SuperSite Blog

We all "know" that's because when you go into Best Buy or Dell.com that you HAVE TO BUY VISTA, right ! No other OS is available anywhere. Can you get Mac at Best Buy or XP or Linux from Dell or other major manufacturers?

Oh, you can?

Never mind.

Oh, geez. Another "iCabal" article. Sigh.

Hey, Paul, there is one thing in common about Vista marketshare increasing and OS X marketshare increasing: Both occur at the expense of Windows XP.

There is one difference. An XP to Vista conversion is one version of Windows cannibalizing another. An XP (or Vista) conversion to OS X is a PC to Mac change.

Summed over all the countless versions of Windows (six(?) for Vista alone) the total is declining. OSX, ie Mac, marketshare is up.

And that's why the numbers on Vista and OS X marketshare growth mean entirely different things.

Why even mention Macintosh in this article?  Unless there's a real threat.

whiplash55:

I would love to buy a mac without mac os but Vista pre-installed instead.

Cheers.

And since the Net Applications report measures into the hundredths of a percent, they can even measure Linux desktop usage.

(Sorry, couldn't resist)

@chuckb84

Of course, that's not necessarily true. Apple has three separate ways of running Windows on their computers. Well, at least 3. Jobs only made time in a keynote for mentioning 3 of them as features of Mac OS.

Who knows how many of those copies of Vista and XP are running on Macs?

It was bound to happen... no need to shout victory. It's been awhile windows has more than 4% market share.

Heran: what do you care, buy it and install it it yourself, it's super simple with boot-camp.

@daveinla

You got it wrong. Heran didn't just want to run Vista on a Mac. That's easy and even Steve Jobs touts running Vista on a Mac as a feature. What he wanted was to be able to buy a Mac without wasting the space on an unneeded copy of OS X that he'd never use. (And, presumably, without paying the OS X Tax)

whiplash55:

I would love to buy a mac without mac os but Vista pre-installed instead.

Cheers.

So would I.

"buy it and install it it yourself"

And don't forget to purchase a full retail license of Vista too.  Otherwise you are not legally licensed.

It's really time for an updated edition of "How to Lie with Statistics".  Oh, wait--it has been done (my copy goes back many years (published 1954, bought soon after)).  Time to buy a fancy new one (mine has a dull red cover).  Or at least dig mine out of the basement.

Consider things like the quite excellent correlation running over a century (at least until the 1950s--probably broken now) between the price of rum in Havana and ministers' salaries in New England.

Change from a low base is one way to produce meaningly numbers;  showing only the top part of a graph is another (it makes minor ups and downs look large).  And many more.

Even with the Windows Vista market share gains, I would love to see Apple with a least 10 percent OS market share.

I think it;s healthier for more choice, and while Vista is stable, compatible and secure, when you have competition everybody bebefits.

Am I lost?  Is this winsupersite?  Or is it.....

www.ilovenohateappleandsomewindowsstuff.com

Wow so when Apple gets 12-14% will they make more money per year than MS?   When they get to 20% will they buy MS?

Which company would you invest in right now?

Since this is applesupersite.com for the last few days, how about covering "1 million iPhones sold over the weekend" which took 74 days for the first one.  I guess that bad press was good for them after all.  Or how about the fact that 10million apps were downloaded over the weekend.  

10 million is probably 20% of the number of Vista copies "sold" but never installed:)

My group of 30 doctors has some interesting stats. A third of us own Macs, and 80 % of we Mac owners installed XP or Vista on it, although only two of us installed Vista. There is another meaningless number that is neglected. That is the number of those who did not buy a new computer because we were afraid of Vista, although that number is shrinking. Therefore, there are many more potential Vista [or Apple] buyers out there.To further avoid Vista, many of my friends have learned to reinstall XP, to rid the malware/viruses that their computers had contracted as they had inadequate protection, to speed up their slowing computers, making them functional again. This has delayed a purchase of a new one, most of which will be Vista. there are many more Vista copies to be sold. or pirated. I think that all the docs in my group that installed XP, used the license from an old dead computer [yep, I know this is in violation of the Windows Eula, but I didn't do it]. Either way, I further encourage it [XP installation] as it runs faster than Vista using VMware.  And now, IT at the hospital gave us a written workaround, so that the ActiveX plugin of Vista's IE7 will work with GE Centricity, our PACS software. GE created an update that works, as we installed it at our offices' GE Centricity WS, but the hospital has had problems installing it the past many months. Eventually it will be installed, but the ppoint is that the docs that waited to buy a new Vista computer, got the green light to do so last month = more Vista sales.

