Posted on 12/09/2015 9:49:24 PM PST by Swordmaker
You are a soul-mate. Thank you for defining why Apple is so unattractive.
Apple doesn't make enterprise grade servers. Even their own data centers are filled with racks of somebody else's hardware.
I just can't get over the yuck factor.
They're replacing their desktops with Macs. They don't say what it is about that change that's saving them money. They may have been buying crappy hardware, and the hardware support costs were eating them up.
The hardware is not the operating system. I've seen a lot of Macs laptops running Windows, and a lot of arguments that conflate the hardware and the OS without any evidence to justify the resulting conclusions.
Mark, I’m an economist and this is my field of expertise. You have to know what you are looking at, and what’s being counted and compared. It isn’t what you think or they say it is.
First of all, that lovely green yellow line claiming to represent “shipments” of Android “smartphones” ain’t. It is IDC’s guess at the number of ALL phones shipped that have an Android operating system loaded on them. Nobody making Android phones, not one single manufacturer, breaks out the product mix of smartphones, feature phones, and plain-old dumb limited function phones. Not one. This is the dirty secret of the Android phone market.
Apple is the only phone manufacturer that reports actual phones sold through to end users, not phones shipped into the supplier channels to eventually perhaps be sold to end users. Apple’s numbers are always actual phones delivered to consumers. All others are observed guesses by industry insiders statistically estimating by looking at indicators and surveys how many may have been shipped. A lot are wild assed, pluck it out of their navel, make it up, cross your fingers, and no one will ever really know anyway fabrications, because there simply is no data on which to even make an intelligent estimate!
In 2013, during the Apple v. Samsung patent infringement trial, the Samsung attorneys made the mistake of commenting that Apple shouldn’t base its damages on Samsung’s shipment claims, first because a lot were returned unsold and heavily discounted or destroyed, and second because not all shipped were “smartphones.”
Judge Lucy Koh then ordered Samsung, the largest Android manufacturer in the world, to disclose exactly what percentage their shipments of phones were comprised of, on an annual basis for the current year, so the damages could be equitably calculated. She also required figures on unsold returns which was a huge eye opener, especially in tablet sales! However, what was most interesting was the product mix in phones. The audited shipment records showed that in 2013 Samsung shipped (not sold) only ~30% Android smartphones, ~40% limited function Android Feature phones, and ~30% Android basic function dumb phones. Competition and market forces would likely force the big five Android phone manufacturers to independently create similar shipment product mixes.
Research shows that many of the smaller Android phone makers do not even attempt to manufacture a smartphone, concentrating their efforts instead in the Feature phone or even basic phone products, many of which run old versions of Android, aimed at poorer third world markets with little access to the Internet. These back alley makers can’t break through the lock the bigger Android makers have on the upper tier smartphone market. They just can’t compete and often turn out crippled feature phone look-alikes to actual real smartphones but which lack smartphone capabilities. IDC, Gartner, Canalsys and the other market metric organizations lump these makers into the “other” category and merely guesstimate their output. . .
The upshot of this is that only about 25-28% of the Area below the Android trend line represented on that and other charts of this kind, actually represents smartphones. The balance is made up of Feature phones and junk basic phones targeted to third world markets. Don’t believe me? Go into any metroPCS, GoPhone counter, Walmart, or other store that gives away phones with contracts and see how many of them are flip phones, candy bar phones, etc., and then think about the millions of Obama phones, and others of their ilk. Add in the phones in poorer countries and areas in Africa, India, and South America and think about the numbers. They are all included in the reported Android phones shipped, but fraudulently counted as Android smartphones because some version of Android is loaded in them, even though the majority of those phones can’t use the HIGHER capabilities of the OS.
This is why when push comes to shove, Apple takes home 94% of ALL mobile phone manufacturers profits, not just smartphone profits, 94% of ALL profits. . . because they are all in there!
I get it.
Apple is gaining market share because for the past 30 years they have supplied school children with apples.
They are brought up in the soup of it.
That's the truth. And don't forget the inevitable whining cheap-ass cooling fan that is specd for the these corporate machines. Nothing but the cheapest of everything.
What a load of crap.
Why not a tablet?
When a carpenter breaks his drill, he isn’t out of business, he grabs another one or buys a new one.
The endpoints themselves should have no value, and what do I mean by that? In the industry it means nothing of value is stored on them. Why? Because the most important part of the end point is the data itself. That is why it is stored in secured enterprise data centers, replicated across SANs, servers in multiple locations.
They've had some success filling a niche (mobile devices) and breathlessly portray that niche as being the whole ball of wax. For them "enterprise" is a marketing buzzword, not an infrastructure.
“Oh I see, the desktop is dead, unless that desktop is running a Mac Operating system, then it is the coolest shiniest thing ever and everyone must buy one right?”
Exactly. Logic was never swordmaker’s strength. Apple = Good. Microsoft = Bad. Same product lines but his bigotry shines through for Apple. Jim Robinson should really be making loads of money with swordmaker’s constant use of FR as an Apple social media marketing site.
Again, not in the real world
Just in Apple fanboi world
And they are using the term “devices” not desktops as well
5400 iPhones and iPads with simple Apps is different to support then 5400 OSX desktops with more complicated software
You are comparing apples to dump trucks at that point.
1,900 Macs a week. REAL WORLD, arl. You don't get more real world than IBM, a company with 400,000 employees. They are comparing Apples to PC support when they are talking about this support.
The commentary was support desk calls for Macs as opposed to Windows using PCs, it was quite explicit. You lose. You are dancing as fast as you can, but you are not dancing very well.
Your analogy is close. Dump Truck PCs. . . Good one.
Another insult added to your pile.
The Fortune Magazine article states quite clearly:
That is not the only source on this information, arl. Can't you read???? IBM has been deploying Macs since 2014. 52 weeks times 1,900 equals 95,000 Macs. . . and that's just assuming 2015 without counting any deployed in 2014.
This is the third or fourth time I've run into this meme that IBM is merely a "consulting" company from the Anti-Apple crowd. It isn't. Do you guys have meetings on how you are going to address these positive events that occur involving Apple?
IBM has a market cap of $132.5 Billion. In addition to consulting, IBM manufactures and markets computer hardware, middleware and software, and offers infrastructure, hosting and consulting services in areas ranging from mainframe computers to nanotechnology. You really don't have a clue what you are talking about. IBM is #82 on the Fortune 100 list. It is NOT some podunk consulting firm you want everyone to believe. With 400,000 worldwide employees, it is by every stretch of the imagination a business that qualifies as a member of "The Enterprise" class businesses.
When YOU make such idiotic claims that IBM is merely another consulting company, then I am considering the source. . . and it is ignorant and obviously biased and pushing a questionable agenda.
Why not a tablet?. . . what?
Why would you recommend a full fledge expensive desktop when a tablet would do?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.