Forums | MacLife

I personally wouldn't mind a bit higher marketshare. One of the drama girls was playing around on our iMac G5 in the booth today, and she was all amazed at how awesome it was. There are tons of 'drones' who do actually appreciate the hardware and software, they just honestly don't really know that it's there. This girl thought the Dock magnification was just awesome. She said that the iMac was so much cooler than Dell.

I also know many people who are awed by the industrial design scheme of Apple. the slimness of the iMac, for example. Nobody can believe that the whole computer is in the screen. Or that the PowerBooks are only an inch thick.

Like I said, I think there are a bunch of people who do appreciate the design and company, who do use PCs, either by choice or by lack of knowledge.

Marketshare means profit.
Who is richer - Steve Jobs or Bill Gates?

I like seeing friends and family switch over to using a Mac but I do like the close-knit community. 

I don't think we have anything to worry about.

resedit wrote:

Marketshare means profit.
Who is richer - Steve Jobs or Bill Gates?

Like I said.....

Czachorski wrote:

I think you are oversimplifying a bit.

Marketshare does not mean profit.

I HAVE to use Access, unless there's a database program that is compatible. It would be impossible for me to use any other program working for a company as large (Ernst & Young) as I do.

But I share in your sentiment regarding Access.

Czachorski wrote:

resedit wrote:

Marketshare means profit.
Who is richer - Steve Jobs or Bill Gates?

Like I said.....

Czachorski wrote:

I think you are oversimplifying a bit.

Marketshare does not mean profit.

I get what you're saying, but increasing market share is how you increase revenue without raising prices and cutting costs.

The good business people at Apple know that there is an equilibrium point between production costs and profit, so I'm sure they'll know exactly how many units they can produce to still earn their maximum profit.

I think it's reasonable to say that with cheap foriegn labor and cheap materials (expenses), if you sell more units (revenue) you'll still turn out a larger profit than if you don't sell as many units.

This link might explain a few of the technical terms better than I can:
http://www.emporium.vt.edu/math1525/152 … index.html

Last edited by vaeaglesfan (2005-11-20 7:26 pm)

I agree. I too was thinking about "what if Apple tried to compete more on the price level of the other computer companies in the much lower range?" but I stopped when I realized they'd have to cut some of the profits they make on the machine. Which would end up cutting their department sizes eventually, or some all together.

You slowly get less creativity on the team, and then make products that look like the competitions' and are at their price range too. And then when you do start getting the market share, you start to rebuild your team again.

But this time the team's orientation may be different. You may want a more cost-efficient oriented team now that you're playing with Dell and the rest of them. You might never get back that team of sheer innovation, creativity, and guts to do what's awesome for the customer AND the company, rather than just the company.

You could lose a lot from orienting your team to gaining market share.

Not too likely with Steve at the head of everything, but I wouldn't risk it.

All good points. We'll just have to wait and see what happens.

Tetrachloride wrote:

Pariah wrote:

I cant think of one single type of software that I would want that I cant get on my Mac.

I'm working on that.

How so?

mahakali wrote:

ScifiterX wrote:

I think all of us Mac fans would pretty much agree that we'd like to see Apple have a decent market share and all the things that go with it such as better profitability and better support for our system of choice. We just don't want Apple to lose the quality and imaginative qualities we like about them and their products in the process.

Back when apple was dominating the market share, did they suffer from bad image? Did they produce craps?

No - the Apple ][ was generally well liked.
Then came the IBM PC with DOS - and then Compaq reversed engineered the BIOS - and PC clones quickly took over because they were cheaper, and "good enough".

Dang, imagine if Steve Jobs died.

What if DANE Cook was CEO?

ABigSmall wrote:

Dang, imagine if Steve Jobs died.

Eventually it shall come to pass. Or maybe a debilitating illness, who knows?

You know, I've thought of that, too. They make it seem like Jobs is the visionary behind everything Apple does - I would hope that isn't true, and there are people in place to carry on. If he didn't consider it before, I hope he did after his cancer scare - life or death situations tend to put things in a different perspective.

On the other hand, what about MSoft? Gates also appears to hold the reins, although he has given up de facto control over the company. I can see MSoft becoming even more draconian post gates, like WalMart after Sam Walton died. Forgetting any development at all and just crushing the competition by the use of sheer numbers, to the detriment of the computer industry as a whole: "You can have any color you like, as long as it's black".

Personally, I would like the world to have the more pleasant computer experience we all share, but they do have a choice, and they choose not to. Ignorance is no excuse. How many people, myself included has tried to convince people to leave the dark side? If they close their minds, they still get exactly what they deserve.

I used to wonder why people weren't excited about their computers and using them to their fullest - after using a PC at work for over a year - I get it now.