Windows 8 - 8.1 nicrosoft what were you thinking!

[Glaucus]

The 30% figure after just 5 months suggests otherwise. Mac owners are happy to lap-up paid OS upgrades (sales of the operating system). Does the same apply to other operating systems? You certainly haven't been able to provide any evidence of this.

It does not suggest other wise.
30%% of less than 7#=% marketshare is crap.
Hoow do you not understand. Even if it was 100% it pound still be crap compared to the market.
Who cares how it does compared to other comes of so. Compared to the market, it is a very poor seler, your 30% does not show anything in comparison too the market. It show comparison to other copies of osx. But as osx has around 7% marketshare, again who cares, 7% is poor sales.

Wow your that money a few users are willing too pay and a small price at that. Of course it applies to other OS the only one with good marketshare in conventional computing is MS. In mobi computing its a different story, where android wins, in fact android in now the largest OS supplier over all platforms combined.

Again if you where a business owner would you like the 7% market or the 92% market.

 

[KIA]

It does not suggest other wise.
30%% of less than 7#=% marketshare is crap.
Hoow do you not understand. Even if it was 100% it pound still be crap compared to the market.

30% is better than 0% of existing customers doling out cash for an OS upgrade.

If the rest of the market is doing better when it comes to paid OS upgrades, where is the proof?

 

[Glaucus]

30% is better than 0% of existing customers doling out cash for an OS upgrade.

If the rest of the market is doing better when it comes to paid OS upgrades, where is the proof?

Only holds true if other os are zero, which they aren't. So totally pointless argument.

It's doing better as many OSs are selling more actual copies and for a higher price. As I said the adoption rate within the particular manufacture marketshare is pointless.

Take steam stats for example, win8 is running on more than 6x the machines that 10.8 and on more machines than all osx versions combined. It's also growing at a faster rate and has a much bigger potential. It's unlikely OSX total marketshare will increase significantly.so even 10.8 maximum potential is still below what win8 is now.

If you take global Internet traffic stats. Then osx has 7.2 %, 30% off that is 2.16% win8 has a bigger market share than that as well at just over 4%.

So in no way is 30% of 7% better.

 

[KIA]

Only holds true if other os are zero, which they aren't. So totally pointless argument.

As I said the adoption rate within the particular manufacture marketshare is pointless.

Other operating systems are no way near 30% of existing users buying a new version of the OS within 5 months. If you have evidence that suggests otherwise, post it.

The adoption rate of the OS is completely relevant because it is made up of sales of software upgrades and new hardware. Sales that you tried to claim weren't taking place.

 

[Glaucus]

Why do you keep saying that. At no point have I siad they are.

What I've been saying since the start is your stats are utterly pointless.

So you would still prefer 2% marketshare rather than 6% marketshare would you?
I'll take the larger sale bolume thanks and at a higher price.

I didnt say sales weren't taking place I said sales are poor. Osx has very poor market sales and has for a very very longtime.

What do you not get about the stats I gave.

Come on reply.
Would you honestly take the sales from 2% or 4% especially as 4% has the higher price per unit as well on top of that the 4% will rise further and at a faster rate than the 2% could dream off.

So no, I not way is your 30% relevant and neither does it show good sale figures. When was 2% oof the market ever good sale figures.

 

[KIA]

Why do you keep saying that. At no point have I siad they are.

I didnt say sales weren't taking place I said sales are poor.

I have to reiterate the point because I'm waiting for you to prove that a company, other than Apple, is able to generate sales and increase OS adoption by 30% in 5 months.

30% new paid OS adoption (sales) would be significant for any company, not just Apple. If sales of the OS weren't happening, the figure wouldn't be this high.

 

[Glaucus]

I have to reiterate the point because I'm waiting for you to prove that a company, other than Apple, is able to generate sales and increase OS adoption by 30% in 5 months.

30% new paid OS adoption (sales) would be significant for any company, not just Apple. If sales of the OS weren't happening, the figure wouldn't be this high.

You'll be waiting a long time, as I've never disagree with that.

And no 30% of 7% is not significant sales. It's poor sales.
When was 7% of a market ever great sales, especially a stable market that they aren't breaking into.

My point was never that the os is not selling, but it's just tiny sales.2% of the market is tiny.

Cash value win8 has sold more copies and more value than 10.8.
My point was your stat is useless not that it's wrong, it's a stat that doesn't support your view.

 

[KIA]

You'll be waiting a long time, as I've never disagree with that.

And no 30% of 7% is not significant sales. It's poor sales.
When was 7% of a market ever great sales, especially a stable market that they aren't breaking into.

Correct, nobody else has generated enough sales to reach the 30% adoption level in 5 months. It's quite apparent that poor sales do not lead to 30% OS adoption. Thus, sales of new versions of OSX are significant in comparison to other paid for operating system upgrades.

 

[Glaucus]

This got silly ages ago. So I'll explain again and I'm done.
You take the money from 2% market, I'll take the money from the market share that at miminim is twice as large, later get price per unit and in the long run has even greater potential.
30% means sod all when your talking 30% of a 7% market share. That is in no way good sales, that is poor.

 

[KIA]

This got silly ages ago. So I'll explain again and I'm done.
You take the money from 2% market, I'll take the money from the market share that at miminim is twice as large, later get price per unit and in the long run has even greater potential.
30% means sod all when your talking 30% of a 7% market share. That is in no way good sales, that is poor.

It would be futile to compare the amount of sales and money generated because the target market is not the same. This discussion has never been about picking X over Y because X makes more money from OS upgrades.

