[besson3c]

I often cringe when I hear debates about the superiority or inferiority of Linux vs. Mac vs. Windows. OS X and Windows are essentially turn-key type products designed to provide a usable computing environment to the masses right out-of-the-box. Linux/Unix was never designed the same way.

However, I'm wondering whether Apple's product approach is bound to hit a ceiling... It is a wonder that Apple managed to get OS X to run on the iPhone, but unless Apple opens that up, things will continue on: you buy a Mac if you want Apple's hardware, Apple's user experience/software, and Apple's overall sensibilities and sense of creativity. However, if it is true that we are about to see an explosion of smarter mobile devices and basically a new age of computing, I see Linux or Windows as being far better suited for driving basically your generic, middle-of-the-road future technology... That is, if in x number of years we are all running smart phones, I see Linux or Windows as the better/cheaper replacement for my sub $100 cellphone, and the edge probably goes to Linux here, especially with Google's backing.

What about the increasing competition we are seeing from China and India? It sounds like right now they are just sort of discovering capitalism and making a lot of money, but if we ever see an age of innovation from these countries where the future companies that turn heads around the world are no longer based in America, I see them building products based on Linux or Windows rather than the Mac.

So my question is this... Apple's marketshare is increasing. They are obviously doing well. Where will it top off? It obviously will given Apple's design decisions - they are going for more of the sports car/Rolls Royce approach to computing rather than building the equivalent of the Toyota Camry or Ford Focus. I'm not suggesting that there is anything wrong with this, but like any boutique/specialty product, their overall market share will be limited. So, where do you think it will level out at in the coming years?

[AKcrab]

100%

[Eug]

Where's the poll?

Originally Posted by AKcrab 

100%

Indeed.

P.S. Car analogies never work.

[besson3c]

Will these two poles do?

[Chuckit]

So because Linux isn't intended to give an easy and smooth user experience, you think it's better suited to user-level applications? Not sure I follow that.

I think Apple's demonstrated pretty well that OS X is a solid platform. Are others going to build their hardware around it? Of course not. That's just the same as now. And you know, Apple is doing pretty well now. Who cares who else makes OS X products as long as Apple is building its hardware around OS X and people are snapping up iPhones like there's no tomorrow?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

So because Linux isn't intended to give an easy and smooth user experience, you think it's better suited to user-level applications? Not sure I follow that.

Sure! Linux is a kernel, not a GUI. If developers want to develop a GUI for their product, they can do just that. As for whether it's better suited, the question is irrelevant so long as the iPhone OS is only available to develop with under the iPhone.

I think Apple's demonstrated pretty well that OS X is a solid platform. Are others going to build their hardware around it? Of course not. That's just the same as now. And you know, Apple is doing pretty well now. Who cares who else makes OS X products as long as Apple is building its hardware around OS X and people are snapping up iPhones like there's no tomorrow?

Sorry, I have no idea what you are trying to say here in relation to this thread...

[Apple Pro Underwear]

My opinion of Apple has changed recently and got me thinking along similar lines. When I first joined MacNN, I was diehard Apple and I wanted it to succeed but it was so difficult at that time. I think now that people are buying their second, third, fourth and fifth computers... the experience is evolving. The "switch" is no longer that difficult anymore. I think consumer-level computer users will look at Windows alternatives and be more adventurous and less timid with their selection. In addition to younger kids choosing Apple right from the start due to the recent popularity... I think Apple can make tremendous inroads. To answer your specific question, I think eventually Apple can surpass Windows in marketshare but it may take a decade or two.

I look at Google and it's dominance in several markets that makes me think it's possible. Within a matter of months it seemed to wipe out it's Search competition. It has become a major player in email now in just a couple of years. Would you think Google would be able to do that? I didn't, so I think Apple can do it too. Although I think it wouldn't be as fast.

