[driven]

At the risk of giving this fool any more hits .... check out this article.

(Just throwing this out for discussion ....)

Grim Macintosh Market Share Forebodes Crisis
ARTICLE DATE: 12.28.04
By John C. Dvorak

The Mac platform is essentially stagnant. That becomes obvious when you look at the declining market share numbers�not from research firms, but from the W3C, which monitors online activity. As of December 2004, the Mac share as measured by online activity is 2.7 percent (Linux is 3.1), with all the rest going to various flavors of Windows. I'm now convinced that this stems mostly from Apple's inability to make the Mac a commodity computer by pricing it to compete with PCs made inexpensively in China and selling with razor-thin margins. Here are the reasons Apple can't sustain its position.

The company figures it has certain market niches locked down. This includes computer users in advertising agencies, news bureaus, and various professional organizations as well as creative artists and writers. I also count an odd, die-hard faction of true believers, but these people are inconsequential except in online forums, where they make a fuss whenever anyone discusses the Mac. They probably hurt the Mac community more than anyone by creating an unfair crackpot image that gets associated with the machine.

CEO Steve Jobs' star persona makes the situation worse. His attention to the Apple flagship has been eroded by the success of Pixar, and more recently, by the iPod and iTunes initiatives. None of these has anything to do with the Macintosh. Keeping it on track is a full-time task�Jobs cannot be in the computer business, the movie business, and the music business and make them all successful. You see the results. Market share for the Mac is crap.

Much of the problem arises from the psychology created by the overpriced iPod. And Mac users who buy the players contribute to the problem by encouraging the company to maintain its high-margin death march.

Apple, seeing it can still use strong marketing to sell high�margin, high-status items, will continue to think it can do so with the Macintosh. What goes on at Apple planning sessions when market-share issues come up? Some executives probably proclaim that three percent of this market is "huge!!" Others nod their heads in agreement. And indeed, three percent is huge. But at some point (which may have been reached already), declining market share creates a relative lack of interest, and eventually, discontinuance. The Amiga fell prey to this.

I've been thinking about this marketing dilemma ever since seeing those w3C numbers, and I've concluded that the real problem with Mac marketing is a weird logical inconsistency that can only worsen the product's market situation. In fact, unless something changes drastically, I can't see the circumstances improving. Ironically, this logical inconsistency is also what makes the Mac great. There's a conundrum in choosing to go with simplicity versus complexity.

Continue reading...

Simply put, the ease-of-use and simplicity of the platform is killing it, because people cannot perceive that simplicity is ever worth MORE than complexity. Simpler should be cheaper.

I made this argument years ago regarding the bloating of Microsoft code. It goes like this: Say you have two identical products on the market�word processors, for example. For the sake of argument, let's make these two, X and Y, almost exactly the same. But product X is written in tight assembly language, fits on a floppy disk, and takes up 30K of memory. Product Y is written in some high-level language, comes on a CD-ROM, and takes up 500 megabytes on your hard drive. Which will outsell the other? I argue that the packed CD-ROM always will, because the public will perceive it as a greater value. You're getting more for your money.

I would go so far as to argue that the CD-ROM product could even run slower (which obviously would be the case), and you'd still have more people buying it. The 30K program could compete only by being cheaper!

Now imagine the 30K product has tight, fast, bug-free code, but is more expensive. What would be the result? I'm guessing three percent market share.

This is the dilemma Apple faces, and there is no way around it. The long-term consequences are obvious. Apple is the easy-to-use, less complex platform. Thus it should be cheaper, not more expensive. It's that simple.

And why can't it be cheaper? Perhaps that's the question its users should ask.

[rambo47]

Same old siht from retard#1. He's been whoring for readers forever and claiming the same thing for 15+ years now. Ignore him. He's mostly harmless.

[Randman]

I've said it before: God help us if he ever praises Apple cuz that'll be the time to truly worry.

btw, has anyone ever tried [email protected] to see what happens?

[driven]

agreed ... but this article is a new low for him. He used to have some very loosly designed logic to his articles. Now he has absolutely none.

[Lateralus]

Mouse man strikes again.

[PacHead]

Oh please......

The guy is obviously a clueless moron, who doesn't know crap about anything, let alone computers.

People have been wishing for Apple's demise for decades now, and all of the predictions have been 100% wrong. Apple has always had a small market share, like that is news. Duh.

Apple will still be around, even after that guy is dead. That's my prediction.

[Shaddim]

His cheese has finally slid off his cracker. Poor fella.

[The Oracle]

More sewage from this guy. I don't know anyone who takes him seriously. He is a joke.

[Ghoser777]

He has an intersting psychological point, and hey may be adapting one line of thought that has been applied to linux. One thing that might slow open source adoption is that businesses like to pay for a product. When they get it for free, they have a hard time blaming someone for when it fails and they automatically think the product must be cheap.

