Opinion: How Apple can gain significant OS market share

Opinion: How Apple can gain significant OS market share: Page 1:


The thought of reducing Mac pricing and licensing Mac OS X, while playing nice with developers may be anathema to Steve Jobs and Company, but with the opportunity to gain market share while Microsoft’s focus is split between Windows and Google, now is the perfect time for Apple to expand its presence.

Yeah, Apple should stop doing what it’s doing (which is working), and instead, adopt the strategy Mike Spindler used to take on Microsoft, which just so happens to be a primary cause of Apple almost rolling belly up, and led to Gil Amelio buying NeXT, which brought Steve back, who threw out all of those strategies….

Because they sucked and almost killed the company.

Great idea.

Hint: the universe has proven, time and time again, that price is not a primary sales motivator or demotivator for purchases of Apple stuff. Chasing sales via pricing isn’t very effective in the Mac market. Even assuming Steve did it right (Spindler botched the execution in so many ways it’s almost funny), this is a bad strategy.

Besides, I’d argue that making a big play for OS marketshare is a bad strategy anyway, because — bluntly — platform is becoming a lot less relevant. It’s sort of like Apple making a decision to make a big move into selling fax machines. The move to a browser-centric, online-centric computing environment makes worrying about which OS you run less critical, a trend that’ll only accelerate moving forward.

This article is trying to win the last war, when it no longer matters, instead of the current war or the next one.

You might also want to read:

  1. At the rate the market is going, Apple may need a sub-$500 laptop on Tuesday » VentureBeat At the rate the market is going, Apple may need a sub-$500 laptop on Tuesday » VentureBeat: Former Engadget editor Ryan Block more or less...
  2. The Market Should Decide “Limited Utility” iPhone Apps: The Market Should Decide “Limited Utility” » Webomatica – Technology and Entertainment Digest: “Utility” doesn’t automatically mean value. Take for example the pointless...
  3. Crazy Apple Rumors Site » Blog Archive » Apple Settle With Apple Corps. Crazy Apple Rumors Site » Blog Archive » Apple Settle With Apple Corps.: Apple Inc. and the Beatle’s Apple Corps announced today that they have...
  4. BehindTheNet.org: Learning to Share BehindTheNet.org: Learning to Share: Hockey is growing in the U.S., despite every effort to kill it, and despite the heaps of scorn piled on each...
  5. Problems I think Apple should fix and challenges Apple faces (Apple Post-mortem, part 9 of some number…..) Previous episodes: Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Over here, I suggested that my “Apple post-mortem” series was going to be eight parts,...

  • http://www.crafted.com.au/blog James Gardiner

    Actually Mr Ree, I had a number of Mac OS9 system under my conrol for running Editing systems. I ran a facility. I had millions of dollars of tech under my control Mac just a small part. And I can tell you. as a tech who controlls a lot of equipment on a facility level. the Mac under OS9 and before was a pile of POO. It would crash far mor often then a well run NT/XP box. For NO particular reason.
    Then, when it came to the future of the OS, protected memory, multi tasking. No chance. It could not keep up and until Steve came along, the Production industry was abandoning Mac in a big way. (Ie Avid went all PC during that time)
    Your responce is a typical one from a MAC only person. I have used it ALL. And I don;t really give a F about OS religion. My job was to get a job done using the tools available. Mac/PC. Whatever, and Sorry. The Mac was never that much better then they wanted to believe. At the end of the day it was purly a preference of user interface that seemed to make people like one more then the other.
    And, unfortunatly, the people who prefered Mac, where the people who prefered the one button mouse. As well.. two would confuse them. Ie generally more creative people etc, who don’t like to think technically.
    But WOW, these days a Mac is just as bad as a PC. I wrote a long blog a while back. The Mac , more and more like the PC. And now its gaining market share. Gee. Wonder WHY!!
    Objectiveness and Mac user, genrally in the past, never went together. Still today it is rare.
    James

  • Mr. Reeee

    Perfect reaction to the foolish “price war” mentality. Apple doesn’t develop OS X with good intentions alone, it’s got to be paid for somehow.
    Macs are pretty good on price NOW, provided that you spec the generic WinBox with COMPARABLE features. This has been proven time and again.
    I guess there will always be a crowd clamoring for Mac OS X on a $299 box. For those people, buy a USED Mac and STFU!
    another james…
    Obviously, you didn’t actually USE pre-OS X Mac System software. That sounds like the typical ignorant FUD swirling around all things Apple from some circles.
    Yes, OS 9 had it’s ‘troubles”, but OS 8 and System 7 were excellent and glorious compared to anything being spewed from Microsoft’s “pipeline” at the time.

  • Mr. Reeee

    Perfect reaction to the foolish “price war” mentality. Apple doesn’t develop OS X with good intentions alone, it’s got to be paid for somehow.
    Macs are pretty good on price NOW, provided that you spec the generic WinBox with COMPARABLE features. This has been proven time and again.
    I guess there will always be a crowd clamoring for Mac OS X on a $299 box. For those people, buy a USED Mac and STFU!
    another james…
    Obviously, you didn’t actually USE pre-OS X Mac System software. That sounds like the typical ignorant FUD swirling around all things Apple from some circles.
    Yes, OS 9 had it’s ‘troubles”, but OS 8 and System 7 were excellent and glorious compared to anything being spewed from Microsoft’s “pipeline” at the time.