@whiplash55

Actually, you CAN buy macs at Best Buy...

And for certain computers you can get Ubuntu or Windows XP from Dell.com...

So, what's your point?

Oh crap, didn't notice the last comment, I apologize

Imagine how cool this blog would be if there was some Windows news instead of 24/7 'I hate apple'.    Starting to seem sort of lame.

When you expend more energy bashing Apple than promoting MS stuff, there might be a problem, and it's not with the 'iCabal'..

Vista is my main machine but I have Mac and Linux boxes as well.  

Might be nice to concentrate on good stuff from MS, unless that's not a possibility.

So, if I read this correctly, a year and a half after Microsoft released Vista as its new flagship OS, it only has 16.14% market share (or 17.9% of the combined Windows market share).

Wow.

@WebGuy3000

Which is about the same migration rate that Windows XP had when it was out the same time.

That's about normal for a new OS release when you have an installed base of any significant size.

I would add that my G4 AGP purchased in 1999, which got a 1.25 GHz CPU upgrade many years ago, runs Leopard flawlessly AND fast. Not as fast as my 3GHZ quad Pro Tower, but plenty fast. I use it many times each week when I work out. I bought a second G4 AGP from Ebay years ago for the same purpose, but it still has the 450MHz CPU [runnning Tiger flawlessly and fast] uut it is collecting dust since I bought the Pro Tower and now use the upgraded one in my workout room. [I use the MS Laser mouse with it, BTW. The new Logitech MX Revolution is still in the box, but is for the Pro Tower.]

@mikegalos@msn.com:

Fair enough.  So it's about what you'd expect.  So how are the numbers Paul quotes in this post in any way significant?  Sorry, but I don't get it.

@WebGuy3000

The numbers Paul posted are significant in showing that, despite the bashing campaign, Vista sales are doing fine.

It's a preemptive dose of reality before the inevitable "Mac sales are huge. Vista's dead." articles that come out from pundits who have no clue about numbers or sales trends but like headlines even if they're idiotic.

@darreldavis  best comment on this site in weeks.  I guess Paul is going for the "negativity or bad stuff" sells more.

Sort of like TV news were its 98% death, destruction, war, negative politics, female teachers having sex with teenage boys and the latest celebrity meltdowns/drunken escapade.

So why go Windows positive and not look like a 15 year old trying to say you got the bigger e-penis when you can go negative, and bash Apple all day long and attract more MS fans that need an island of love for their products.

Unless there is now good Windows news like you stated???

My only surprise is why he did not call someone a "LIAR!!"?  Then again Weathorn has not chimed in, maybe its his turn this week?

As my Grandma used to say, dont blow out someone else's candle to make yours burn brighter.  Paul keep blowing its not working....

Oh boy, here we go.  This is the ultimate Thurrott trifecta post.  "iCabal" strawman slander PLUS a hyperbolic title about the Mac being left "in the dust" PLUS completely brain-dead analysis of the meaning and context of marketshare/usage share numbers.

Get ready boys,  this is gonna be a long one.

First of all, Mac OSX doesn't compete with Vista.  It competes with the ENTIRE Windows platform and more specifically Windows-based PCs.  Since Vista is now the default OS on new non-Apple PCs, and has been for 18 months... Microsoft is seeing their userbase migrate to the system as users upgrade to new machines.  Great.  This was inevitable, given their monopoly.  Consumer goes into best buy, asks for PC... gets Vista.  And that's fine. It's no a choice, it's just bundled.  Most people don't even think about operating systems.  But Vista appears to be a fine product.  Wonderful.  

But these new Vista sales were former XP sales to the same people plus 10 to 12% (the PC industry's growth rate).  Apple is growing their OVERALL share by 30% plus.  I'm not talking Net Applications.  I'm talking the real numbers released by Apple for the past quarters compared to the overall sales, worldwide.  That's the REAL numbers as Paul like to say.  Apple's offering is driving overall sales growth for them and delivering major revenue and stock growth as a result.  

So Vista's user share went up.  The overall Windows share still went down.  Thats just a fact.

This is a pretty blatantly ludicrous numbers game.  Vista is Windows.  Mac vs. Windows share is not about a particular version.  Vista's growth is coming entirely out of their existing userbase of the market plus a the overall PC market growth which, again is a third of Apple's.  Vista hasn't made any material improvement in the PC industry's growth rate at all.  None.  And it's growth is coming ENTIRELY from the XP userbase and not at all from the Mac userbase.  The Mac userbase however, is growing at the expense of the Windows userbase.  That's how it ACTUALLY works.

