Out of the blue, Apple topples Micro$oft in Japan with more market share!

[downix]

mongo wrote:
Keep in mind that if you are buying Mac OS X Leopard, you already own a Mac.

Apple didn't gain any new users, they just sold an upgrade to existing users.

Total gain in market share for Apple = 0%.

By that same logic, people are buying Vista to go on their already existing PC's.  So total gain for Microsoft market share is also 0%

[da9000]

This is fantastic news! Arigato Nippon!! :-)
Because we'd be more than 20 years ahead, technologically, if it wasn't for this M$ stagnation cesspool we're in.

koaftder wrote:
ported to the mac. Having written software on Windows for 10 years, it has become a comfortable environment. I find that

@koafder:

No offense, but by your logic I should still be programming DOS apps, because I was comfortable with them, and considering any other platform inadequate. Thus save myself from any positive self-evolution and personal development.

It's also completely illogical when people say that their programs aren't available for platform X, therefore the platform is inadequate. Sure, program 1 from platform Y might not be called 1 on platform X, but platform X, 99% of the time, has program 2 which does the same things more or less with program 1. I'm sick and tired of hearing this argument. And worse of all it's coming from people who actually where there when their favorite platform was at an infantile stage and DIDN'T have any software (Amiga anyone?). Yes, software gets created and evolves - it's not innate. Duh. So, of course a crappy platform like Windows which has been TRYING to get a decent media player (anyone remember the pre-Win3.0 days' first attempts at Windows Media Player?) for the last 20 years, will have more software than a newer platform. That doesn't mean that imbalance will stay that way, and it also doesn't mean that the newer platform will have worse applications. In fact, it's so funny, Apple came out of nowhere with iTunes, and look at things now: iTunes is the *de facto* media player! In under 5-6 years. (I'm mostly an MPlayer guy btw)

The fact of the matter is that any good programmer can do almost ANYTHING with any platform, however crappy it may be. Witness all the cool GUI environments on ZX Speccys, C64s and Amstrads, or one of the hairiest platforms ever: Windows. People have still managed to do great things on top of it, despite all the limitations (let's not get into 16bit code, hunks, segmented memory models and all the putrid garbage it entailed).

And to be honest, your opinion seems to be biased as you yourself say you've been doing Windows apps for a long time. Have you tried doing OS X or reading the fantastic set of resources and documentation that is provided freely with it?

Myself, I've gone the opposite way: used to do DOS / Windows / Linux apps (last thing I touched was unVisual Studio 2005 I think it was), and once I discovered Mac OS X (in 2005) + Cocoa/Objective-C/Xcode/InterfaceBuilder/Shark/ObjectAlloc, I was pulling my hair out for not having seen "the light" back in the NeXTSTEP days.

My friend, you along with many "stalwart" developers been living in a cave, as was I for years. The core development technologies in OS X are way way ahead of what "Visual" crap M$ has been pushing down devs throats. Words cannot simply do them justice. Suffice to say they're part of the technological trio that Jobs "stole" from Xerox Parc, no doubt the premier inventors of computer technology in the last half century (if you're interested check out: http://product.half.ebay.com/Dealers-of-Lightning_W0QQprZ850632QQtgZinfo ).

I highly urge you, and any other developers, to check out Xcode 3.0 + latest IB and the plethora of FREE developer tools (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Developer_Tools) that Mac OS X provides, and since we're talking about technologies that are of essence to developers here's a challenge: show me anything as good or even close to Shark/Instruments (used to be called XRay) or ThreadViewer or some of the OpenGL tuning tools (ex: http://developer.apple.com/graphicsimaging/opengl/opengl_serious.html) on other platforms. (please, no responses if you've not played with any of the tools for 30-40 minutes - it'd render your opinion useless)


Cheers, and be AFRAID NOT dear friends, the future can only get better from now on! I know you're under the deepest, darkest spell, and just like Darth Vader & co, Microsoft has an uncanny ability to pacify and sedate your sharpest wit, and make you believe you're in good hands, and that change is bad for you. But change CAN be good and in this case your fellow Amigans are voicing more than ever this sentiment. Choice (AROS, MorphOS, AmigaOS4, Linux, *BSD, Mac OS X, etc,etc) and freedom is rising like a Phoenix from the ashes. Allow yourself to be EDUCATED, for education is the key to breaking away from the digital slavery you're bound in. The dark ages seem to be coming to pass.



PS1. Sorry for the epic epilogue, but as a hardcore technologist, with much blood spilled after the days of C='s decay, I'm delirious and ecstatic about the bright future I see for all of us.

