[Kerrigan]

http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/05/0...25.shtml?tid=3

"MacDailyNews has an editorial which summarizes reports from various research groups that analyzed the number of computer users affected by viruses. The conclusion was that 16 percent of all computer users are not affected by viruses because they use Macs. The lack of viruses on a Mac is commonly known, but the interesting thing is the fact that the results finally provide the first set of conclusive numbers which illustrate the Macintosh's install-base. So far only "market-share" statistics are commonly published for the public and do not convey install base. (If for example 2 people are using computers and one replaces his 2x in a 3 year period and the other only does once, market-share dynamics dictate that one demographic has 75% market share while the other has only 25% -- even though install base is still 50/50.)"

[Apple Pro Underwear]

interesting indeed.

[Zimphire]

And that folks, is what really matters.

[The Godfather]

Are you saying that viruses are actually helping PC vendors sell PCs? If so, we need some viruses in our Macs too

[Oisín]

Given the inaccuracies that may arise from these 'market-share' statistics (I would think the Mac userbase is generally better off economically, and has the money to switch computers more often than Windows users - then again, Macs are more expensive and last longer; could go both ways), that might be a reasonable conclusion in the US. In most other parts of the world, however, it doesn't hold.

I doubt Mac has a market share of more than 1-2% here in Denmark. I personally don't know anyone else, besides one of my old professors, who has one. I know people who have never even heard of a 'Mac', and don't know what it is.

One person in particular made me giggle on the inside when I showed her my PB and she was like, “Oh, so do you also have like an iPod computer?” I showed her my iPod, thinking that was what she meant; but no: “No, I mean like an iPod computer, not the iPod itself”. Okay, I explain to her that there is no such thing as an iPod computer, that an iPod is an MP3 player (simplified for the benefit of her limited cerebral capabilities) made by Apple, the same company that also makes the computers called Macs. She persists, saying, “No, but I saw one in a store; it was a computer, but it had the iPod logo on the back, it was an iPod computer”. I show her the back of my iPod, point to the Apple logo on it and say, “Is this what you mean?”. “Yeah, that's the one”. Slowly, and without using too many big words, I explain to her that the apple on the back of my iPod is the logo used by Apple the company, on both Macs and iPods, so what she saw was a Mac, the same as mine.

Still, she didn't really seem to get it.

At least, it shows that, however sparse, the iPod marketing has been effective, and even airheads like her know what it is.


Anyway, my point was just - good for Apple if they really do have anything near a 16% market share; it just doesn't hold anywhere outside the US, I'd say.

[The Godfather]

She was dumb, but would you hit it?

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by The Godfather

She was dumb, but would you hit it?

She is extremely dumb, not at all a nice person (in fact, she's somewhat of a b*tch), and her thick, trashy Nørrebro twang makes me cringe in disgust - but more to the point, she's female, so no, I wouldn't.

[Apple Pro Underwear]

the good thing you can make of this is:

the girl knew what an iPod was. she had genuine interest in the ipod computer and will figure it out sooner or later (if she visits the apple site to buy a iPod possibly). there are millions out there like her and when they go to the apple site to peep out iPod offerings, some of them will have interest in the mac OS which may mean a purchase a few years down the line.

[Kerrigan]

It isn't her fault that the iMac was deliberately designed to look like an iPod, and they market it as "from the makers of iPod"...

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Apple Pro Underwear

the good thing you can make of this is:

the girl knew what an iPod was. she had genuine interest in the ipod computer and will figure it out sooner or later (if she visits the apple site to buy a iPod possibly). there are millions out there like her and when they go to the apple site to peep out iPod offerings, some of them will have interest in the mac OS which may mean a purchase a few years down the line.

I think you're over-estimating her intelligence. She barely knows what the Internet is; she would certainly never make her way to the Apple store, and probably wouldn't recognise an Apple Centre if she walked through it. She can barely work a Windows machine, and she's the kind of person who would run away screaming at the very thought of having to learn something new.

Despite the fact that she studies some sort of design-related subject, I was mortally surprised that she even knew (of) Photoshop and Illustrator, but she did! She didn't know what they looked like, what they were for (other than just 'graphics stuff'), or how to use them, but she knew (of) them!

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

It isn't her fault that the iMac was deliberately designed to look like an iPod, and they market it as "from the makers of iPod"...

But they don't - not here. They have no TV or radio commercials, only a few posters here and there, and that's only for the iPods. There's absolutely no advertising done for Macs in any mainstream media in Denmark; I'm guessing that's why so many people don't even know them.

[Kerrigan]

Weren't you living in China a little while ago? Have you moved back to Denmark now?

Anyways, it's no suprise to me that people think the iMac is an "iPod Computer".. It looks essentially like a giant iPod.

[JoshuaZ]

Some people are just dumb. I was working in a college computer lab during finals time, and all the PCs in the lab were occupied, and yet only one person sat at a Mac. I watched as people walked into a lab, saw there were no PCs, and walk out. A senior girl I knew started to do the same thing, so I got up and and suggested that she use a Mac to type on. "I can't use a Macintosh, the icons are different." I let her go.

[Zimphire]

What a moran.

[Kerrigan]

Remember back when more people used Macs, and nobody was really sure what Apple was? People simply thought that it was "MAC", and the name Apple meant nothing to most people. This is the same now with the iPod.. people know what an iPod is, but when you tell them that something named "Apple" makes it, they get confused.

I believe it is because Apple is not a very simple name to grasp as a company. If you say "I have a Sony VAIO zx83472 desktop" most people understand that you have some kind of Sony computer. But if you say I have an Apple Mac computer, people can't readily tell the company name from the name of the model.

[James L]

The stats vary so much, it is hard to get an honest grasp of Mac market share...

for example, when I view the web traffic statistics for sites that I designed or maintain (and a wide variety of sites also, not necessarily just one market), the average for the number of people hitting the page from a Mac OS is 4.2%.

[- - e r i k - -]

I believe the number is between 4% and 10%. This is just a guesstimate from different web statistics (including Google Zeitgeist) and this new number (which seem far too big and relies on "computer not getting viruses").

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Zimphire

What a maroon.

Fixed™

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Weren't you living in China a little while ago? Have you moved back to Denmark now?

Uhm, yeah, about six months ago (mid-December)...

[Zimphire]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Fixed™

Naw moran fits nicer here.

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/05/0...25.shtml?tid=3

"MacDailyNews has an editorial which summarizes reports from various research groups that analyzed the number of computer users affected by viruses. The conclusion was that 16 percent of all computer users are not affected by viruses because they use Macs. The lack of viruses on a Mac is commonly known, but the interesting thing is the fact that the results finally provide the first set of conclusive numbers which illustrate the Macintosh's install-base. So far only "market-share" statistics are commonly published for the public and do not convey install base. (If for example 2 people are using computers and one replaces his 2x in a 3 year period and the other only does once, market-share dynamics dictate that one demographic has 75% market share while the other has only 25% -- even though install base is still 50/50.)"

I don't know how they estimated the 16%, but I think it is funny that the slashdot poster made an example about a marketshare percentage with a percentage sample problem that is wrong.
Guy 1 replaces computer twice. 1 + 2 =3
Guy 2 replaces computer once. 1 + 1 = 2
3 + 2 = 5 total computers
3/5 = 60%