In order for this entire statistics dance to even make sense regarding your headline, Mac share would need to be declining.  But it's not.   And, It looks like Apple may even push that growth rate further this quarter with estimates of 2.5 million Macs being sold.

I'm not saying Apple is taking over the world here.  It most obviously is not.  It's making incremental improvements at the macro scale in he mac.  Windows is a monster compared to Apple's relatively puny share.  But they're growing their business much faster than Microsoft.  Just look at the REAL numbers.  The balance sheet.

In 2006:

Apple had 19.3 Billion in gross revenue and 2 billion in net profit.

Microsoft had 44 Billion in gross revenue and 12.6 billion in net profit.

In 2007:

Apple had 24 Billion in gross revenue and 3.5 billion in net profit.

Microsoft had 51 Billion in gross revenue and 14 billion in net profit.

Now look at total asset values:

Apple's total equity was 10 billion in 2007 and is 18 billion today.

Microsoft's total equity was 40 billion in 2007 and is 37.5 billion today

That's 24% growth YOY in revenue and 75% in profit for Apple in 2007

versus 15% growth YOY in revenue and 11% in profit for Microsoft in 2007

More astoundingly, Apple almost DOUBLED (80% increase) it's total cash value

while Microsoft's total cash value DECLINED in the same period.

So, Apple's gains are HUGE.  Period.  HUGE for any business.  This is what has driven their enormous stock gains over the past few years.

Paul, by making your arguments based on a rebuttal to the "iCabal" strawman, you are ultimately producing garbage analysis in the opposite direction.  I guess you could call that balanced in the Fox News kind of "we're conservative because the rest of the media is liberal" kind of way.  But it's certainly not objective or intellectually honest.

Nothing about what Apple is doing is "easy" as you say.  The computer business has network effects that reinforce marketshare.  Apple's growth is tiny in absolute terms, but an enormous accomplishment in the real world.

Take That, brain-dead, partisan hack analysis. Sorry.  But it is.

ps: If even Walt Mossberg isn't a partisan shill (as you are pointing out), who exactly is this iCabal?  It's nobody.  it's your strawman for teeing up these posts in order to vent at the fanboys. And let's not open up the TCO argument (which the Mac generally wins objectively and fairly).

"There are over a billion people using Windows, for crying out loud."

And where are you getting that stat?  Since when is every license a one-to-one with a person?  Love to know.

Both are making money, right?

finance.yahoo.com/echarts

finance.yahoo.com/echarts

@Paul

I think you're a good guy, and I enjoy the articles on the SuperSite as well as the podcast, but this "iCabal" stuff is really tiresome.

I can't decide whether you're simply pulling a Dvorak and link-baiting or whether you've decided to fight the Internet's operating system wars by joining the ranks.  Covering the trivialities of the Windows vs. Mac vs. Linux holy wars using incendiary language is incredibly, incredibly boring.  Frankly, constantly using this "iCabal" stuff doesn't make you any better than the iCabal you keep harping on.  I get enough of this stuff on the network news.  

You're certainly capable of sober, pragmatic analysis of the best tool for the job at hand.  Instead, you've repeatedly chosen to go with tabloid news style coverage.  I understand this gets "ratings" in the Internet sense, but it is of little value to those of us who care about technology and at least try to have a fair, honest discussion about it.  You can do better.

>>Apple's growth is tiny in absolute terms, but an enormous accomplishment in the real world.<<

I double-dog dare anyone to take on this analysis.

But no, it won't be touched.  :D

The billion Windows users number came out last year and is actually a conservative value that's been accepted as pretty solid even by the anti-Microsoft types. (Who change the subject rather than attack it)

And, no, despite your jerking knee, it isn't based on "licenses ever sold". Just because you don't like something doesn't make it false.

BTW, there is math error in the PC World article, which Paul repeats in his headline.  The Vista growth should ne 255%, not 355%.

This was pointed out in the comments:

"Going from 6.03 to 7.94 is indeed an increase of 32%. However, going from 4.54 to 16.14 is an increase of 255% (actually slightly closer to 256%), not 355%. Yes, 16.14 is 3.555 times 4.54 but that's not the same as a 355% increase."

Just in the interest of accuracy.

^ definitely Paul is mixing up a bit every thing here in that article and gets a bit carried away.

As John said, Vista is not gaining market share bit is replacing slowly XP. But for Apple to slowly erode the market share of Windows in the personal computers business, meaning computers used by the people and therefore chosen by them (which is what NetApp is measuring even if it's skewed towards windows as millions of people like me browse the internet from work during the day on their work's PC and use Macs at home the remaining of the day) is a huge achievement.