  • Jay Carlson

    If chasing sales via pricing doesn’t work, why did we lose the Cube in favor of the mini?
    I bought a mini the day they came out, and since then have bought two minis, an iMac, and a MacBook for relatives. I don’t know if any of those sales would have been made if the price (and size, ha ha) of the Really Big Dongle had not improved from the Cube era.

  • http://www.crafted.com.au/blog James Gardiner

    jcr, I agree. I don;t expect it to be as cheap as Apple sell it for Apple systems, match the vista business price. People pay for XP/VISTA now. They know the costs. They would be very willing to pay the accepted windows price for a superior OS to windows.
    James

  • http://www.crafted.com.au/blog James Gardiner

    If OSX was open, yes, it would be an option for DELL and HP. And it would sell well. I know many people who are very interested in OSX on their dell if it was available. They just don;t want the limited Apple hardware choice and high price tag.
    Also, imgine all the people who would dump Vista/XP and cross grade to OSX. Business would also be much more likely to select OSX or corss grade to it.
    The cross grades alone will bring the % of systems coming online compared to windows around 50%.
    Vista is not good. End users know it, and if given the choice, many would go OSX. OSX growth would accelerate drematically as viral acceptance spread.
    But at the end of they day most decisions are based on price. Open OSX would break that wall down.
    In terms of loss in hardware sales.. What are you saying. Mac Hardware is overpriced?? and does not compare to Dell/HP? I thought all seeing Steve made superior hardware that was worth the extra cost. Thats what Apple keeps saying..
    Apple Fan boys, please get serious. Either your hardware is worth it, or it is over priced. Please pick one, and do not change your opinion when suited.
    Apple hardware is quite good and I feel would still be viable. But really, in the questionable economic times ahead, price is going to become the most important of all.
    Apple has already seeded the fact that they will be dropping prices and taking a lesser margin then in the past.
    One could also predict a high possability that OSX is actually being prepared for opening up as the next OSX release is only a Bug fix. Or is it??
    James

  • John C. Randolph

    I’m another ex-Apple employee, and I have a slightly different take on licensing OS X.
    I would advocate that Apple offer OS X for non-Apple hardware, but NOT at the same price that they charge to run it on a Mac. NeXTSTEP sold for $800 for a user seat, and about $1500 for a developer seat, as I recall.
    There are a lot of people who don’t get to choose their hardware because their company has an exclusive deal with Dell or HP to supply their PCs. They can’t override their corporate purchase agreements.
    Offering OS X for generic hardware at a price that equals or exceeds the margin on a machine in the middle of the Mac range, would reach another large segment of the market.
    As for letting the HPs and Sonys of the world bundle their machines with OS X, I’d say sure, but they should pay through the nose for it.
    -jcr

  • another james

    james, why do you think “the % of systems sold running OSX would go to over 50% within 6 months”? how would that happen? would businesses start buying OS X just because Dell/HP is selling/”supporting” it? Is Dell/HP selling their OS X PCs cheaper? Are Dell/HP putting OS X on their cheapo configurations?
    how much would Apple need to charge for OS X licenses to make up for the lost hardware revenue? Or do you think they wouldn’t lose any hardware revenue? Why not if Dell/HP are pricing below Apple’s Macs?
    Please explain how this incredible growth would occur from OS X licensing.

  • http://www.crafted.com.au james gardiner

    It is uninformed comments like this and commonly from many Mac fanboys that really annoy me.
    The attempt of Apple to go open and mass market back in the day was a reaction to internal issues that already existed in Apple. Apple may have had a nice interface and user experience, but before OSX, the Apple OS was a complete pile of POO. It was suffering and going open was an attempt to over come its downward trend. However, it was only because Apple was doing custom hardware was it able to stand up at all against NT/XP (Custom hardware let them design around the OS faults). Going Open only made its ugly internals more apparent and was a disaster.
    The decision was, and always will be sound. The decision today is even more sound. NextStep, sorry I mean OSX was designed to be a open OS that could run on any intel hardware. The X86 community is going very well with many people I know running Hackentosh just as reliably as any Mac can.
    Today we also have very well developed standards for interfacing. USB, SATA etc. unlike the less standardised era in which Apple tried the first time.
    Those who suggest it will cause massive incompatibilities are ignorant or blinded by the propaganda engine.
    OSX going open platform would not be difficult at all. The argument here is what exactly will this mean to Apple share price. OR, the elitist attitude held by general mac users.
    In my opinion, the share price would double in 6 months. The % of systems sold running OSX would go to over 50% within 6 months. It would be a new era in the PC.
    However, OSX would not be OS for the elite. It would be the everyone OS.
    Any really, I am not sure the everyone OS goes with the turtlenecks and jeans…
    So most say it is unlikely to happen.
    Some times decisions are not based on good business with shareholders in mind. (Ie Yahoo)
    James

  • Arnold Ziffel

    Chuqui,
    You are 100% right on the mark. When will folks let this “port OS X to PCs” crap stop??
    Thanks for your comments.

  • zato

    “This article is trying to win the last war, when it no longer matters, instead of the current war or the next one.”
    It still matters if one of the choices is unsecured. The goal for either Apple or any OS dev. should be to make computing simple and secure for everyone.

  • rattyuk

    @Ird
    Have you got your sarcasm filter switched off? Chuq was complaining about the article over at Ars Technica… But using sarcasm to highlight it.

  • lrd

    Apple shouldn’t change its Mac strategy. The ipod, iphone, Apple TV & iTunes halo effect continues to work just fine. I’ve met at least three people maybe four that have bought Macs based on ipods and iphone experiences. That says it all.