PS2. Not included are the bad things in the Apple camp, and that's because the discussion wasn't focused on that, but on the Mac OS X as a good development platform. Apple and Mac OS X have plenty of things they've got to fix, no doubt, and having been used them and lived them I can honestly say so, yet they bring many more positive things to the table. And because of that, at the end of the day, in my honest opinion, I'd rather be a slave to Apple any day than to a third rate company with third rate products. This is very much like my stance was with Commodore: boy did Commodore have problems, and even the venerable Amiga was not perfect, both in the hardware and the software, but you know what? Compared to the alternative (IBM PC & DOS), I'd rather be a Commie {bleep} Slave any time of the day!

PS3. I sincerely apologize for the length, but you've got the choice to not read it! :-D

[remaster01]

Well, what can I said.

Here in Mexico (sad but true, third world), the fight of MS vs Apple is so strange.
In my work we have the two systems, and they are a headache. In my country, at any level, we work with Win98 to Vista, and System 7 to Leopard.
I'm a Graphic Designer, working since 90's with Amiga, now in PC. The Mac are too expensive but its a status for who got one.
In general, all hate MS, love Mac, and (too sadly) pirate all the software what they can.
And the two companies sell too much hardware and software anyway.

[little]

downix wrote:
By that same logic, people are buying Vista to go on their already existing PC's.  So total gain for Microsoft market share is also 0%

That is not really what is happening. For Vista you really need a new AND expensive PC, a cheap PC from three years ago simply wont do. On top of that as soon as Vista SP1 is released you will need to buy a new video card since cards one year or older are deemed "unowrthy". That is the reason many people are staying with XP (and a few are tempted to try Linux). But if you really need to buy a new PC, might as well be a Mac with XP installed in a partition for games and using Paralles to run applications. Also, Japanese users do like to have the newest gadgets, so they do buy new PCs quite often, so what we see today in Japan might be seen happening in the USA in three years.

[RRunner]

da9000 wrote:

It's also completely illogical when people say that their programs aren't available for platform X, therefore the platform is inadequate. Sure, program 1 from platform Y might not be called 1 on platform X, but platform X, 99% of the time, has program 2 which does the same things more or less with program 1.

I like the mac and OSX and use it from time to time for work however I have not made the switch because:

- I'm an Oracle database developer and there are no development tools on the Mac for Oracle (not that I've seen anyways)

- Cost... I can buy a laptop with Vista for hundreds cheaper than a Mac

- Finally, the games that I like to play just aren't available on the Mac.

I did see an interesting article the other day which showed how to install OSX on standard, off the shelf intel hardware... I wonder if I could set up a dual boot environment on my laptop....  :roll:  :lol:

[mongo]

downix wrote:

By that same logic, people are buying Vista to go on their already existing PC's.  So total gain for Microsoft market share is also 0%

Because people can't buy or assemble a new PC and buy Vista to run on it?

Not to mention the fact that Microsoft really doesn't need to gain any market share.

[koaftder]

da9000 wrote:
This is fantastic news! Arigato Nippon!! :-)
Because we'd be more than 20 years ahead, technologically, if it wasn't for this M$ stagnation cesspool we're in.

koaftder wrote:
ported to the mac. Having written software on Windows for 10 years, it has become a comfortable environment. I find that

@koafder:

No offense

None taken. :-)

but by your logic I should still be programming DOS apps, because I was comfortable with them, and considering any other platform inadequate. Thus save myself from any positive self-evolution and personal development.

Not really. You move up when new platforms come around that provide a better environment. Win32, *nix, and OSX are all stable, modern, well maintained operating systems that provide equivalent features. None are really better than the other, they are just different. Why should I move on to only develop for OSX when it's not a significantly better OS for hosting my applications? Especially when none of my customers uses OSX?

It's also completely illogical when people say that their programs aren't available for platform X, therefore the platform is inadequate. Sure, program 1 from platform Y might not be called 1 on platform X, but platform X, 99% of the time, has program 2 which does the same things more or less with program 1. I'm sick and tired of hearing this argument. And worse of all it's coming from people who actually where there when their favorite platform was at an infantile stage and DIDN'T have any software (Amiga anyone?). Yes, software gets created and evolves - it's not innate. Duh. So, of course a crappy platform like Windows which has been TRYING to get a decent media player (anyone remember the pre-Win3.0 days' first attempts at Windows Media Player?) for the last 20 years, will have more software than a newer platform. That doesn't mean that imbalance will stay that way, and it also doesn't mean that the newer platform will have worse applications. In fact, it's so funny, Apple came out of nowhere with iTunes, and look at things now: iTunes is the *de facto* media player! In under 5-6 years. (I'm mostly an MPlayer guy btw)

I never said OSX was an inadequate OS because the apps I need to use to do my job aren't available on that platform. If i need a new machine I can't convince the boss to provide funding for a mac when the tools we use don't run on the mac. Macs are selling well, to consumers, no so much for business environments.