As said before Windows is a huge beast and 0.5% taken away from it is millions computers more sold for Apple.

@darreldavis

"When you expend more energy bashing Apple than promoting MS stuff, there might be a problem"

I've always said the same thing, but about Apple...you have seen the many, many, many switcher ads correct?  

Apple seems to bash MS more than promote the features of its OS.  I have yet to see one MS ad that puts down Apple at all...although I wish they would have done at least one in response...it could have been really funny if handled the right way.

Apple brings this type of bashing on itself…

You'd think Paul might question his iCabal label as applied to Mossberg based on such stuff as where Mossberg said there was no evidence macs last longer than PCs.  But of course not.

Paul's claim that he is objective, while folks like Mossberg are a shill for Apple shows just how far out to lunch Paul is sometimes.  I mean, pot calling the kettle black?  Mossberg doesn't actually derive income from a particular OS - like Paul does.

Even your headline is wrong!

From Net Applications:

Vista share June 2007 04.54%

Vista share June 2008 16.14%

Increase of 255%

Paul I realize it's PC World's mistake and not yours but come on,  this is bordering on WindowsCabal territory.

>>Mossberg doesn't actually derive income from a particular OS - like Paul does.<<

Nor Pogue.

This is an INSANELY great point.

That didn't take long...

>>Apple® today announced it sold its one millionth iPhone™ 3G on Sunday, just three days after its launch on Friday, July 11.

--

“It took 74 days to sell the first one million original iPhones, so the new iPhone 3G is clearly off to a great start around the world.” <<

on the other hand:

>>Public developers recently started an online petition on Android's Google Group because they're frustrated with the lack of an updated SDK - the last one was provided in March 2008. The complaints are that the current SDK is buggy and that certain features don't work.

--

a Google Engineer Jean-Baptiste Queru spoke up. Although he makes it clear that he's not the official spokesperson for Android, he does try to address some of the issues while also expressing some frustrations from the engineering team's side of the fence, too. In fact, reading between the lines a bit, it sounds like some of the engineers aren't happy with the decisions being made, either.<<

www.readwriteweb.com/.../gphone_rumors_and_android_developers_revolt.php

I disagree with a few things here. Although i have no statistically valid studies, I think that MS and Apple do compete. Let's face it, you can either buy a Windows PC or a Mac, so that 's competition [or Linux?]. Also, from many years of experience with numerous friends and family, these average users tend to use their Macs much longer than Windows PC's, by 2 to 3 years. They have old XP boxes in their garages and basements, wondering how to dispose of them. Also, the township where I reside told me that the few Mac they they get to dispose, are considerably older than the PC's. Market share will effect the number, but not the age of the computer to be disposed. They guy from the local Goodwill made the same claim. The Apple store 15 minutes away is always packed and there is another busy store within a few miles [Marlton and Cherry hill stores], so there is plenty of opportunity to buy a Mac. There are several close Bestbuys too. CompUSA  just closed, but had been around selling for years. My point is that Apple put two stores here as they sell a lot in the area, so the above claims should not be refuted by stating that not many must be sold locally. But of course you all know that NJ is the most densely populated state, or at least very close to the top of the list. On the other side, NJ has a higher average income than many states, which could also be a factor to allow the sale of Macs, which have a higher entry price than Windows PC's.

mikegalos@msn.com

So to me this means the months of BS of were we heard about how horrible Vista is/was is just that, BS. Anyone remember Blaster or any of the plethora of security issues XP had the 1st year or 2, or how slow it runs compared to my Windows 98 box with a screamin 500 mhz  pIII?  The more thing change the more they stay the same.

One thing that has changed is Apple now actually provides a reasonable alternative, and has a brilliant marketing program called the iPod/iphone. I'm glad to see competition in the market we all win.

Market share is quite complex to "see", but maybe some calcolous could help. If you search the web, in 5 minutes you discover how few Apple has "gained" market share.

Maybe the case the Apple is having some side-effect that is proper of every enterprise (big or small) which tends to delay the time to change old machines for new ones. This happens even in the Apple niche environment.

As Paul did report some time ago we have Windows "caught" between Apple and Linux. Data just will slap in your face the reality: Windows 96%, Apple 3%, Linux 1%.

It's really sad to see how overhyped is the Apple business (on the web and around) that gained in TEN YEARS, i repeat thet TEN YEARS, a very small percentage (1%? with all that adv mess? embarassing).

For second argument let's just say that Apple business is really much as hyped as its marketing. And don't forget that Apple is mainly (i mean, if we talk about relevant things) Pixar, iPod and now climbing (or attempting to) with iPhone in smartphone market.

