that OS X is the way to go right now.

 

The availability of an equivalent application for Linux and OSX can't be generally applied. For one, OSX does not have a strong set of Accounting software. Finance is just one of the areas where quality equivalents are unavailable.

[/quote]

This is true for the consumer markets. The enterprise markets will often require proprietary devices or software that can support their critical proprietary software systems. The OSX SDK is inferior to Microsoft's SDK. This will always be a hindrance to a bigger market.

On the cellphone markets, I would like to see Microsoft get away from their Independent hardware vendor system and adopt a more vertically integrated system, like they did with the Xbox. They make the hardware and software and thus control the entire interface. The Cell phone market IS a consumer electronics market and only adopting a more integrated model will help Microsoft and the rest of the competition get their heads on straight. This will allow the individual hardware vendors to gain more power and control over their devices. At the present time, Carriers have a HUGE input on what goes in the phone and what doesn't. The serious lack of competition between the wireless carriers really really sucks balls here in the US.

 

You think cell carriers suck in the US. Come to Canada. We are double stuffed sideways, by Rogers, Telus and Bell. Cell phone prices in Canada Continue to rise. Not decrease. It almost seems the three companies aren't even trying to compete. Their just following one another's lead. And the final outcome is we get screwed, without the benefit of Vaseline or pain killers. "Just relax and it won't hurt"

 

The sheer amount of oratory in this post alone deserves rep.

 

Can you show me 1 OSX torrent client that matches Utorrent on the PC. I guess your gonna quote the usual Transmission, Azureus etc but they simply in no way match Utorrent in any manner. Since you seem to have a fantastic ability to make bold conclusive statements can you state what exactly makes 1 OSX developer 'worth' more than a another OS developer. I'm intrigued, whats your meaning of worth exactly.

 

1. I'm curious what kinds of driver issues you encountered w/ Vista. I haven't had any trouble finding drivers, but I know the support for drivers has improved drastically. This seems like the biggest thing people complain about w/ Vista, even if they haven't used SP1.

2. What is this 'cool' factor you speak of? This seems to be one of the weakest arguments in favor of OS X. I have used all the OS's pretty often (with the exception of Linux) and I don't feel any 'cooler' using OS X than I do XP or Vista. Maybe I'm just not getting into the whole Justin Long mindset...but to me each OS is just another OS with different eye candy. Simply comes down to which one you are most familiar with.

 

1) I've yet to diagnose the issue. It is a driver issue, somewhere related to NVIDIA and ATI but also to something else that I have yet to find. I was on Vista SP1, all available updates installed, all drivers for anything as up to date as possible. I ran into random shutdowns, games freezing up and such. I've been on XP for a week and not a single issue yet, so its most likely not a hardware issue.

2) By "cool", I meant more as in you yourself being more "cool". I'm not supporting Apple or telling people to buy iPods or Macs because they will make them look more "cool", but that is the truth at the moment. Many buy iPods and Macs because it "elevates" their status. Its not in my eyes a good reason to buy those products, but they do.

OSes are more than just its appearance though. I find the way OS X is organized, the way OS X presents itself is a lot more logical than the way Windows works. I like the Vista GUI, but with the issues I ran into it, I couldn't even enjoy it.

 

Ubuntu plans to take over OS X in two years.
I plan to help..lol

 

Honestly I don't want to sound like a fanboy but on my comptuer vista crashes a lot less than the ones I use at camp for design and whatnot. I haven't had flash crash on me once on this computer but I've had it crash 3 times on a mac.

I think Vista is also more reliable than XP now at least for my use it is.

 

Sam, just noticed your signature. Are you still running on Tiger? Is there a reason you haven't upgraded?

 

Yes, I'm still on Mac OS X Tiger...no reason really, its just money I don't really have . If I could, I would upgrade to Leopard, but considering Snow Leopard is just another year away, and there's nothing wrong with Tiger, I'll just wait for Snow Leopard.