Linux has a place in the IT world but I don't see it as a serious contender for a consumer-level OS. Apple is proving it takes a certain marketing appeal just for them to reach this new found success. Linux will never have the marketing behind it to go anywhere with consumers. That's not to say in 25-50 years people may be savvy enough to go with it though.

{This is slightly off the subject but I want to say I feel we are so early in the Computer age that I'm still optimistic that Windows may be only a footnote in PC history.}

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Sure! Linux is a kernel, not a GUI. If developers want to develop a GUI for their product, they can do just that.

And we've all seen how well that usually works out.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Sorry, I have no idea what you are trying to say here in relation to this thread...

I'm saying that there's no connection between the thought "Other companies can't use OS X on their devices" and "Apple's marketshare has a hard limit."

[analogika]

Now that rsync's available for Mac OS X: The sky's the limit.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Apple Pro Underwear 

My opinion of Apple has changed recently and got me thinking along similar lines. When I first joined MacNN, I was diehard Apple and I wanted it to succeed but it was so difficult at that time. I think now that people are buying their second, third, fourth and fifth computers... the experience is evolving. The "switch" is no longer that difficult anymore. I think consumer-level computer users will look at Windows alternatives and be more adventurous and less timid with their selection. In addition to younger kids choosing Apple right from the start due to the recent popularity... I think Apple can make tremendous inroads. To answer your specific question, I think eventually Apple can surpass Windows in marketshare but it may take a decade or two.

I look at Google and it's dominance in several markets that makes me think it's possible. Within a matter of months it seemed to wipe out it's Search competition. It has become a major player in email now in just a couple of years. Would you think Google would be able to do that? I didn't, so I think Apple can do it too. Although I think it wouldn't be as fast.

Linux has a place in the IT world but I don't see it as a serious contender for a consumer-level OS. Apple is proving it takes a certain marketing appeal just for them to reach this new found success. Linux will never have the marketing behind it to go anywhere with consumers. That's not to say in 25-50 years people may be savvy enough to go with it though.

{This is slightly off the subject but I want to say I feel we are so early in the Computer age that I'm still optimistic that Windows may be only a footnote in PC history.}

Okay, but this addresses the Desktop... I agree with your assessment here, but what about all of these other computing devices that people are forecasting are on the way? What about this next generation of computing that even Apple is predicting?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

And we've all seen how well that usually works out.

On the Desktop we have, but what about these other devices? What about Android?

[mduell]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I often cringe when I hear debates about the superiority or inferiority of Linux vs. Mac vs. Windows. OS X and Windows are essentially turn-key type products designed to provide a usable computing environment to the masses right out-of-the-box. Linux/Unix was never designed the same way.

You're making a flawed comparison between Linux and other, single-vendor operating systems. Ubuntu Linux is designed to work out of the box (off the CD even, without installing anything) and does so better than OS X/Windows IMO.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

So my question is this... Apple's marketshare is increasing. They are obviously doing well. Where will it top off? It obviously will given Apple's design decisions - they are going for more of the sports car/Rolls Royce approach to computing rather than building the equivalent of the Toyota Camry or Ford Focus

This often-repeated Mac/Ferrari vs PC/Camry drivel is one of the most pathetic responses I've heard to explain Macs tiny marketshare (still in the low single digits); Apple may choose not to participate in some markets (low end servers, high end servers, desktops), but that doesn't make them a premium brand (there's absolutely nothing premium about a Mac mini!). The theoretical marketshare cap for OS X is no different than any other OS, particularly if Apple continues to stretch the definition of "OS X" to include more platforms.

[Apple Pro Underwear]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Okay, but this addresses the Desktop... I agree with your assessment here, but what about all of these other computing devices that people are forecasting are on the way? What about this next generation of computing that even Apple is predicting?

The same thing applies. OSX's single best feature is overall intuitive usability right? So only Apple right now is capable of delivering that feature.