His point takes a strange, different path. That is, the more efficient the program, the cheaper it should be. I guess some comparison between Graphic Converter and Photoshop pops into his head (not that they do the same thing at all), but I can see the point. Bloat to people means features means value. When you have a program with a really clean interface, it may be really easy to use, but then it looks like its not as powerful for some odd, psychological reason. So complicated means more power or something. I'd like to see some research before I buy it though.

[driven]

Originally posted by Ghoser777:
He has an intersting psychological point, and hey may be adapting one line of thought that has been applied to linux. One thing that might slow open source adoption is that businesses like to pay for a product. When they get it for free, they have a hard time blaming someone for when it fails and they automatically think the product must be cheap.

His point takes a strange, different path. That is, the more efficient the program, the cheaper it should be. I guess some comparison between Graphic Converter and Photoshop pops into his head (not that they do the same thing at all), but I can see the point. Bloat to people means features means value. When you have a program with a really clean interface, it may be really easy to use, but then it looks like its not as powerful for some odd, psychological reason. So complicated means more power or something. I'd like to see some research before I buy iy though.

I'm not buying it at all. To me more efficient means: Better designed, more thought out product ... more time went into development ... it will work better and cost me less on other resources.

That's why a developer who CAN code in assembly and is able to make small efficient code that can run on embedded systems is worth more than a VB programmer. This is the exact opposite of his example using a word processor. The difference here is that a small fast word processor has no more value to a user on modern hardware than does a big bloated one. Now, ask NASA if they want small, fast code for their limited memory spy plane or big bloated code. Find out which one they will be willing to pay more money for.

[Ghoser777]

But we're not talking about employeers looking for employees, we're talking about buying software, which is compeltely different.

[driven]

Originally posted by Ghoser777:
But we're not talking about employeers looking for employees, we're talking about buying software, which is compeltely different.

In my example, which product would cost more?

[Millennium]

Dvorak is an unprofessional hack who has always let his personal vendetta against Macworld magazine drive his so-called "journalism" ever since they fired him.

This is, perhaps, one of the most blatant examples. Not only are his statistics not taken from the W3C, as he claims, but they are taken from a site with a strong IE/Windows bias, thus ensuring that few Mac users will visit it.

[rozwado1]

Originally posted by driven:
I also count an odd, die-hard faction of true believers, but these people are inconsequential except in online forums, where they make a fuss whenever anyone discusses the Mac. They probably hurt the Mac community more than anyone by creating an unfair crackpot image that gets associated with the machine.

You guys are losers.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by driven:
In my example, which product would cost more?

He was talking about perceived value. Perceived value of software correlates amongst other things with the price tag, size and weight of the box and with the Megabytage.

[driven]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
He was talking about perceived value. Perceived value of software correlates amongst other things with the price tag, size and weight of the box and with the Megabytage.

I understand that. I was respectfully disagreeing with it. :-)

[Cadaver]

If the Macintosh platform is so pathetic as he says, why does he continue to write a near-monthly "the Mac sux" article?? Why does he waste his time? I can't figure this guy out.

[Kilbey]

Seriously, I had thought Dvorak had died. Not that I wished he was dead. But I could have sworn I had heard he had died.

Oh well. I see he hasn't changed much while still being alive. just turned into even more of a bitter older man.

I wonder what he would write about if Apple did fold? Linux companies?

[xi_hyperon]

Originally posted by Kilbey:
I wonder what he would write about if Apple did fold? Linux companies?

Oh, I don't think that would stop him. He'd continue to go on about how Apple died because it was its own worst enemy or some such nonsense. And for good measure, he'd throw in a comment or two about the crazy people who continue to use Macs. Rinse, repeat, ad infinitum...

His bull**** isn't worth the plastic PC keyboard he's typing on.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by driven:
At the risk of giving this fool any more hits ....

Which is the ONLY reason he writes this stuff. Haven't people figured this out by now?

A new term could be coinded, pulling a...

"Dvorak": writing negative articles about the Macintosh platform whenever you want to increase your name recognition value and/or hit-count based on the GUARANTEED knee-jerk reaction. "Hey, my cheeseball site needs an increased hit count and greater ad revenue. What can I do?" "Pull a Dvorak."

It's kind of a shame people fall for it every single time, and thus provide the guarantee that it works.

[Kilbey]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
Which is the ONLY reason he writes this stuff. Haven't people figured this out by now?

A new term could be coinded, pulling a...

"Dvorak": writing negative articles about the Macintosh platform whenever you want to increase your name recognition value and/or hit-count based on the GUARANTEED knee-jerk reaction. "Hey, my cheeseball site needs an increased hit count and greater ad revenue. What can I do?" "Pull a Dvorak."

It's kind of a shame people fall for it every single time, and thus provide the guarantee that it works.

It was nice that no link was provided assuring this would not happen here.

