Re: Resurrecting an old RiscPC

beamendsltd <beamendsltd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
In message <slrn.2006-07-15.12-06-20@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Ben Shimmin <bas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[...]

But how does being able to run Windows on an Apple computer change any of
this? People who are shallow, vain, or silly enough to buy a computer
because it's `reassuringly expensive' have always been able to buy a Mac.
The ability now to run Windows on a Mac doesn't increase that market in any
way. Anyone silly enough to fork out extra money for a computer merely
because it looks good, or merely because, er, it costs extra money, is just
as likely to use the operating system that the computer comes with --
especially if it happens to be a superior one -- as they are to use Windows.

But Joe Public doesn't think Apple's OS is better, they know Windows
is better because *everyone* uses it - you only have to rear the
thread on "Have Your Say" on the BBC web site regarding Bill Gates
"leaving" Miscrosoft to see that. (I don't know if that's archived).

But that's not what we're arguing about. You're saying that people will
buy Apple hardware to run Windows on. I'm saying they won't, because that
would be an expensive and foolish thing to do. You're right that people
are prejudiced against Apple, and the `Windows is better because everyone
uses it' argument is a prevalent one, but that argument extends beyond
merely Mac OS X to Macs and Apple hardware in general. Your average man who
just wants a cheap computer doesn't know or care that you can run Windows on
Apple hardware, and he isn't ever going to want to know or care about this,
or to buy Apple hardware, for that matter, however cool or shiny it is.
He's going to buy a Dell, or whatever, at the lowest possible price, to run
Windows on.

[...]

I don't understand why you are so confident that these people are going to
want to run Windows on their Macs. It's not like the computers come with
Windows pre-installed. They would actually have to go to an effort to
install Windows. This means they would have to use OS X, at least briefly.
You can get Patience for OS X, you know.

I'm also pretty sure the idea is that the whole Mac experience, from the
logo on the computer to the luscious Aqua interface, is part of the `cool
factor'. Anyone who wants to look `cool' on the train using a Mac is also
going to want to look `cool' using OS X. The two go hand in hand.

Surely then everyone who has been to University should be using Macs?

Surely this is a non sequitur?

Every University (7 of them) I vistited, under the PCAS/UCCA system
as it then was, had Macs.

*Some* Macs, perhaps. Presumably also rather more PCs.

I would venture that the Mac userbase has
infact declined markedly since then (as a %age of the overall market)
rather than increased.

Do you have evidence for this? To the best of my knowledge, Apple's
userbase has remained fairly steady. I'm not disputing what you say,
because I don't actually know. I do know that Apple are shifting somewhat
(but not vastly) more units now than they were a couple of years ago.
You may attribute this to the `iPod halo effect', if you wish.

I also think you are mistaking your delight
with OS X with an assumption that everyone else will feel the same.

I talk to a lot of people who are very weary of continually fighting against
viruses on their computers, and to a lot of the same people who are generally
dissatisfied with Windows computers, and are genuinely surprised if
anything they want to do actually works the first time. These people would
be delighted to use an operating system that is reliable, attractive, and
completely free of viruses. I've introduced several of these people to
Macs, and they certainly were delighted. One was so delighted he's just
bought a MacBook, and he says it's revolutionised his computing experience
(he now actually enjoys using computers; previously, it was a chore).

Personaly when shown the wonders of it shortly after it's release
I'm affraid it left me cold.

`Shortly after it's [sic] release'? What, five years ago? Is it possible
that they've improved since then?

[...]

I belive
Microsoft also beleive this to be the case, hence they have made
it possible.

Er, no, Apple made it possible.

Actually, they both made it possible.

What did Microsoft /actively/ do to make dual-booting XP and OS X on an
Intel Mac possible? Boot Camp is entirely an Apple product.

There is indeed a risk that Apple could end up
doing an Apricot, and see their own OS pushed aside.

I think it's a non-existent risk. If Apple became a box-shifter and
sold low-price machines with Windows pre-installed (and the option of no
OS X on them), it'd be a risk. But that's never going to happen.

Which was very likely Apricot's last words..... Seriously, I really
can't see Apple's being much more than (addimittedly large) niche.

You're probably right. I never said otherwise. Boot Camp and Parallels
will not make much difference to this; however, they will encourage a certain
number of people to buy Macs -- people who wanted to before but couldn't
because they still needed Windows for a small number of tasks.

If anything is going to take the world by storm it will either
be becasue Microsoft let it, or because big business wakes up to the
advantages of Open Source.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

I'm not even sure we're agreeing and disagreeing about the same thing!
You seem to have shifted the goal-posts wildly since this discussion
started. We started out with your belief that people will buy Macs to
run Windows on. Perhaps we could return to that, and you could justify
it meaningfully, rather than talking about how Apple aren't going to take
over the world?

NB: I've set follow-ups to csa.advocacy, since this is becoming painfully
off-topic here.

b.

--
<bas@xxxxxxxxx> <URL:http://bas.me.uk/>
`We first met through a shared view.
She loved me, and I did too.'
-- Mike Skinner
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Intel + Mac = PC? Does AMD + PC != PC?
    ... are no longer Macs. ... PCs don't necessarily all have intel processors. ... a PC runs one of those instead of Windows, does it cease to be a PC? ... There is not a single Apple product sold that comes with Windows. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: IS everyone buying a Mac?
    ... Mayor of R'lyeh wrote: ... does everything I want at a price I want to pay that isn't Windows ... Macs are not the highest priced computers. ... Apple makes the highest profits in the industry. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: The bunny suit thing at MW
    ... > 4 million Macs in 2005. ... > 3) Having committed these two acts of submission, then let Apple ignore Viiv ... "With Intel Viiv technology, you control a highly integrated Intel ... > Mac-intelatosh can run Windows software in emulation. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: When is a Mac no longer a Mac?
    ... Soon enough it'll be PC with Windows vs. PC with OSX vs. PC ... >> property of Macs today sets them apart from PCs? ... Apple Talk is Local Talk, which is as dead as ADB. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: The whole Apple can Run Windows thing...
    ... insurance policy for Apple hardware should the downward trend in people ... chosing to use the Mac OS platform continue. ... whiny Apple apologistas you so dislike...... ... since OS X can run Windows in emulation (and ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)