Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 09:12:48 -0400
Reply-To: Duane Fahey <dfahey@VISUALAUTOMATION.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Duane Fahey <dfahey@VISUALAUTOMATION.COM>
Organization: Visual Automation, Inc.
Subject: Re: It's a Beautiful Day in America!...
In-Reply-To: <3F1DE82C.9040607@eoni.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Well said.
A lot of people assume that a 3-5% market share is a bad thing for
Apple. They are a business that is profitable and they provide a choice.
I think Dell has something like 15 to 17% market share, and they are the
biggest right now, I think. Or maybe HP/Compaq is.
And Windows is on about 95% of desktop computers.
Now, in the car industry, the big 3 each claim to have about 20-30% of
the market as does Toyota. Assuming that this is right, somehow, then
that means that VW, BMW, Nissan, Honda, and Hyundai each have pretty
small market shares. Regardless of what you think about an individual
company's coolness or reliability or whatever, it seems pretty obvious
to me that market share has nothing to do with it. They don't use the
same engine, designed by one company. There isn't one company, telling
all of the other companies what to do. There isn't one company deciding
how reliable or cool the other companie's products will be. Government
regulation might do this stuff to a certain extent, but a company does not.
As Vanagon owners, we've chosen a very very small percentage of the
market. We wanted to drive something different. Not an SUV. Not an
RV. Not a sedan. Not a bug. We might choose to drive these kinds of
vehicles too, but we chose the Vanagon because we wanted specific
features not found in other vehicles. People choose Macs for the same
reason. I usually have more than one car, and they are usually
different companies or models. The same is true with computers. No one
computer company or OS will do everything I want -- nor should it.
So, this is my attempt at comparing the computer industry to Vanagons
somehow, to make it relavent to the list. :-)
- Duane
Jim wrote:
> I was going to stay out of this, but.....
>
> Most of the comments I've read here today preface with, "Personally I
> don't use a Mac..." I'd offer that that's akin to saying, "Personally, I
> don't drive..." when posting a criticism of or comments regarding
> Vanagons on the Vanagon list. Drive a Mac for a year or two, THEN
> experss your opinion.
>
> <OPIN>
> Personally, in my business I support both Windows and Mac systems. With
> the release of XP and OS X, the operating systems are very similar in
> 'look and feel'. The advantage of the Microsoft product is the 95%
> market penetration. The advantage of OS X is Apple's control of both
> the hardware and the software. The disadvantage of Microsoft's product
> is that it must run on an incredible variety of hardware configurations.
> This leads to bloated software. The disadvantage of Apple's product is
> 5% market penetration. (Actually something like 3% these days...)
> However, I can run nearly any Windows program (including the all
> important ETKA) on my Mac. I don't think you can run iTunes, iMovie,
> iPhoto or Safari on your Windows platform..... I work on both platforms,
> and my home systems are Macs and Mac clones. Eventually, the open source
> initiative may do them both in. (One can always hope. )
> </OPIN>
>
> But... The reason I had to write was to question the statement, "You
> mean like Microsoft who wrote the first Apple operating system?"
> Aristotle, cite your source... My research shows,
>
> "DOS and ProDOS are operating systems designed by Apple Computer, Inc.
> to run in the 8-bit Apple II line of computers. DOS was released for the
> Apple II in the late 1970's and was later replaced with ProDOS. ProDOS
> is much easier to use than DOS. Apple has always had an ease of use
> philosophy. You can tell by reading their older Apple II DOS or ProDOS
> manuals. They have always strived to make the computer experience as
> humanistic as possible. DOS and ProDOS are text-line OS's and as such
> are inherently harder to use than a GUI OS. Attempts to add a GUI to the
> older 8-bit Apple II's (not withstanding the 16-bit IIgs) have all
> pretty much fallen flat. The Apple II simply does not have the graphical
> capabilities to support a convincing GUI. The Apple II, excluding the
> later IIgs, is a text-line machine, take it or leave it. You might
> expect that as a text-line machine, it would be hard to use and cryptic,
> especially if you are familiar with text-line operating systems like
> MSDOS. DOS and ProDOS were designed with as few keywords as possible. It
> was designed to make the levels of abstraction as few as possible. These
> OS's are simple, elegant, and fun to use. They do not tax the user with
> multitudes of cryptic commands and hard to remember procedures. It is no
> wonder that the company that produced these powerfully simple text-line
> OS's eventually changed the world with the MacOS GUI."
> <http://homepage.mac.com/vectronic/appleii/dos.html>
>
> You might also take a look at
> <http://www.chips.navy.mil/archives/02_fall/index2_files/briefhistory2.htm>
>
>
> I'll shut up now.
>
> Jim
>
--
Duane Fahey
Visual Automation, Inc.
http://www.VisualAutomation.com
517.622.1850 517.622.1761 fax
--
Secure Desktop | iLock | ColdKey | iLockNess | ePortal.com
| 
