Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Will Windows PCs/laptops get a boost in sales?
- Thread starter ian87w
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Of course, but they're also more open to be platform agnostic.
The things that Microsoft is doing now would've never happened under Balmer.
Without question, while obviously they would like to promote x86, they have been embracing competing platforms to a greater degree since Nadella became the CEO
I think having a running version doesn’t mean it’s ready for consumers. Pretty sure they’ll release an ARM version for both OSs once it’s ready
MS Office is compiled for ARM, but it shows as an x86 app, in order not to break plugin support.
For this reason many people think it runs emulated, but it does not. =)
Microsoft has to emphasize services because they frittered away their entire mobile hardware presence. Poof, gone. Their Windows Mobile blunderings are now a classic case for B-schools.
The entire PC market has been contracting going on ten years now. There will be a short-term spike in PC sales due to work-at-home directives but COVID-19 will not drive quarter after quarter of PC sales.
Windows license revenue will continue to shrink as a fraction of their total gross.
Microsoft's best long-term strategy is to focus on services for the most widely distributed technology platform in the world: Android smartphones.
Let's not forget how many Android smartphones there were in 2007. Microsoft completely bungled it.
I see so many people complaining about the online communication tools using up a lot of CPU, crashing systems, etc. What I could see for the future is for laptops that are thicker for better cooling and beefier CPUs and RAM. I am running Zoom on an old desktop and it's fine - I don't like running it on my old MacBook Pro as it spins up the fans. A lot depends on your home environment and ambient temperature too.
Or maybe the people who write online communication tools could write better software.
Facetime doesn't seem to tax iPhones that much. Hell, even the old warhorse Skype works acceptably.
I've used most of the common desktop PC online communications software in the past 10+ years (Skype, WebEx, BlueJeans, goToMeeting, whatever) and the legacy entries all ran decently on hardware that was far less capable than today's gear.
I see most of today's popular online communications tools' shortcomings as atrociously written code.
The fact that billions of people have been using video conferencing on ghetto $200 Android handsets is for years is pretty much proof.
No one should be going out of their way to defend the breathtaking ineptitude of the Zoom engineering team. Their older cousins the WebEx guys figured out this stuff ten years ago.
Facetime doesn't seem to tax iPhones that much. Hell, even the old warhorse Skype works acceptably.
I've used most of the common desktop PC online communications software in the past 10+ years (Skype, WebEx, BlueJeans, goToMeeting, whatever) and the legacy entries all ran decently on hardware that was far less capable than today's gear.
I see most of today's popular online communications tools' shortcomings as atrociously written code.
The fact that billions of people have been using video conferencing on ghetto $200 Android handsets is for years is pretty much proof.
No one should be going out of their way to defend the breathtaking ineptitude of the Zoom engineering team. Their older cousins the WebEx guys figured out this stuff ten years ago.
Modern software is built on tools on top of tools on top of tools using lots of interpreted languages. It's more efficient for the tools companies to do it that way than to engineer for performance. I like assembler programming myself but that's just not how modern software is written unless it's written specifically for performance or the performance issues are important for selling products.
Personally I think Apple could of expanded sales of their Mac devices had they kept them upgradeable {like with some of their older stuff 2012 Macbook/Mac Mini}).
If people could of upgraded ram, storage on their devices, people would probably by them more often because they are built better and the OS is better. But Apple wants that premium upgrade price and doesn't believe in Right to Repair and is greedy and wants to increase e-waste by gluing and soldering crap together.
Sure you could say they might lose some sales because people keep the machines longer, but I honestly think they would of grabbed more of the computer market, because people would of paid more for a better machine than getting a Dell/HP with Windows 10 spyware and virus issues.
I don't think the majority of consumers/'prosumers' will notice. They might initially, as it will undoubtedly take a bit of time for some apps/programs to adjust, but I think that will be the exception and not the norm.
Business/professional users on the other hand, might - depending on the software they run, workflows etc etc. I know for me, the company I just joined runs a lot of proprietary software they've built themselves. When joining, they gave me the option of choosing between a Mac and PC. I went with the Mac (if only because using one in a professional setting is something of a novelty for me) - so this will be interesting to watch play out.
Business/professional users on the other hand, might - depending on the software they run, workflows etc etc. I know for me, the company I just joined runs a lot of proprietary software they've built themselves. When joining, they gave me the option of choosing between a Mac and PC. I went with the Mac (if only because using one in a professional setting is something of a novelty for me) - so this will be interesting to watch play out.
This is precisely the reason Microsoft’s strategy switched. They had no choice.
They certainly are, but they had to adopt this business model because their mobile play failed (mostly thanks to the developers who are now complaining about there being a duopoly in mobile app markets...)
You have to be in Cloud or you will be irrelevant. That's irrespective of your other businesses.
Large tech company projects fail all the time. You create products and hope that they work out but you know that a lot of them fail. Amazon also tried the Fire Phone and that also failed.
They've adopted business models that have worked and ditched those that didn't work. That's just the modern tech business for you.
Dell and HP both had great earnings on people buying more PCs for Work From Home and School From Home. So the basis for this thread is correct. I've noticed it in higher PC component prices.
