Well I'll be..... Mr. Dvorak, I applaud you for this. Perhaps the "Sense sticks" we beat you with all the time finally knocked some logic into you.

I actually think Microsoft may have forgotten to pay him this month and this is his way of letting them know a payment is due. All the brainless and biased press releases comparing apple to everything windows are Microsoft cronies on it's payroll. It's a great way to look so innocent on the surface and be able to screw competition with impunity.

Booganosefunk

I think that the criteria being used is not necessarily current (or may not be for long). With all the viruses/bugs/trojans/worms/crashes/hassles associated with Windows, the criteria is changing to wanting something stable, useful and fairly hassle-free. That is not Windows.

In many ways the price factor is against wintel boxes too... since a Mac has a much longer life span and software don't need to be replaced at avery drop of a hat, we all know Mac are cheaper on the long run.
The problem is mos people don't think that way... they look at prices in the exact moment the purchase something and that's it...
And this is not even ignorance, but just short-sightedness (hope this is correct, I'm not native english speaker

Perhaps Apple should try a campaing pointing to that also...

cheers

is to get people to take an informed look at Macs. The problem is that when most people buy a computer they are told the old line about Macs being too expensive and no software. The person telling them is a commission salesman who knows where the money is - his money, that is. I call it The Bubba Syndrome and it moves a lot of PCs.

Several things are changing this landscape. The iPod over the long run will be a major help, as will The Music Store. The new iMac is definitely going to have an impact on switching to Macs, but only after supplies are abundant. Promotions like Cram & Jam are also a significant factor in Apple's computers. College kids with one will likely stay on the Mac platform and college kids without one will be wanting one before the semester is over.

The Apple Stores are also going to have a huge impact on Apple's future, especially in 3 - 5 years when there are a lot more and IBM is delivering Gx chips without problems . . .

As for Linux, you'll know it has really arrived when Apple comes out with iTunes and The Apple Store for them.

Not everything Dvorak wrote in the story made good sense. But before I get to that, I couldn't find a link to Dvorak's original story in this MacObserver piece, for those who care to actually research before ranting here it is:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1641372,00.asp

When Dvorak left me wanting in the story was when he summarized the Mac-situation with the following:

"When Apple split into two divisions and limited the amount of code that would be put in the Macintosh, its fate as a low-market-share company was sealed. In the mid-1980s, Steve Jobs decided that the Mac would de-emphasize games. It was years later (too late) before the machine was seen as a good game platform."

Sorry, I think this distorted abd biased view, IMHO, is a result of a journalist trying to summarize an entire market shift and platform transition in two sentences. I don't think it can be said that Apple limited the code being put into the Mac in 1984 (what were all those libraries then?) nor sealed it's fate forecevr by it's game support in the first few years (hey, I still miss Dark Castle ;->).

That's not Dvaorak's usuall incendiary stuff criticising Apple but I think that it's still pretty lame.

With his comment about if you value coolness and userbillity then the Mac is a no contest winner. You can always debate the coolness factor, but even John C sees the superiority of the Mac User interfase.

Thanks for the note about the link, Guest. I've now added a couple of links to the piece.

Dvorak hasn't changed an iota. It's bad enough that fool prefers Microsoft's virus and adware riddled crap, the crime is that Dvorak wants us all to think he's right for preferring that. Fact is that the first lead of his article is about people justifying their decisions, and then going on about Justifying his. Dvorak can and always will be a cheap MS pitcman. Bah what a LOSER.......

Problem is Apple does not press enough about how things are changed... not enough commercials and not the right ones...

the commercial with the G4 iMac mimicking the man was nice and cool.. but it did not imply anything about easy of use or compatibility with the PC world... or even about software or whatever...

I would have not switched based on that commercial.. I switched cause I saw a Mac running at a friend's home... I saw the actual thing working and that's what hooked me...

Apple needs to start a campaign that promotes these kind of things... like the switch campaign, but less trite...

cheers

three reasons
1. momentum-people (including Mac users) stick with what they have (see number 3). It's easier to get a new customer then a switcher.
2. Get what your friends have (.
3. Microsoft giving $300 to people who signed up for 3 years of their internet service. This was when tons of people got there first computer.
one point
1. Most people never made the choice. They just went for windows.
Just because what he says makes sense, doesn't mean it's true.
-b

Apple will never EVER rise above a *maximum* 10% share, because of plain old human nature.

The things that matter to mac users just DON'T to 90% of the rest of the population....

But its like that with *everything* that is an optional purchase. Everything.

Its even like that with food. I know people that will put the most *foul* low quality food into their mouths, because better food isn't a requirement, nor is it a consideration.

I know folks that spend a ton of money on something, but will use the most *crap* stuff in the world to "maintain" it.

No matter how many commericials, ads or whatever apple runs, the vast majority will not pay a premium over Price X for a quality product.

The iPod is a fluke; it is more a *cultural icon* status ssymbol, and its cost is *just* low enough that enough folks pony up.

But yeah, most people like crap, so that's what they look for.

Hell, i actually had one guy i know, and a smart guy too, tell me that Apple's stuff is *no better* than anyone else's and that 'Mac People' are gullable.

I *know*...its nuts...but really guys...Apple is where they are because there is nowhere else for them to be. They would have to effectively become another company to get anything more than 10%

Then we'd all buy something else

-K

I don't think I'm still on a Mac just cause I'm used to it... For me, at least, is a better experience than anything windows gave me.