Someone thinking about Apple hardware with Windows as only os? Why paying 30% or more the price of the same PC hardware without being able to change or upgrade later with other pieces (motherboards, graphic cards, processors)? And there's also the fact that, for this, you should have to buy a retail version of Windows which is much more expensive than the oem you buy with a new pc.

This is the reason why pc/windows ecosystem is so gargantuan.

It REALLY works. Data tells this, simply.

Or are you really thinking about designing aircrafts, cars, ships, measuring the universe, controlling data, calulating biomolecular or organic chemicals interaction and other complex things with "keynote.app"?

Wake up people.

Run DMC used to sing: don't believe the hype. But, couriously you seem to believe always the biggest hypes of IT history as far as i can read...

:(

I really think that that's the important point, competition. So much had improved for the user because of it. Tis includes all forms, including the aging Palm platform. I do think that Paul's point is to prove that some of the stupid headlines that Vista is a failure, is just plain ridiculous. Not just using market share and sales, but also include profits on Vista. Granted it's forced since you can barely buy anything but Vista OS PC, but the stats speak for themselves. I certainly like it's look and feel better than XP, don't you all agree? It more 'Mac-like' as per all the write-ups.

@DRWAM

Lots of image obsessed attention seekers in that area too...need to have the latest over-hyped, over-priced gadget to keep up with the neighbors.  

Imagine what the neighbors would think if they were caught getting out of their hummer/benz/lexus without the latest handbag and cellphone…the horror!!!

fzanes.Yep, agreed. I was born in Western PA, above Pittsburgh, in coal mine territory. Worked many jobs and loans through school as dad was a fireman. My wife and I know what you mean, especially in the nearby Moorestown area where some of the Eagles and other Philly team members live.

Nickelgreen, while you cannot upgrade the mobo on a Mac, the Vid cards and CPU's have been upgradable for years and there are many references to prove it as well as web sites. I have used OWC [macsales.com]. Read above where I have upgraded a 1999 450 MHz G4 with a new CPU. They can only go to 2 GHZ, but you can upgrade the vid card [which I have done on all my Macs, as well as RAM and drives made for any PC. In fact you can flash many PC vid cards to work on a Mac. That's what I am typing on right now, a 1999 G4 running Leopard]. Also, calling a the success of a multibillion dollar profitable company like Apple's, all 'hype' is a bit ridiculous. Few companies can claim Apples success in the past few years. Again, read above. It looks like I agree with the rest of your post. You need to add computers in medicine. Macs used to have a presence, but all the major companies went to Windows long ago. While there are several FDA approved Mac related apps in medicine, like market share, they are an ant on the sidewalk compared to Windows apps [FDA approved or otherwise]. Any how, love your website. We obviously have much in common.

@DRWAM yes I think the look of Vista when using it is better looking than XP.  However I like the look of Leopard even better.

If you take XP as the base looks, the Vista is way better looking but kind of neon/cartoon in comparison.  Leopard is better looking than XP minus the neon/cartoon looks.

Vista changed a lot of things, for no real reason, like add/remove programs, its now Programs or whatever in the control panel.  There are many more examples of this.  

Vista's over all GUI speed seems slower to me than XP on the same hardware.  Only if you turn down stuff, or you are running on a really fast desktop does Vista feel quick like XP.  On a new machine XP is super fast in comparison.

@nickelgreen "t's really sad to see how overhyped is the Apple business (on the web and around) that gained in TEN YEARS, i repeat thet TEN YEARS, a very small percentage (1%? with all that adv mess? embarassing)."

So Apple with its 3% of the market (your numbers) it had 24billion in revenue last year vs MS with 96% and 51 billion, and you say that is overhyped?

Embarrassing?  If you had 10,000 shares you would be laughing all the way to the bank.

Nickelgreen you're on pot or what ??

"Apple is mainly (i mean, if we talk about relevant things) Pixar, iPod and now climbing (or attempting to) with iPhone "

Apple still makes about 50% of its revenue by selling Macs !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and that share is the one that's is climbing the fastest right now as ipod sales are reaching a plateau and iphone is just starting to pick-up.

@jp and davinla -

"First of all, Mac OSX doesn't compete with Vista.  It competes with the ENTIRE Windows platform and more specifically Windows-based PCs."

"But these new Vista sales were former XP sales to the same people plus 10 to 12%"

"As John said, Vista is not gaining market share bit is replacing slowly XP."

My only issue with these statements is that when you discuss OS X are you talking all versions up to and including Leopard or only Leopard. I would submit that many Leopard "installs" or "purchases" or however you wnat to state it are replacements of Tiger and previous OS X versions. So, how do we count those numbers?