With Apple transitioning to their own silicons, I'm sure many people are not comfortable leaving x86. Seems like a great opportunity for PC OEMs to buff up their lineups to try pulling these users, especially in the beginnings where Apple is still in transition.
Hopefully we can see some really nice offerings from the major OEMs like HP and Dell.
Not unless they decide to pull the finger out and start building desirable, sturdy hardware that doesn't spring broken hinges within 3 years.
Not unless any of them decide to actually make a trackpad comparable to a MBP in smoothness and precision.
Not unless they start working on a seamless ecosystem across phones / tablets / computers and services to support them.
I think the amount of people who even know what x86 and non x86 systems are, are a small enough market in regards to those big sales Apple pull in for Macs every year. Said people are also likely to be willing to have an Apple silicone Mac nearly as a toy alongside a powerful desktop PC rig etc.
What I was talking about above is the typical consumer. I think those swayed to PCs due to cost or whatever reason still will be. I think those who had the money for a Mac and wanted the 'nice computer that works' will still opt for it 95% of the time.
I have parts for a new PC build arriving this weekend to build a Mac Pro class system. Cost for the parts is about $1,500. It will be to run trading programs that run better on Windows than on macOS. One runs under WINE in macOS and some versions don't work with some versions of WINE though they try to make it transparent. WINE is often not 100% and I get hangs from time to time which are really annoying as I lose my settings when I have to kill the running program. I considered a Mac Pro but it has things that I don't need and the cost is a lot higher and I'm a bit worried about how long they will support it macOS x86. I had considered building a Ryzentosh as well but that would be a lot more work trying to get the thing configured and there's the same issue with how long Apple will support macOS x86. It would really help if Apple put out a statement on OS support.
All of the Macs that Apple makes have thermal issues except for the Mac Pro, but the Mac Pro is simply overkill for the vast majority. My current desk has 2x4k + QHD and I am thinking of going to 3x4k and I don't think that Apple has anything except for the Mac Pro that would run these without thermal issues. So I'd run my main programs on Windows but still do some things on macOS like browser, email, notes, calendar, reminders, office, etc.
I wish that Apple made a tower system for normal people.
I would argue there are no thermal issues whatsoever with any Apple product today. They perform well for what they're designed to do under real world, real use case scenarios. For uses such as yours, you can run a Windows tower PC. But the sale of Apple's machines and consumer demand would suggest that you're the niche case, and that actually the majority of consumers are fine with how Apple computers perform. Each to their own.
If there was consumer demand for an Apple tower for 'normal people', one would exist. Also, most 'normal people' don't have a tower PC anymore. Most households here in the UK now have a laptop floating about, or an iPad. Whereas 2000s-2010 there was always a 'family PC tower', but only because better options didn't really exist at a low cost at the time.
Sure, you can build a computer with the specs of a Mac Pro. But it's never going to run or deliver an experience like the Mac Pro. Nor is any other display at half the cost which also beats the Pro Display XDR on paper. Apple don't sell spec lists, they sell that complete experience.
Funny example, I have a friend with a computer's worth of £2,000 parts... my 2017 MacBook Pro when I had it could start up and get to work in seconds versus his PC and it legitimately had a combination of downright superior parts...
I suppose that you haven't seen the threads on thermal issues issues here. The one on the MacBook Pro 16 is over 100 pages long.
Gaming is really big in the US and you want a tower for gaming.
As far as the experience of a Mac Pro goes - the nice thing about building a PC is that you can tailor the components for your use case. So you can get a better experience than that of a Mac Pro. I used systems with over TB of RAM, hundreds of cores and hundreds of TB of SSD. I don't think that you can get that experience with a Mac Pro.
Unfortunately to some of the people on here, their bad experience or thoughts about Apple products ‘being flawed’ don’t actually make them flawed. I’m not saying there haven’t been Macs with flaws, but I’m saying people like to blow things out of proportion. Trust me , the 16” is not flawed on its thermals any more than any thin and light professional notebook on sale today. Compare it to a gaming laptop and of course it doesn’t have the same cooling system... comparisons must be apples to apples etc.
Gaming is popular all around the world, but a large part of that is now mobile gaming, of course console gaming. Building gaming PCs is still very much an enthusiast thing. How many supermarkets exist selling ready-to-go consumer PCs versus part stores? Very niche in comparison.
Again, you can get the specs on a custom built PC - no problem. But if that Mac Pro is anything like any Mac ever made, it’ll burn PCs with twice the specs in many real-world scenarios ;-). I just checked, you can configure 1.5TB of RAM in the Mac Pro. That must equate to what... about 4.5TB of RAM on a Windows PC? ;-)
I don't know. What I do know is that Windows 10 is more efficient with older hardware.
I'm sure that there are lots of applications that will beat out a Mac Pro as well. Especially those that don't run on macOS.
But let's compare it to a Mac Mini as the prices are more directly comparable.
My i7-10700 build does actually have over twice the specs of a Mac mini i3 for a few hundred less. It also comes with a huge case that has the capacity for 8 fans or water cooling if you prefer. And dual-channel memory instead of single-channel memory.