And in my line of work the asian languages handling under OsX is just too much a boon to turn back to windows (even if most of my colleague still toil under that system).

Still it's true that changing from what you are used to, even if it's crap, is very difficult for most people...

Cheers

Quote

Semeyaza wrote:
I would have not switched based on that commercial.. I switched cause I saw a Mac running at a friend's home... I saw the actual thing working and that's what hooked me...

And realized it was worth the asking price.

This is the thing that puts you in the target "niche"...

Apple can make the greatest pitch in the world, using the most broad modern medium there is for this sort of thing, but for one, it is "beneath" them*...and they don't care *nearlyy* as much as the "userbase" does.

The Pitch of The Century would still fail when the price comes up

-K

*an infomercial, silly

IMHO Dvorak is just filling print space. Nothing new is revealed about his PC world view. Whether or not he likes the Mac he knows mentioning Apple increases his readership.

The article is a subtle capitulation the Mac will continue to sell and Apple will remain in business regardless of his view of the company's products or their "niche".

If you compare equally equipped PCs to Macs, the PCs will always be more expensive. Try going to the DELL online store and configure a machine comparable to the new iMacs. Even if you use the slowest processor to push down the price the iMac is way cheaper.

What PC makers offer on the other hand are computers that are so badly built, with lousy components, no FireWire, XP Home edition and absolutely unaccessible innards for regular users to upgrade, that they can offer a matching price for what such a machine is worth... almost nothing.

The DELLs and Gateways don't even care about bad the user experience they are offering, because most people just regard the lost time as normal and think its their own fault that their cheap PCs break all the time.

It's the same lack of intelligence and responsability that makes people buy cars that can go 300 km/h (where can you drive that fast in the US?), that use 15 liters of gas/100 km… while knowing exactly that burning petrol is the most stupid way to use this valuable but restricted natural resource. Lack of foresight and intelligence is human, and this hasn't changed since Voltaire bemoaned it.

So why should this situation be different in the Mac vs. PC question?

________
The only thing we learn from history is that we dont learn anything from history.

The column by Dvorak is like a half-finished thought. He starts in the right direction, but then gets sidetracked into the wrong conclusion (probably due to past bias).

Dvorak states, "If you make coolness and usability the main criteria, then the Mac easily wins." Then he goes on to say, "If you're an art director working almost anywhere, your criteria lead you directly to the Mac."

Huh?? How is it that "Art Directors" are the only niche that wants coolness, and most importantly, usability? The whole iPod --> iMac thing is based on people getting a chance to see for themselves what computer usability really means by owning (or using a friend's) iPod. This will have a huge impact on their next computer purchase.

I suppose Dvorak will argue that even if Apple's marketshare goes up 2x or 3x, Apple will still be a niche player. Maybe so, but no one should doubt that the Mac will appeal to a very broad range of consumers, not just "Art Directors".
-Travis

Bryan (and everyone else who think's Dvorak's an MS "shill"),
here are two more Dvorak articles that make a lot of sense and hardly pander to Microsoft:

"Shorthorn"
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1643598,00.asp

"Kill Word"
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1631430,00.asp

Jon

Dvorak is not an MS shill. While his anti-Mac bluster usually makes its rounds quickly through the Mac community, he certainly does not have great affection for Microsoft.

Despite his sometimes over-the-top comments about Apple, he is a bright guy who often has very constructive things to say.

Quote

Halix wrote:
If you compare equally equipped PCs to Macs, the PCs will always be more expensive. Try going to the DELL online store and configure a machine comparable to the new iMacs. Even if you use the slowest processor to push down the price the iMac is way cheaper.

But in some way that is Dvorak's point. To get equal spec, you have to add things like Firewire, Ethernet, some way of adding Airport, etc. The point is that Apple's consumer level machine has a lot of value-added features. Unfortunately not all users a) appreciate b) need or c) want these. They end up paying for features they won't use. Yes the same PC is more expensive, but Apple don't have a stripped down model with similar performance.

Not everyone has a Digital Camcorder or external HDD, therefore a Firewire port is unnecessary. As Mac Heads we all know that once you see iMovie and iDVD, you'll want a Digital Camcorder, but people don't see this when buying a PC, so its not in their criteria for choosing a machine. Hence, I think, Apple's try-before-you-buy retail store strategy.

I am no advocate of the stripped down "headless" iMac, quite the contrary. What Apple needed to do was to get the iMac G4 down to eMac prices but LCD demand and Motorola production issues drove component prices up. Hopefully the iMac G5 will eventually go there, and the issue of cheaper vs value added will disappear.

Sanj

Years ago, Dvorak was a Mac columnist! Then he switched sides. After that, when he wrote about Macs, it was mostly critical...sometimes on target, sometimes not. To me, he's kind of like Rush Limbaugh: he writes hysterically at times just to get a reaction and keep his job. I'm not being critical of him; he's got to make a living, too...like the guys on Crossfire.

The sad part is that when he switched, the Windows platform was unbelievably clunky. Apple OS was magnificently better...that's why Microsoft copied it.

Today when Dvorak is complaining about Apple/iPod/iMac, he really misses the point: The PC mass market is mostly about Wal-Mart costs and value. The Apple market tries to reach an audience that is willing to pay more for style, performance, and innovation. With the iPod, Apple did more than sell a music player: they changed our culture and the way we do things.

The new iMac demonstrates that style, performance and innovation are still possible for a desktop computer, and, that, yes, it is affordable...but not at Wal-Mart quality and prices.

well said