[olePigeon]

Anyone have that URL to the "Apples is Dead" counter? Rack one more on there.

[alphamatrix]

Originally posted by olePigeon:
Anyone have that URL to the "Apples is Dead" counter? Rack one more on there.

http://www.macobserver.com/appledeathknell/index.shtml

[MacGorilla]

Lemme see...is this the same hack hack who in 1984 bashed the Mac for its "perimental mouse pointing device" and desktop icons "that everyone is supposed to know to click on". yepper. He doesn't get it.

[Apple Pro Underwear]

Pure IDIOCY:
I made this argument years ago regarding the bloating of Microsoft code. It goes like this: Say you have two identical products on the market�word processors, for example. For the sake of argument, let's make these two, X and Y, almost exactly the same. But product X is written in tight assembly language, fits on a floppy disk, and takes up 30K of memory. Product Y is written in some high-level language, comes on a CD-ROM, and takes up 500 megabytes on your hard drive. Which will outsell the other? I argue that the packed CD-ROM always will, because the public will perceive it as a greater value. You're getting more for your money.


I AM STILL waiting for apple to make a move though. Something genius that boosts marketshare and that satisfies a need in the market. I have no idea what that is, it may be the iPod for all i know.

[i am not talking about 1 particular product but just something that changes the status quo. right now, it looks like the iPod is a big deal. whether apple has a plan that can make this 1 product bridge into mac sales is another story.]

[macaddict0001]

Originally posted by rambo47:
Same old siht from retard#1. He's been whoring for readers forever and claiming the same thing for 15+ years now. Ignore him. He's mostly harmless.

is mostly harmless supposed to be a hitchhikers guide ot the galaxy quote?

[driven]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
Which is the ONLY reason he writes this stuff. Haven't people figured this out by now?

A new term could be coinded, pulling a...

"Dvorak": writing negative articles about the Macintosh platform whenever you want to increase your name recognition value and/or hit-count based on the GUARANTEED knee-jerk reaction. "Hey, my cheeseball site needs an increased hit count and greater ad revenue. What can I do?" "Pull a Dvorak."

It's kind of a shame people fall for it every single time, and thus provide the guarantee that it works.

At least I was kind enough to copy/paste the text instead of posting a link.

[MindFad]

Wow, the Mac is dead again? Thanks for the update, Dvorak.

[DeathToWindows]

the mac : Dvorak is dead.

Could he? Please?

[Rev-O]

Originally posted by Lateralus:
Mouse man strikes again.

Hey, you guys need to get off of Dvorak's back. Face it, the mouse a fad. So are GUIs. Wake up and smell the coffee.

2006 is going to be the year of the Command Line!

[rambo47]

Originally posted by macaddict0001:
is mostly harmless supposed to be a hitchhikers guide ot the galaxy quote?

Yup. I just love that series.

Although I don't wish the man dead just for being an ass, wouldn't it be a hoot if he was killed by a falling Mac Classic someone threw out a high-rise window? Just plonked him on the head from a height of maybe 12 stories.

[macaddict0001]

I love the hitchhiker series also, it is easily in my top three favorite books.

[MacGorilla]

Here it is:

�The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a �mouse.� There is no evidence that people want to use these things.� (John C. Dvorak, SF Examiner, Feb. 1984. )

Idiot.

[villalobos]

A friend of mine bought an iPod. Next he is buying a Powerbook. Used to be an all PC guy. Apart from that, Apple is dead.

[scaught]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
Which is the ONLY reason he writes this stuff. Haven't people figured this out by now?

A new term could be coinded, pulling a...

"Dvorak": writing negative articles about the Macintosh platform whenever you want to increase your name recognition value and/or hit-count based on the GUARANTEED knee-jerk reaction. "Hey, my cheeseball site needs an increased hit count and greater ad revenue. What can I do?" "Pull a Dvorak."

It's kind of a shame people fall for it every single time, and thus provide the guarantee that it works.

ya. this is too common. charles haddad of businessweek used to be our mac hatin' whippin boy a year or 2 back.

its not hard to see this is all intentional. i emailed David Pogue and asked if this sort of thing was intentional, and if net-writers get a fatter paycheck if they get alot of pageviews,etc, and this was his response:

My thoughts are that columnists are considered successful when they stir
controversy -- so some deliberately choose the course of most
controversy, as in this case.

so ya. its pretty obvious. mac users are an easy target cause we're all so foaming at the mouth intense about our platforms.

[Eriamjh]

My mac is DEAD? Crap. Better buy another one.

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
It goes like this: Say you have two identical products on the market�word processors, for example. For the sake of argument, let's make these two, X and Y, almost exactly the same. But product X is written in tight assembly language, fits on a floppy disk, and takes up 30K of memory. Product Y is written in some high-level language, comes on a CD-ROM, and takes up 500 megabytes on your hard drive. Which will outsell the other? I argue that the packed CD-ROM always will, because the public will perceive it as a greater value. You're getting more for your money.