Windows has no expertise at that (lol ) and Linux's single best feature is not usability so that rightfully leaves Apple as the leader. In mobile and alternate devices, the unique functions offer new challenges that are arguably even more difficult than normal desktop computers.

Are you suggesting that these new computing devices use a open-source solution? The same problem why open-source doesn't work for desktops apply here as well. I'm guessing you're looking at Apple's guidelines and rules and regulations as of late for the "app store" and you're thinking it's restrictions are hindrance to tech progress right? Well I'm OK for it now because since taking advantage of mobile comm networks, it can be tricky dealing with that carrier's systems. Since it's still early, I'm OK with Apple "setting the precedent" for their product and company's standards. I've used open source-software before and am aware of the pros and cons and I don't believe Apple allowing the flood gates to open is a good idea. My personal opinion is let's see how this progresses and we'll see how this evolves.

[besson3c]

Apple Pro: I don't know whether or not these new computing devices will use an open-source solution, but our phones in the coming years will need more from their hardware and software than today's sub $100 phone. The path of convergence is clear: consolidation of devices focused around the internet. How does Motorola, LG, Nokia, etc. provide the iPhone experience on their sub $100 phones, or do they just cease to exist and succeed this market to Apple?

Apple completely owning the phone space is a distinct possibility, but Apple doesn't seem to be interested in being the next Microsoft/market dominator. Perhaps the car analogies fall short, but until Apple provides some evidence that they want to sell stuff in Walmart and compete with companies like Dell, the underlying point remains: Apple focuses on making the most innovative and best stuff, not to concern themselves with undercutting everybody else in price and going after the Walmart crowd.

[Apple Pro Underwear]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Apple Pro: I don't know whether or not these new computing devices will use an open-source solution, but our phones in the coming years will need more from their hardware and software than today's sub $100 phone. The path of convergence is clear: consolidation of devices focused around the internet. How does Motorola, LG, Nokia, etc. provide the iPhone experience on their sub $100 phones, or do they just cease to exist and succeed this market to Apple?

They'll copy Apple like the market does now (see iPod clones) and they'll do a pretty decent job after awhile. Apple has legit competition for the time being from Blackberrys and even the new Samsung stuff is getting positive reviews right?

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Apple completely owning the phone space is a distinct possibility, but Apple doesn't seem to be interested in being the next Microsoft/market dominator. Perhaps the car analogies fall short, but until Apple provides some evidence that they want to sell stuff in Walmart and compete with companies like Dell, the underlying point remains: Apple focuses on making the most innovative and best stuff, not to concern themselves with undercutting everybody else in price and going after the Walmart crowd.

There are many strategies to making money and I don't think Apple's singular plan is to gain market share. You can gain market share as a result of concentrating on innovation and quality. Pricing to me is the least understood data point in this topic.

[besson3c]

Sure you can gain market share by going after innovation and quality, I believe that strongly too. However, there are some people that simply do not want to pay $x for a device, and will never want to pay $x - either because they don't have the money, or simply do not need the best.

So, the question remains: what will this ceiling be for Apple? Obviously they can't win over everybody unless they can do to the phone market what they did to the mp3 player market.

[Apple Pro Underwear]

To give my opinion on the question you asked:

Apple will lead the smart phone market within the next 3-5 years.

All new phones being sold will be smart phones within the next 3-5 years.

Apple will be the leader in market share in 3-5 years. [I don't see iPod like dominance though in 3-5 years though]

[Brien]

Originally Posted by Apple Pro Underwear 

To give my opinion on the question you asked:

Apple will lead the smart phone market within the next 3-5 years.

All new phones being sold will be smart phones within the next 3-5 years.

Apple will be the leader in market share in 3-5 years. [I don't see iPod like dominance though in 3-5 years though]

One does gotta wonder what that'll do to plan rates, though, if everyone starts getting a data plan whether or not they want one (like my parents).