The fact of the matter is that any good programmer can do almost ANYTHING with any platform, however crappy it may be. Witness all the cool GUI environments on ZX Speccys, C64s and Amstrads, or one of the hairiest platforms ever: Windows. People have still managed to do great things on top of it, despite all the limitations (let's not get into 16bit code, hunks, segmented memory models and all the putrid garbage it entailed).

This is true. A good programmer can write just about anything for any platform. A programmer who wants to eat and make a living must be selective.

And to be honest, your opinion seems to be biased as you yourself say you've been doing Windows apps for a long time. Have you tried doing OS X or reading the fantastic set of resources and documentation that is provided freely with it?

I use OSX every day. I have written a few apps for OSX as well (hobby stuff).

Myself, I've gone the opposite way: used to do DOS / Windows / Linux apps (last thing I touched was unVisual Studio 2005 I think it was), and once I discovered Mac OS X (in 2005) + Cocoa/Objective-C/Xcode/InterfaceBuilder/Shark/ObjectAlloc, I was pulling my hair out for not having seen "the light" back in the NeXTSTEP days.

My friend, you along with many "stalwart" developers been living in a cave, as was I for years. The core development technologies in OS X are way way ahead of what "Visual" crap M$ has been pushing down devs throats. Words cannot simply do them justice. Suffice to say they're part of the technological trio that Jobs "stole" from Xerox Parc, no doubt the premier inventors of computer technology in the last half century (if you're interested check out: http://product.half.ebay.com/Dealers-of-Lightning_W0QQprZ850632QQtgZinfo ).

I highly urge you, and any other developers, to check out Xcode 3.0 + latest IB and the plethora of FREE developer tools (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Developer_Tools) that Mac OS X provides, and since we're talking about technologies that are of essence to developers here's a challenge: show me anything as good or even close to Shark/Instruments (used to be called XRay) or ThreadViewer or some of the OpenGL tuning tools (ex: http://developer.apple.com/graphicsimaging/opengl/opengl_serious.html) on other platforms. (please, no responses if you've not played with any of the tools for 30-40 minutes - it'd render your opinion useless)

I've written software for a lot of different platforms over the years. Each platform has a different way of doing stuff. Some things are easy, others hard, it's all the same. Just different ways of getting the job done. Xcode is nice, it's suited perfectly for writing apps on the mac. Cocoa is neat, objC is cool, it's just yet another way of doing things. It isn't any better than anything else, it's just different. No language or set of libraries will ever compensate for good application design and programming capability. Languages and libraries don't write applications, people do. C# and the .Net framework isn't any better or worse than objC and Cocoa or Java for that matter. It's all just different ways to accomplish the same things.

Cheers, and be AFRAID NOT dear friends, the future can only get better from now on! I know you're under the deepest, darkest spell, and just like Darth Vader & co, Microsoft has an uncanny ability to pacify and sedate your sharpest wit, and make you believe you're in good hands, and that change is bad for you. But change CAN be good and in this case your fellow Amigans are voicing more than ever this sentiment. Choice (AROS, MorphOS, AmigaOS4, Linux, *BSD, Mac OS X, etc,etc) and freedom is rising like a Phoenix from the ashes. Allow yourself to be EDUCATED, for education is the key to breaking away from the digital slavery you're bound in. The dark ages seem to be coming to pass.

You need to get out a little more! :lol:

PS1. Sorry for the epic epilogue, but as a hardcore technologist, with much blood spilled after the days of C='s decay, I'm delirious and ecstatic about the bright future I see for all of us.

PS2. Not included are the bad things in the Apple camp, and that's because the discussion wasn't focused on that, but on the Mac OS X as a good development platform. Apple and Mac OS X have plenty of things they've got to fix, no doubt, and having been used them and lived them I can honestly say so, yet they bring many more positive things to the table. And because of that, at the end of the day, in my honest opinion, I'd rather be a slave to Apple any day than to a third rate company with third rate products. This is very much like my stance was with Commodore: boy did Commodore have problems, and even the venerable Amiga was not perfect, both in the hardware and the software, but you know what? Compared to the alternative (IBM PC & DOS), I'd rather be a Commie {bleep} Slave any time of the day!

PS3. I sincerely apologize for the length, but you've got the choice to not read it! :-D

[mongo]

little wrote:

That is not really what is happening. For Vista you really need a new AND expensive PC, a cheap PC from three years ago simply wont do. On top of that as soon as Vista SP1 is released you will need to buy a new video card since cards one year or older are deemed "unowrthy".

I often wonder if the people bashing Vista have actually ever used it.

Vista runs quite nicely on my PC that consists of a $30 motherboard, a $7 CPU, a $12 heat sink and fan, $40 worth of ram, an $87 hard drive, a $22 case, a $15 power supply, a $34 DVD burner, a $25 CD burner, a $15 sound card, a $40 video card, and a $10 monitor.

I also have a $7 keyboard and a $12 mouse.

That's $356 in total. Not really an expensive PC, by any standards.