--tayme

"Mossberg doesn't actually derive income from a particular OS - like Paul does."

Income no (not directly anyway, since Apple is a sponsering advertiser of the WSJ and NYT), but gadgets yes.  If someone gave you a gadget to review and said to keep it, wouldn't you write a favourable review of the [company's] product?

"Vista changed a lot of things, for no real reason, like add/remove programs, its now Programs or whatever in the control panel."

Probably because nobody ever used it to *add* programs to their computer.

I mean, the "add programs" wizard consists of a message saying "insert your program disc now", and then AutoRun would kick in.

How is that different from what happens automatically?

....that's why they changed it.

@cesjr - "Paul's claim that he is objective"

You are not the only one who has said this...so it is not a slam on you...but please show me when Paul as EVER claimed to be objective.

--tayme

Just one more thing here. Paul wrote

"And speaking of myth-busting, did I ever tell you about the joke were iCabal high-priest Walter Mossberg actually busted the myth that Macs are somehow used over a longer period of time than Windows PCs? I know, that's funny, right? Well, it really happened."

If Mossberg is an iCabal high priest, why is (in your view) busting the myth?

Am I the only one who sees the bizarre inconsistency in this?

And the same remarks can be made of the review of reviewers of the iPhone. Pogue---who Paul regularly "iCabals"---delivers a fair and balanced review. How then can he be an iCabaler?

The whole thing sure seems like sour grapes to me.

@ Dipsh t Admin

Sorry but you are wrong.  If you install an OEM version of Vista, or XP on a new Mac or on a computer where you have scrubbed the disk, you are completely legal as you qualify as a 'system builder'.  Microsoft already has enough of your money, why complicate their lives by giving them more than you need to.  

>>If someone gave you a gadget to review and said to keep it, wouldn't you write a favourable review of the [company's] product?<<

Not if you had any integrity.  Besides, this article says that everything he gets ends up going back.

www.wired.com/.../mossberg.html

Well, Ocean, you were 100% correct.  Nobody dealt with my post of the true facts all.  Perhaps I need to break it down so that a child could understand it.

Okay, here it is guys.  We'll work off of 100 people to equate directly to 100% as a total share (duh).

You have 100 people.  It's 2007.

6 of them are mac users.  91 of them are Windows users. 3 use something else.

Simple, right?

a year goes by.  The overall Windows PC business grows, but the Mac grows three times faster.

So now you ask that 100 people what they use.  It's 2008.

8 of them are mac users. 90 of them are Windows users.  And 2 use something else.

So.  In one year, Apple converted 2 out of 100 people to the mac.  Windows lost 1 and "something else" lost 1.  It would seem likely, given the saturation of the computing market, that Apple converted 1 windows user and 1 "other" user.  

Macs are growing and Windows is not as a percentage of the userbase.  How you can translate that into "mac's being left in the dust" is a matter of whether you are honest or a are being a partisan hack.

Now, there are many new computer users out there to be had.  People are born every day.  The population is growing.  But that's absolute numbers, not relative percentages.  So the Windows PC market is growing at 10 to 12% which is a decent living, but the Mac is growing at 30% or more which means Apple is taking a bigger and bigger percentage of that pie.

Windows Vista is not a separate platform from Windows XP.  It is the successor.  The intention of Vista is not to "compete" with XP, but to replace it and compete more effectively with Linux and the Mac.  Just as Toyota's 2008 cars are meant to take share from GM's latest, not from last year's Toyota.

Again.  This is easy stuff.  Only partisan hackery and meta-hackery being done in the name of countering alleged "iCabal" hackery could twist this stuff around.  PC World and Paul are both out to lunch on this analysis.  It's just plain stupid.

@jp - I did address your post and you still haven't adressed my question. When you say OS X are you talking only about Leopard or about all versions? I am curious about the numbers of Leopard compared to Tiger and on down the line of the feline family of OS X. Since you are making the point that you cannot count Vista upgrades as a positive,  I wonder if your OS X numbers or those of others are being counted in that manner as well.

--tayme

Tayme:

Well Paul started to mix things up by comparing Vista's replacement rate over XP with OSX market share (all versions included) ;-% hard concept to grasp, but well he did it !

John and I were pointing to the fact that given that XP is not sold anymore and that all computers sold now come with Vista and that Win still has around 90% market share, it was likely that Vista hit 16% one of these days. You don't need to be a psychic for that nor a PhD.

The info that is of more interest is that despite Vista's rise (over XP) this doesn't prevent the erosion of Win (all versions) market AND usage share in favor of OSX (all versions).

regards.