The sales of the competition have not been significant as Apple's because they have not generated any where near 30% adoption. You would probably refer to the competitions sales as "poor".

 

[Glaucus]

The target market is the same, it's the pc market. Or are you saying they aren't competing for both home and corporate use.
They have been far more significant thanked, hence they hold more marketshar, thus more sales. It's as easy as that.

Again at no point did ii say your 30% was wrong, I siad the stat was pointless.

 

[KIA]

If the competitions sales were as significant, they would have managed to achieve greater than 30% adoption in 5 months. Number of sales required to reach a certain OS adoption percentage and become significant will always vary from company to company.

 

[theheyes]

It's a bit of a futile comparison anyway because the Mac segment is skewed heavily towards people who are likely to upgrade. Affluent, tech enthusiast Apple fans must surely make up a huge proportion of their customer base, whereas the vast majority of Windows users don't give a rats about upgrading.

Trying to steer the thread back on track a little, the initial post that kicked this off was about why would Microsoft "copy" OSX? Well, on the other hand, why wouldn't they adopt some of the better ideas? Moving to the yearly release cycle is straight out of the Apple book, and a good thing in my opinion. And it's free, for this version at least.

 

[Glaucus]

If the competitons sales were significant? They are far more significant, they shipped many more copies from twice as many to 6times as many depending what stats you use.
So no again you are not using the right stat in the slightests.

30%of 7% is very very different to 30% of 90% which is what you are saying they should have a dieted, that is insane to come to that conclusion.
End of the day win8 has out sold new osx, in some it's even outsold all osx currently in use.
So yes Ms marketshar wis far more significant as showen by the stats. When you don't pick a stat and then trying to use it for something it was never meant for.

 

[Glaucus]

Trying to steer the thread back on track a little, the initial post that kicked this off was about why would Microsoft "copy" OSX? Well, on the other hand, why wouldn't they adopt some of the better ideas? Moving to the yearly release cycle is straight out of the Apple book, and a good thing in my opinion. And it's free, for this version at least.

Yes copy good features, but the posted I replied to was copy osx due to poor sale figures. Despite it outselling osx many time sober.
So in reply to that, it makes effect sense, somehow it's a poor seller, but still copy something that has still sold less.

 

[opethdisciple]

Mac sales are down too, as are iPad sales - significantly. So you're right in the sense that customers have spoken with their spending habits, but the trend is towards inexpensive mini tablets for which Apple have a half-way solution and Microsoft have almost no representation at all.

Abandoning their philosophy won't solve that problem, and neither will it do anything to slow the decline of the desktop market. Windows 8 gets credited with way more influence on the PC market that it deserves considering the industry had stalled before it was even released, and does absolutely nothing to explain declining Mac sales.

Surely Mac sales should have spiked if Apple truly offered a superior solution?

I think it has tho surely? I see lots of people as I go about my daily life, with ipads and mac books... Obviously people are still buying traditional Win laptops, but I'm sure the Mac sales are up.

As for tablets, the ipad is the defacto, I havent seen many people with android based pads and I have not seen a single person with the Windows variety.

Im a PC by the way!

---

WP is not doing well either. Recently read that Nokia are moaning that Microsoft arent putting enough resources in to development of the O.S. They focus on the Desktop and Office more than the mobile O.S. Nokia are complainig as they have low sales not becuase of the hardware, but becuase of the O.S. (Well they shouldnt have partnered with MS should they! Why couldnt they have gone Android. It's free?)

I think this is why Nokia are looking in to bringing out an Android based Lumia. Diversify the brand a little.

 

[Glaucus]

MS still outsell anyone else in the traditional markets. ~90% market share to OsXs ~7%
So MacBooks aren't doing very well at all.

As for tablets, Ms are doing dreadfully ATM, but android are outselling iPads. And iPads have lost market share to android. Going from 46% to 28% and android 51% to 67% over the last year q2 results 2012 and 2013
Windows 2013 q2 is just under 5%
These are all sales rather than all devices out there.


They won't go android as samsung have that market sowen up, they would not be a big player.
Although WP market is very small it is growing and nokia have got themself at the top with over 90% of the wp8 sales. So are in a very good place providing the wp8 marketshare grows.

 

[Burnsy2023]

MS still outsell anyone else in the traditional markets. ~90% market share to OsXs ~7%
So MacBooks aren't doing very well at all.

People don't buy a PC just for an OS, they buy for a complete product. A Macbook is a very different product to a cheap Acer and they have very different target markets. Macbooks are more of a niche product fore a niche market and are not going for cheap mass market appeal. That's all part of the product strategy, high margin, premium product.

You are comparing Apples with Oranges.

 

[Glaucus]

People don't buy a PC just for an OS, they buy for a complete product. A Macbook is a very different product to a cheap Acer and they have very different target markets. Macbooks are more of a niche product fore a niche market and are not going for cheap mass market appeal. That's all part of the product strategy, high margin, premium product.

You are comparing Apples with Oranges.

I'm not comparing apples and oranges. They are in direct competition with windows. Ultra books exist. Did I say they buy it just for an os?
Yes it is high margin stuff, but do you honestly think apple are happy with it?
Just becuase it's high margin doesn't mean you should be stuck at single figure marketshare.
Just as iPod, iPhone and ipad show, all off which are premium priced high margins affairs.

 

[deuse]

As for tablets, the ipad is the defacto, I havent seen many people with android based pads and I have not seen a single person with the Windows variety.

Your social circle must be small as android has 75% of the Mobile market