[Salty]

Honestly I think Apple's desktop market share is probably gonna top out at most around 15% though who knows. Unless after Steve steps down and leaves someone else in charge they get more willing to come out with machines that fill more niches.

I think probably what we'll end up seeing are some generic thin client peripherals, by that I mean, devices that you plug your smart phone into, which then loads up a desktop OS. For example when your iPhone can have 200 gigs of Flash Memory, sticking a reasonable version of OS X on there isn't going to be that big of a deal correct? Now at first the OS might remain on the thin client, but eventually I think it'll move onto the device itself. But at first you might say only keep your home folder on your iPhone which connects by USB 3.0. And at that point then phones will be tied to various OS vendors, Microsoft will of course resist the trend but ultimately windows 8 or 9 or 10 will be put onto windows mobile devices. We'll of course back up our phones at home. But this way when we go to the library or the lab at school, perhaps even at work, we can load up our phones into thin clients and have our desktop where ever we go. Even have a slot in notebooks to slide the phone under the hand rest, or perhaps connect via wimax or something. Either way, fun times ahead

[besson3c]

I don't know if it will ever make sense to simply transplant the Desktop versions of Windows and OS X onto a mobile device. For starters, the kernels are optimized much differently, and thinner all-round = more battery life. Of course, there are also several usability issues with designing interfaces for 30" displays vs. an iPhone display.

My guess is that Snow Leopard is Apple's attempt to really abstract and modularize OS X. It is going to reduce Apple's development time considerably when they can merge iPhone and OS X development into a single OS. They can do this by abstracting Aqua so that it isn't tethered to the rest of the OS, and basically generalize their code enough so that the higher levels can be easily swapped out, the non-essential parts of the kernel moved to extensions (where this isn't already the case), etc. This way they can develop on a single code base, and simply flip a few switches to boot the iPhone stuff vs. the OS X Desktop stuff.

Generalization and abstraction requires a lot more development time. This is, in part, why Linux is behind Windows and OS X in terms of Desktop GUI stuff. Leaving all of the usability stuff aside, writing code that can be run on a variety of window managers on a variety of hardware is a much different set of challenges than tethering your code to a particular GUI and framework. On top of this, ideally developers want their apps to feel as integrated as Apple's do, which is also difficult.

I also wonder if Apple will some day license the iPhone OS to some vendors. It doesn't seem to make much sense on the face of it, but the cellphone market is far more saturated than the mp3 market, so I think it will be far more difficult to get everybody on an Apple cellphone like Apple did with the iPod and mp3 player market. On top of this, you have to deal with your carriers that want these exclusive deals like AT&T has now, or at least some carrier imposed stipulations. If Apple were to license their software (or some variant of their software) to Nokia, Motorola, Sony, etc. as well as their touch screen technology, they could potentially make a killing just as Microsoft has done by selling Windows. Whether this will happen, I don't know, but I'm sure somebody at Apple has thought about this...

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

On the Desktop we have, but what about these other devices? What about Android?

Android is vaporware. You may as well ask what the US will do about venomous alien cats. The first requirement to compete with the iPhone is existing at the present.

If I were to guess, I'd say Android will do OK but not as well as the iPhone simply because it it is more flexible and open and that is not a comparatively good thing in terms of user experience.

[besson3c]

When did I say it would be better than the iPhone? That's not what is at question here...

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

When did I say it would be better than the iPhone? That's not what is at question here...

The question you asked was whether people are able to challenge Apple in terms of a good user interface in the cell phone world. That's what I was addressing.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

The question you asked was whether people are able to challenge Apple in terms of a good user interface in the cell phone world. That's what I was addressing.

Where did I ask that?

Again, this thread is about filling that sub $100 generic cell phone niche, and the like. I guess this wasn't clear?

[Brien]

If that's the question, Apple will probably fill that itself with an iPhone nano of some sort, it's almost an inevitability.

[Chuckit]

Heck, for all we know, maybe that's the product that's going to maul Apple's profits in the coming months.

