Re: Apple's ways

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

Greg Buchner <nobody@mn.rr.com> wrote:

>supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer) wrote:
>
>> Well, Motorola got to build Mac clones for about a year.
>
>But you overlook that fact that this was killing Apple.  The Mac clone 
>companies weren't going after new markets, they were going right after 
>the Mac market.
>
>If the Mac clone companies had siphoned off sales from the windows
>market, it would have been different.  But Apple couldn't compete
>as the big boy in the small marketshare that the Macs had and wasn't
>being expanded.

But how do you go after the Windows market?  By building better
PCs.  Faster, sleeker, more powerful PCs.  The Mac clone makers
did this and in fact, the overall number of MacOS users increased
meaning that it was gaining market share from Windows.  The fact
that these powerful Mac clones hurt Apple was simply because
Apple refused to change from its usual business practices.  Instead
of producing more powerful and feature rich Macs to justify the
premium prices it was charging, Apple continued to be, well, Apple.
It didn't put the effort into making better Macs.  If Apple made
better Macs and the clones made better Macs, you would have
a healthy cycle of improvements that would raise the MacOS
platform to the level where it could have the same leverage as the
Windows platform.

>How many ads from Power Computing, Motorola and the other clones did you 
>see in computer magazines that weren't Mac related.  Not many if any at 
>all.

You don't advertise in a magazine that's not for your target and
not doing so does not mean you are not going after a new market.
Linux wants more of Windows' market yet you rarely see Linux
advertisement in Windows magazines.  But that's not the point.
The point is if your Mac magazine has glowing reviews for clones
and cover stories of clones breaking this barrier and that, it will
catch the eye of new computer users and those wanting to
switch alike and THAT's how you expand your market.