Anyone who has heard Paul rip into Microsoft on any number of topics would tend to disagree with you. He also uses many Mac products and frequently comments about them in a positive light. The article was about Vista uptake, and shows that it is similar to XP at the approximately the same point after XP's rollout. Mac share has increased dramatically as well but from a much lower level of market share,  I wouldn't let the term icabal upset you to much, you should here him talk about the Windows Mobile platform, he pretty much ripped them a new one last time I heard it brought up.

@johnpapola

Actually, you didn't even do the math for the simplified version you presented.

Let's stick with your simplified model.

You have 100 users

95 Windows (95%)

--92 Windows XP (92%)

--3 Windows Vista (3%)

4 Mac (4%)

1 Linux (1%)

A year later there has been a 50% growth rate in the industry

You have 150 users

134 Windows users (89.3%)

--126 Windows XP (84%)

--8 Windows Vista (5.3%)

7 Mac users (4.7%)

1 Linux user (0.7%)

You could say

Overall growth was 50%

Windows Vista growth was better than average at 167%

Mac growth was better than average at 75%

Windows overall growth was less than average at 41%

Windows XP growth was less than average at 37%

Linux was worse than average at 0%

Or you could say:

Windows Overall grew by 39 units

Windows XP grew by 34 units

Windows Vista grew by 5 units

Mac grew by 3 units

Linux was flat

All of those are true.

If we go by percentage growth

Windows Vista is the big winner

If we go by unit growth

Windows XP is the big winner

If we lump all Windows systems together then the Mac does better in percentage growth but even worse in unit growth

There are lots of ways to measure and all tell part of the story.

(And we didn't cover things like XP and Vista on Mac hardware or hardware replacement rates. We assumed that all no computers were replace and that no computers use more than one OS.)

@Johnpapola

You had one conclusion not supported by the math that really should be called out. You said:

"So the Windows PC market is growing at 10 to 12% which is a decent living, but the Mac is growing at 30% or more which means Apple is taking a bigger and bigger percentage of that pie."

While that is technically true, the hugely better growth rate doesn't correspond to a huge growth in share. (A fact that usually gets ignored by fans of any product or idea with a tiny share)

Let's assume two products. Big product has a 99% share and tiny product has a 1% share. The market grows by 12%. Tiny product has a 30% growth that year.

Sales

Overall market 1000->1120 (12% growth rate)

Big product 990->1107 (11.8% growth rate)

Tiny product 10->13 (30% growth rate)

Market share ratio

Year 1 - 99.0:1.0

Year 2 - 98.8:1.2

That 30% growth rate only corresponds to a 0.2% increase in share.

Tiny product's fans put out BIG BANNER HEADLINES:

TINY PRODUCT SALES UP 30%. BIG PRODUCT DOOMED!!!

Big product puts out a press release:

Big product sales up 11.8%

Sales of Big Product set new record at 1,107 units sold.

Is Big Product "doomed"? Well, if tiny product can continue to grow at that rate, they'll become significant in a few decades but it's a little premature to talk about doom because you lost 0.2% market share in a year.

@mikegalos

Or you could just use the original figures from Net Applications.

Operating System Marketshare

Windows (all flavours)

June 2008 90.89%

June 2007 93.34%  GAIN: MINUS 2.45%

Mac OS (All cats!)

June 2008 07.94%

June 2007 06.03%  GAIN: PLUS 1.91%

I will try to put it even simpler that that. Windows is losing share (according to these metrics) .... and the Mac is gaining share.

All the talk of Vista, XP, Leopard, Tabby, whatever ... is pretty irrelevant. The millions of people who are being counted are just using the OS that came on their computer. Very few upgrade or even downgrade their OS.

I have read the whole PC World article.

In a nutshell here is it what it says:

Some people who, last year, were already using PCs running Windows are now running Windows Vista on their PCs.

There are more people (as a percentage) using a Mac OS than there were  last year......

...... but  "when seen in absolute numbers, it's not particularly impressive"

Basically it's " My dad is still bigger than your dad (even if your dad is growing a bit faster"

Paul calls the article interesting, even when it plainly isn't and even copies  their mistake ... and then uses it as a headline!

The reason I, and obviously other commenters, get frustrated is that if you try and point out obvious errors and flawed statistical interpretations you end up forever being painted with the "i" word.

Or, to give another example. Using the same data from the same survey.

Linux had 86% growth this year. Almost triple the growth of Apple's OS X.

The bad news for the Linux fans is that after 17 years they still have less than 1% of the market.