[besson3c]

And my question is whether Apple can do to the already saturated market what they did to the mp3 player market, especially considering the AT&T exclusive deal, pricing, etc.?

[Apple Pro Underwear]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Where did I ask that?

Again, this thread is about filling that sub $100 generic cell phone niche, and the like. I guess this wasn't clear?

I thought this thread was about Apple's mobile phone projected market share?

I think Apple will eventually have a phone that comes in sub $100 either by more efficient manufacturing, subsidization or by price drop (or combination of all 3) in the coming years. Just like in the other markets, a low end product will exist but the consumer will seek out a higher quality device because the challenge of this space is all about functional design, usability and aesthetic looks. Apple will be a leader in this space because it plays to ALL their strengths.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Apple Pro Underwear 

I thought this thread was about Apple's mobile phone projected market share?

In consideration of all of the factors laid out (including whether Apple will go after the sub $100 cell phone market or remain a niche phone for people who want the best phone money can buy), yes.

I think Apple will eventually have a phone that comes in sub $100 either by more efficient manufacturing, subsidization or by price drop (or combination of all 3) in the coming years. Just like in the other markets, a low end product will exist but the consumer will seek out a higher quality device because the challenge of this space is all about functional design, usability and aesthetic looks. Apple will be a leader in this space because it plays to ALL their strengths.

I don't know... Look at the phones that a carrier like Verizon gives away for free and ask one of them how many $100 or $200 phones they sell? There are a great many people that will be wooed by Apple's strengths, but there will be many that simply want a cheap POS they can pick up at Walmart for a nickel, cause that's all they really think they want or need. If Apple goes after this crowd, I see no upper limits to their potential marketshare, but if these mobile devices are really the future of computing, Apple becoming the next Dell in terms of volume and market penetration is a radical departure from their basic company focus/mission.

I don't think it is a given that Apple will do to the cell phone market what they did to the mp3 market. I've used market saturation as an argument, but also consider the fact that there is a day when pretty much every American will own their own cell phone - this is a much huger market.

[Apple Pro Underwear]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

In consideration of all of the factors laid out (including whether Apple will go after the sub $100 cell phone market or remain a niche phone for people who want the best phone money can buy), yes.

I don't know... Look at the phones that a carrier like Verizon gives away for free and ask one of them how many $100 or $200 phones they sell? There are a great many people that will be wooed by Apple's strengths, but there will be many that simply want a cheap POS they can pick up at Walmart for a nickel, cause that's all they really think they want or need. If Apple goes after this crowd, I see no upper limits to their potential marketshare, but if these mobile devices are really the future of computing, Apple becoming the next Dell in terms of volume and market penetration is a radical departure from their basic company focus/mission.

Apple will be interested in innovating the space until it has a foothold on the market. While it continues to innovate it will try to offer phones that encompass markets they neglected. The low-end market will be addressed when it's financially appropriate for Apple to do so.

You're suggesting that a company can't offer high-end and low-end without the products suffering in quality. Apple can and already does that. I have a inexpensive Apple shuffle and a expensive iPod that are both high quality that are at different ends of the pricing spectrum. [You can make this argument for all of Apple's products actually, but the iPod is theonly thing I can personally attest to]

[besson3c]

Whether they could or decide to is a different matter altogether. Apple could sell a sub $500 Mac tower, but they have chosen not to. Companies in general face problems when they lose their focus. In Apple's case, selling that $500 Mac tower and that sub $100 phone would be a radical departure away from what the essence of their business has been. As Apple has always stated, they don't wish to compete with Dell in the sub $500 Mac space, because it's essentially a lost, resource draining cause for them.

Let's assume that Apple does not go over the Walmart shoppers... Does their marketshare top off somewhere?

[analogika]

It tops off at whatever is neither custom-built hardware (which is a tiny market) nor cutthroat discount junk (which is pretty much impossible to make decent money with, as margins are tiny).