[redrumloa]

I often wonder if the people bashing Vista have actually ever used it.

Yes, hated it.

M$ did a fair job with XP, best effort they have ever done. Vista IMHO is on the same level as Win95(rev-a) or WinME. Total garbage.

[uncharted]

Fanboyism in all its forms is rather sad, but Microsoft fanboyism is in a league of its own.

[downix]

mongo wrote:

little wrote:

That is not really what is happening. For Vista you really need a new AND expensive PC, a cheap PC from three years ago simply wont do. On top of that as soon as Vista SP1 is released you will need to buy a new video card since cards one year or older are deemed "unowrthy".

I often wonder if the people bashing Vista have actually ever used it.

Vista runs quite nicely on my PC that consists of a $30 motherboard, a $7 CPU, a $12 heat sink and fan, $40 worth of ram, an $87 hard drive, a $22 case, a $15 power supply, a $34 DVD burner, a $25 CD burner, a $15 sound card, a $40 video card, and a $10 monitor.

I also have a $7 keyboard and a $12 mouse.

That's $356 in total. Not really an expensive PC, by any standards.

Compared to the $200 PC Walmart sells that comes with Linux....

[Damion]

uncharted wrote:
Fanboyism in all its forms is rather sad, but Microsoft fanboyism is in a league of its own.

LOL... not hating MS = fanboyism???

I wish I could share your enthusiasm, but not everyone can get by on an A500/WB2.

--edit

Viewpoint 1: All OSes have their positives and negatives, I use and enjoy many. IMO, Vista runs reasonably well on cheap hardware.

Viewpoint 2: If you're not browsing on 030's and cursing MS with every breath, you're an MS fanboy and AOS2 traitor. Besides, Vista crawlz even on dual-core and has no redeeming attributes for anyone.

Now which one sounds rational/healthy to you?

[little]

mongo wrote:
$40 worth of ram

You are pulling my leg, rught? You are running Vista with only 512 Mb of RAM? That is the bare minimum for XP. Do you really do anything besides websurfing with that machine?

a $22 case, a $15 power supply

A case already comes with a power supply, another indication that you are yanking at my leg.

a $10 monitor.

Come on, where can you buy a new vga monitor for ten bucks? If this machine was built with used parts then it is not a clear reflection of market prices.

[koaftder]

little wrote:

mongo wrote:
$40 worth of ram

You are pulling my leg, rught? You are running Vista with only 512 Mb of RAM? That is the bare minimum for XP. Do you really do anything besides websurfing with that machine?

a $22 case, a $15 power supply

A case already comes with a power supply, another indication that you are yanking at my leg.

a $10 monitor.

Come on, where can you buy a new vga monitor for ten bucks? If this machine was built with used parts then it is not a clear reflection of market prices.

You can easily pick up a crt monitor for 10 dollars at a thrift store.

For what it's worth, I installed Vista on a 3GHz p4 i got 3 years ago for 500 dollars (shuttle model). 512MB ram, and Vista runs on it just fine.

When win95 came out, All kinds of people {bleep}ed profusely.
When Win98 came out, all kinds of people {bleep}ed profusely, and recommended sticking to 95
When Win2k, all kinds of people {bleep}ed profusely and recommended sticking to win98
When XP came out, all kinds of people {bleep}ed profusely and recommended sticking to 2k
when vista came out, all kinds of people {bleep}ed profusely...

See the pattern? And in every instance, just about everybody kept using windows.

When Apple farts people sniff and cheer. People pay 250 dollars for a 4gb flash ipod and 600 dollars for an iPhone.

[little]

Viewpoint 1: All OSes have their positives and negatives,

Actually quite misleadung. By the same logic even Hitler made something good in his lifetime and even mother Teresa must have done something wrong. It is not the existence of positives and negatives that matter, it is the net sum of them. Therefore there are hideous OSes (i.e. Windows ME) and funtional OSes.

I use and enjoy many.

Truth is if you use many OSes you enjoy some and endure the others; with time you get comfortable with those you had to endure the same way you would get comfy with your kidnappers, you might even end loving them!!!

IMO, Vista runs reasonably well on cheap hardware.

Again quite misleading, that is a subjective point of view, some people surf the net with their commodore 64 and would say that it "runs reasonably well on cheap hardware" because they have gotten used to it.

[little]

When win95 came out ... See the pattern?

I was there, I remember all of it. New windows releases (BTW, you skipped 3.11 and earlier) had always required improved hardware. But with windows vista you need new hardware, people can fool themselves all they want (I mean, they are doing so in their own free time) but anyone that uses their PC for anything beyond web browsing (i.e. for gaming) will not touch Vista at the present time because it does not run fine, period.

edit:

When Apple farts people sniff and cheer.

It seems you have confused me with an apple lover or the like, I have no ipod, iphone, iwhatever.