«

In article <>, Mxsmanic
<> wrote:

> nospam writes:
>
> > nope. on intel macs, windows is fully supported by apple via boot camp.
> > for older macs, apple had a port of linux for a while called mklinux.
> > third parties ported freebsd and others.
>
> Can you buy a Mac with no OS, and then install the OS of your choice on the
> machine?

what would be the point of that? the attraction of a mac is mac os, but
you can certainly install whatever you want on it, including windows
(which many people do), linux and bsd natively and most anything else
via vmware (os/2, nextstep, beos, etc.). not much point in anything
other than mac os x and windows though.

In article <>, Mxsmanic
<> wrote:

> > what would be the point of that? the attraction of a mac is mac os ...
>
> Yup. And what would be the point of buying a PC without Windows? More than 99%
> of the market wants Windows. Even when Microsoft was forced to allow
> manufacturers to provide the option of another OS, people still wanted
> Windows.

it's actually around 90% these days and dropping. apple's sales are
outpacing the market, big time. if you look at specific markets (i.e.,
photography, graphic arts), mac market share is much, much higher.
adobe sells about 50% mac, 50% windows.

> > ... but you can certainly install whatever you want on it, including
> > windows (which many people do), linux and bsd natively and most anything
> > else via vmware (os/2, nextstep, beos, etc.).
>
> Will Apple sell you a Mac without an OS?

will dell sell you a pc without an os?

In article <>, Eric Stevens
<> wrote:

> >> Will Apple sell you a Mac without an OS?
> >
> >will dell sell you a pc without an os?
>
> They will offer you a choice of operating systems. See for example
> http://search.dell.com/results.aspx?...cat=all&ref=ac

clicking to the customize section from that link (i picked a dell
t3500), they only offer 1 of several versions of windows. i don't see a
'none' button, or even a linux button.

In article <>, Eric Stevens
<> wrote:

> >Will Apple sell you a Mac without an OS?
>
> Probably not, but they control the whole chain. MS never has.

sure they have. they required vendors to include windows or they won't
get as good of a deal on pricing (or no deal). that's part of what got
them into trouble several years back.

In article <>, Mxsmanic
<> wrote:

> The only reason Apple hasn't got into trouble is that it's such a small part
> of the market. It turns out that many people don't want to be in Apple's
> stranglehold, so they just buy PCs instead.

not anymore. apple's sales are outpacing the market as whole and have
been for many years.

> Apple apparently would rather have
> a tiny minority of followers of Steve Jobs' peculiar religion than a much
> higher revenue.

except that apple's market share is growing and their revenue is higher
than other companies such as dell.

> Microsoft was always more interested in giving the mass market
> what it wanted.

actually, the opposite.

In article <>, Mxsmanic
<> wrote:

> > it's actually around 90% these days and dropping. apple's sales are
> > outpacing the market, big time.
>
> As of this morning, 95% of non-Mac systems accessing my site are running
> Windows. Macs are 13.5% of total visitors,

if macs are 13.5% then it's 86.5% non-mac, not 95%, which is even
higher than my rough 90% estimate.

> but I suppose that includes iPads
> and iPhones (or does it?--I'm not sure how these devices report themselves to
> Web sites).

as ipads or iphones, using mobile safari or whatever other browser the
user is using (yes there are alternatives).

> Apple's revenue is not coming from the desktop computers, although they've
> been greatly helped by other Apple gadgets that have been hugely successful.

apple's revenue is mostly mobile devices and laptops. desktop computer
sales as a whole (industry wide) are dropping for laptops and now
tablets.

> > if you look at specific markets (i.e.,
> > photography, graphic arts), mac market share is much, much higher.
> > adobe sells about 50% mac, 50% windows.
>
> Adobe long ago switched primary development to Windows, because more users
> have Windows than Macs. They then port to Macs.

totally false. where in the hell did you come up with that?

> Today, Macs and Windows are roughly equal for graphics. Heck, they use the
> same hardware, and there's nothing about UNIX clones that makes them better
> for graphics than NT-family operating systems.

the hardware may be similar but the software is very different. for
example, os x has been able to offload just about any graphics
operation to the gpu for nearly a decade.

> The Mac predominance today in graphics is part inertia and part emotional
> attachment. However, I suppose that if you intended to use a computer for
> absolutely nothing else, a Mac would still be the better choice for graphics.
> When you decide to run your SOHO accounting on your machine, though, you
> discover that it might not have been such a good choice.

accounting software on macs is not great. graphics software is very
good. linux is a good choice for servers. different tools for different
purposes.

> > will dell sell you a pc without an os?
>
> I don't know. I build my own PCs these days--something that wouldn't be
> possible if I wanted a Mac.

most people do not build pcs, however, it actually is possible to build
a mac, just not cost effective. homebuilt is a tiny portion of the
market and not very profitable either.