But somewhere, a Linux Fanboi is posting:

LINUX GROWTH RATE TRIPLE APPLE'S OS X. CONSUMERS REJECT APPLE "FRIENDLY GUI" FOR OPEN SOURCE. COMMERCIAL SOFTWARE DOOMED!!!

@MaryW

What will be interesting to see with the (All cats!) number is what will happen if the rumored abandoning of PPC Macs with Snow Leopard leaves 34% of Mac users abandoned.

@mikegallos

Mike, your calculator may be accurate but you just don't "get it", do you?

No one is claiming that Microsoft or Windows is "doomed" or that the OS X is going to dominate the PC market. The simple fact is that the Mac is gaining share. And Linux too. Both of these gains come at the expense of the Windows OS.

I am part owner of a multimillion dollar company. Our business concerns are profitability and sustainability, not market share. While market share is interesting, customer service is more important. But we are in business to serve our community and make money at it. We have over 300 employees, which include a CFO and HR staff. We know are profitability of each modality [product in business terms] down to the penny. Both MS and Apple are very profitable, but market share is the small part of the story.

In my opinion its about time Apple had more of the market share. At lest now viruses will be made for the mac as well so that way everything will be distributed. In a negative will make leopard appear like XP but will benefit when apple will realize that they should spend some more time on their security.  Not being negative right now im typing on a mac (just to note) but that's probably what is going to happen. it will benefit though both operating systems in the end.

@MaryW

The point of the whole article is to preempt the inevitable "Windows is Doomed!!!" posts. (Perhaps you should have read Paul's post in full rather than just PC World's)

@DRWAM

"but market share is the small part of the story."

Exactly!

Apart from when certain logic takes a back seat and everyone chimes in with the   "Microsoft/DellNokia/etc has more marketshare.

Pfffeeeeewwww .... everybody agrees on the bottomline: windows loses shares to macs (mostly) and linux, everybody agrees on the distortion of the view from the stats: an increase on a small number is a big % increase (whether vista, OSX or linux) and finally vista is poised to take over XP as users have no choice anyway ! ... but still everybody holds the truth !

So what's the point arguing with stupid maths when the bottomline is simple enough to understand and to agree on ?

Alternative titles for this post:

"Most people have no taste."

"People still buy crap by the truckload"

@tayme,

Dave covered it for me.  That stats in question simply state "mac powerpc and mac intel".  They split out the Windows versions too, but I combined them all.  It's Mac vs. Windows.  That's the growth rates that matter to these silly platform debates.  The company performance numbers I pointed to already is what matters to everyone else that is serious.

And Paul is not a total hack.  He's usually pretty fair... unless the discussion turns to marketshare stats.  Then he just shuts off his cognition and revs up the anger at his "iCabal" strawman nemesis.

@Mikegalos

I'm strictly using the "net applications" stats (which are user share) since that's what this article is using to arrive at it's numbers and what Paul is therefore using too.

I'm not sure where you got those stats your using and for what time period.

Still, I've stated numerous times that worldwide share is a meaningless state.  User-segment share is all that matters for the technology (consumer share for consumers, enterprise share for enterprises, broadcast user share for video pros, etc) and profit and growth is all that matters to shareholders.  Worldwide share is a hack number that's good for one legitimate thing: spotting trends.

And again, regarding your very correct math about Apple's growth rate and it's impact on absolute totals... the question is this: who cares?  The Mac market is healthy and the developer community is strong and growing.  Their massive growth is driving massive profit which makes for a healthy company and happy shareholders.  I have never made any ridiculous claims regarding Apple "taking over" or Windows being "doomed".  That is the talk of forum troll idiots.  Nobody in the mac press that I read has made such claims either.

But I do understand where you're getting that idea from.  The forum jerks.  They are the "iCabal", I guess, that Paul seems to be so absolutely tormented by.   Too bad his working definition of the "iCabal" has included anyone with .mac, Walt, Pogue and the rest of the mainstream press.

As I've said before, Paul is dead wrong about the "ease" with which Apple is gaining share.  One needs only to look up "network effects" to see what they're fighting against in a world dominated by Windows.

The real issue is this.  Why is paul writing every post about Apple as if it's targeted solely at the most absurd forum trolling morons?  That's a completely incendiary and frankly ridiculous way to approach any subject... unless you are a partisan hack yourself.  And I don't believe that Paul is a partisan hack.  He just acts like one with these posts and this iCabal strawman garbage.

@MaryW

you are dead on.

@Dave

There is no point.  Only the rainman-like obsession of Paul with worldwide share and the ranting of loony mac forum trolls that seem to have crawled into his