You just described WriteNow vs. Word.

You have a point. While most on this forum wouldn't fall for it, the IT managers who buy the software, and care nothing for the employees' productivity, would fall for it.

[Phat Bastard]

He forgot to mention that Apple's "market share" in the scientific community is much higher than it's overall market share of 3%. At least in life sciences, which has been my experience. Go to an academic institution and guaranteed, you'll see like 25% Mac. My lab is 7 Macs vs. 1 PC vs. 2 Linux boxes.

There might be a correlation:
Scientists ~ have intelligence ~ will buy Macs

As long as there are scientists, creative people, and the diehard Mac fans like us, Apple will NEVER die.

Can you find a similar community that will always support Micro$oft? Dell? HP? Yeah, that's right.

[JHromadka]

Originally posted by driven:
At least I was kind enough to copy/paste the text instead of posting a link.

Thanks for doing that. I refuse to click on any of his articles anymore. I used to like his stuff when he wrote for PC World, but most of his stuff these days are head scratchers.

[MrSundberg]

Originally posted by driven:
And indeed, three percent is huge. But at some point (which may have been reached already), declining market share creates a relative lack of interest, and eventually, discontinuance. The Amiga fell prey to this.

Theese three sentences are so wrong that they actually make my head hurt.

[alphasubzero949]

Damn. Dvorak finally convinced me that it's all over for Apple. I knew those stores were a waste. Finally Old Navy will be able to occupy those free spaces. While I'm at it, I better ditch my Panther CDs, all of my software, my Blueberry iBook, Late '01 iBook, and my 15" Al PowerBook and replace everything with Dell PCs running XP. Better yet, I'll be able to catch the excitement on Long...errr...WinXP 2nd edition soon.

Apple should change their slogan to "Dead for 27 years and counting."

[ReggieX]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
His cheese has finally slid off his cracker. Poor fella.

This statement did not get enough love.

[BasketofPuppies]

Are people still paying attention to this guy? I thought by now everyone figured out he was writing sensational columns to get attention and reactions.

My "favorite" was the one where he blamed Apple for making computers mainstream and easy to use. Not because of the Macintosh, but because of the Apple II shifting the industry from useless kit computers you had to assemble yourself to personal computers people and organizations could actually do things with.

I believe there was one response in support of Dvorak. Everyone else - and a lot of people responded - said he was an idiot.

I assume (hope) Dvorak doesn't believe what he writes.

How I miss the days when Ziff Davis and ZDNet were one company.

[mitchell_pgh]

"The Mac is DEAD!!!" -Dvorak 1996
"The Mac is DEAD!!!" -Dvorak 1997
"The Mac is DEAD!!!" -Dvorak 1998
"The Mac is DEAD!!!" -Dvorak 1999
"The Mac is DEAD!!!" -Dvorak 2000
"The Mac is DEAD!!!" -Dvorak 2001
"The Mac is DEAD!!!" -Dvorak 2002
"The Mac is DEAD!!!" -Dvorak 2003
"The Mac is DEAD!!!" -Dvorak 2004

[Millennium]

Originally posted by BasketofPuppies:
Are people still paying attention to this guy? I thought by now everyone figured out he was writing sensational columns to get attention and reactions.

The problem is that he writes enough other articles to retain more respect than he deserves, which in turn gives his anti-Mac columns more weight. It's all a personal vendetta on his part, but the man knows how to maximize his impact.

My "favorite" was the one where he blamed Apple for making computers mainstream and easy to use. Not because of the Macintosh, but because of the Apple II shifting the industry from useless kit computers you had to assemble yourself to personal computers people and organizations could actually do things with.

I don't remember this one, to be honest. Do you have a link?

It's such a shame that the article where he openly admitted that this has all been a personal vendetta on his part was taken offline.

[BasketofPuppies]

No luck finding it. I think it was written between 1999 and 2001 for ZDNet. (Might have been ZDNet picking up one of his PC Magazine columns, though.)

Even for a Dvorak column, it was ridiculous.

[JHromadka]

I can't find it either (I remember it though), and doing a "dvorak mac" search at PCMag's website yield's zero results (yeah right!). The thing is, Dvorak likes writing inciteful articles that piss people off with polarizing views. Look at these topics and go back a few pages. He just wants to piss people off and get more pageviews.

[MilkmanDan]

Its dead? And I just spent $1500 on a powerbook....

[FOXHOUND]

=), I hope he is being sarcastic.

[Superchicken]

All kidding aside Apple does have some problems and it's foolish to ignore them. That said they are doing some to get around them. From the sounds of it we'll finally see a low cost intro level Mac in the works. With any luck we might see a more diverse laptop line and more aggressive marketing.