In article <>, Mxsmanic
<> wrote:

> > not anymore. apple's sales are outpacing the market as whole and have
> > been for many years.
>
> I don't expect any change in Windows dominance.

it's changing.

> Applications drive platforms,
> and there are more applications available for Windows than for any other
> desktop platform.

quality versus quantity, plus a mac can run all of those natively,
alongside all mac applications and unix apps. in other words, macs can
run more software than a windows box can.

> > except that apple's market share is growing and their revenue is higher
> > than other companies such as dell.
>
> Most of their revenue is coming from non-desktop gadgets (iPhone, iPod, iPad,
> etc.), although the desktops are receiving some benefit from this.

<http://readtechnews.com/windows-is-d...-os-fastest-gr
owing/>

According to Gartner reported, benefit from the Mac desktop and
notebook sales strong growth, the revenue of Apple platform in 2010
was 520 million U.S. dollars, up 15.8%. In contrast, MicrosoftŒs
client business grew only 9.2%.

from apple's earnings call last month, mac sales grew 28% compared to a
market contraction of 3%, the 20th consecutive quarter that they
outpaced the market. half of mac buyers are buying their first mac (aka
'pc switchers').

> > actually, the opposite.
>
> No company prospers by marketing the opposite of what consumers want.

exactly why apple is prospering.

In article <>, Mxsmanic
<> wrote:

> > totally false. where in the hell did you come up with that?
>
> It has been true for years. As I recall, that came directly from Adobe.

it's never been true. adobe uses a cross platform framework of their
own design. photoshop *began* on the mac and was ported to the pc (via
aforementioned framework).

> > most people do not build pcs, however, it actually is possible to build
> > a mac, just not cost effective. homebuilt is a tiny portion of the
> > market and not very profitable either.
>
> Apple sells OEM copies of its Mac OS? I've never seen that anywhere. What
> about the BIOS and other Mac-specific stuff?

snow leopard (os x 10.6) is $29 at any computer store that carries it.

meanwhile, windows ultimate (which is the 'equivalent' to os x) is
around $300 for retail and $200 for oem (but no support, something you
get with os x).

a 5 user license of os x (family pack) is $49. how much are 5 licenses
of windows ultimate?

In article <>, Mxsmanic
<> wrote:

> > Apple is such a small part of the market ...
>
> On the desktop, yes. And one reason for that is their iron grip on both
> hardware and software. It's a walled garden, but it's a small garden.

wrong, and it's actually a big open garden. the os x kernel is open
source, as is webkit and many other parts of of os x. in fact, some of
apple's competitors use apple's own webkit engine (google, nokia and
others).

what parts of windows can i download and where? has microsoft released
the internet explorer rendering engine source code? windows is about as
proprietary as it gets, especially with microsoft doing things to keep
people on the platform (active x, .net, c#, wmv, etc.).

In article <>, Mxsmanic
<> wrote:

> > it's changing.
>
> Unless the applications market changes first, the changes will not be
> significant.

the industry is moving to mobile devices, namely tablets.

> > quality versus quantity, plus a mac can run all of those natively,
> > alongside all mac applications and unix apps. in other words, macs can
> > run more software than a windows box can.
>
> There's no difference in quality between Mac apps and Windows apps,

there can be a dramatic difference, depending on the app.

> and there's no reason to run Windows apps on a Mac.

that contradicts your earlier statement that there's more software on
windows, which would mean there is a reason to run windows apps on a
mac.

try to keep your story straight.

> The application market for
> Windows is so vast that it's very rare to be forced to get a Mac just for an
> application.

tell that to those who buy macs *just* for final cut pro, aperture, or
many other apps on the mac that are *not* available on windows.

some people even buy a mac to run windows, not os x, because they like
the hardware better.

> > According to Gartner reported, benefit from the Mac desktop and
> > notebook sales strong growth, the revenue of Apple platform in 2010
> > was 520 million U.S. dollars, up 15.8%. In contrast, Microsoft¼s
> > client business grew only 9.2%.
>
> Growth is not dominance. Five million dollars up 15.8% is an extra $790K;
> 95 million dollars up 9.2% is an extra $8.74 million, or more than ten times
> as much increase in absolute dollars.

growth leads to dominance and your numbers make no sense. apple's
revenue last quarter was $24.67 billion (with a b) and net profits of
$5.99 billion. microsoft's revenue was $16.43 billion with $5.23 net
income. for a company that has such a tiny market share, they're raking
in the cash.

> > from apple's earnings call last month, mac sales grew 28% compared to a
> > market contraction of 3%, the 20th consecutive quarter that they
> > outpaced the market. half of mac buyers are buying their first mac (aka
> > 'pc switchers').
>
> Wait and see.

wait for what?

> > exactly why apple is prospering.
>
> Apple is prospering because of non-desktop products.

no, they're prospering for both mobile and desktop products.