Perhaps the following might help the unenlightened. Apple's overall market share is hitting new lows--2.6 percent, by Giga Information Group's most recent count. Pinto

I don't remember them counting my Macs. DavidH

Macs have long been a niche computing platform. I would use OSX if I 1) could afford the outrageously expensive hardware and 2) didn't have to re-buy all my apps for a Mac

i Know, I Know.....too many cheap pc's out there. But seriously, the pc market is greater because they are being crammed down the publics throats, plus they are disposable.They are using it to test the bugs before we get the real thing, jsut like P4 and PP. this is something i have never understood, most apps and games are written, built and desiged on amc but, the mac always get the final product last. Thanks Micro$oft

Yes,... this is becoming a problem for MAC users. Most of the 3D applications and plugins are developped either only for PC or "will be available" on MAC OS X in a "near futur"...

But the only one to blame here is Apple. Steve Jobs and his team have spend the last 3 years only focused on design and propaganda instead of improving the system itself. They have attracted new customers - especially "home users" - but they are loosing the professional market. I really don't understand their marketing strategy. the 1GHz dual G4 processor is slower than a single 1.8 GHz Pentium 4 chip, yet it's 3 x more expensive... Who will buy it ?

People are always blaming and insulting Micro$soft. But PCs are getting more stable, more powerful and cheaper. Where is the problem ? If I can get a lightning fast PC workstation for a few bucks, Bill Gates can spy me as much as he wants. I'll even send I'm pictures of me...

Sorry Apple, but it's time for real change... otherwise in less than 3 years MACs will be dead and buried.

Wow... lets dont do this please. Everyone knows statistics are skewed. Sure Apple doesnt have a large market share but what there is represents over 25 million users. If you think in those terms things look a lot different. Also dont forget that a huge amount of PC's are purchased for office use where the numbers are even further skewed. Think of all the server farms, development test beds and other places with multiple PC's, then figure that a massive percentage of sold PC's are never going to run more than MS Office on them regardless of what you advertise and the numbers once again look much different. We cant run amok witch hunting with simple statistics or overviews. After all, Hitler was a vegetarian artist and Gengis Kahn could be called "the man with the active outdoor lifestyle". ; ) Being a dual platform person myself I feel confident with my previous bottom line; if developing for Apple is good enough for Newtek, Alias Wavefront, Adobe, Macromedia, e-on, Maxon and thousands of others it's also good enough for Curious Labs. ......... or maybe not. ; )

audity, According to the following, 2003 may be the key year. Apple just announced that starting in January, all its new machines will run exclusively on OS X (previously, users could boot up in either OS X or "Classic," or OS 9, mode). While it might seem natural that new computer purchasers would want the latest software, here's the rub: The makers of Quark Express, the popular desktop publishing program that ushers Apple into many corporate markets, have yet to release an OS X version and won't say when one will be ready. And the matter of Microsoft and Apple's always-rocky relationship is not trivial. A key five-year contract between the companies has just expired. In August 1997, Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple and agreed to develop future versions of its Office productivity suite for the Apple OS for the next five years. Microsoft spent a lot of time and money to create Microsoft Office for OS X and reportedly feels Apple hasn't done enough to promote it. Microsoft's Kevin Browne complained to News.com that Apple spent "20 times" more money advertising the iPod than it did marketing OS X. Apple CEO Steve Jobs needs Bill Gates & Co. on his side; plenty of potential Mac buyers could make the switch to a Wintel machine if they can't use Microsoft's leading productivity suite. If the .Mac services don't take off, if Quark doesn't meet the January deadline, and if Microsoft decides not to renew its pact with Apple, 2003 will be a hell of a tough year for the company. With so many fires to put out around him, Jobs is in danger of losing his focus. And that could be about the worst thing for Apple. Pinto

Don't write Apple off yet!!
http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=174096756&m=8700938335&r=8700938335

What the hell are you talking about? .Mac doesnt mean much of anything to Apple's success, Microsoft released OSX for Mac AFTER the contract expired, which is feature equal to the windows version, and anyone who would even buy quark already owns it and has it installed on systems that work just fine connected to high end equipment that wont be changed because it doesnt need to be because it works fine now. How many PC owners use Quark? Last I knew Quark wasnt a big ticket seller for Windows either. The print industry is not an important one right now. It's not growing or evolving. Other markets are far more important. And on that note, Jobs actually has done a great job of improving the machines, and you would know that if you looked any deeper than the tv adds. All of the machines are really loaded with features, and you would pay just as much for a PC with matching functionality. Mac's today use the same video cards, hard drives, ram and other hardware found in PC's so things arent as different as you would expect. Think you got a great deal on that new hard drive upgrade? Yeah, so did the mac user. Get over it. Anyhow, if you are so comfortable with your decision to buy the same machine as the majority of people did, why do you need to continue to bash Apple users? We are happy with our choice as well, and most of us know the Windows OS as well as you do and use it every day too. Apple has cash in the bank and a loyal following of customers, and they have never had more than 5 or 10 percent of the computer sales. Yet everyone thinks they are going to die tomorrow. Yeah, whatever. Dont flame me on this, I dont care. ; )

Not only did M$ invest 150 million, they also settled an undisclosed amount in a lawsuit (the .AVI format apparently has code ripped directly out of QuickTime). The person who's got the most to fear isn't Jobs, it's Gates. There are a number of entities that appear to be convinced that M$ is a Monopoly. Hmmm, imagine that. Would M$ survive intact if Apple went under? FWIW, Apple is still profitable.

not to bash the mac or apple but isn't apple just as much a monopoly? how many companys are allowed to produce hardware that runs OSX only one that I know of, and other then a half year failed experiment a while back, that has always been true and the same thing is true of the OS. now there are pluses and minuses to this to be sure, one big plus is stability if you have a lmited number of configurations to work with there is less chance of software-hardware incompatability, but you also loose in the competitive marketplace to an overwhelming variety of less expensive alternatives which is what happened. I have worked on both Macs and PCs the Mac is the Betamax of the computer industry arguably better in many aspects but the need to control their product so stringently has probably religated them to the same fate as the betamax. The bare truth is that Apple has come close to bankruptsy too many times to be sure of their future. and sure the statistics include those who use PCs as oversized word processers but that distinction doesnt matter in the long run. I love the Mac but I bought a PC for the same reason I bought a VHS recorder. no one can be sure Apple can stay afloat indefinately. Does anyone remember the amiga? OK bring on the flames.

I for one think the Mac's look way cool. I wonder how many times you have to recycle plastic before it looks that way. ;-)

OK, my turn to get flamed. (Hopefully not.) Pinto: That's not enlightenment, it's idle speculation. I'm sorry, but this one reported market share, even if accurate, ignores the huge disparity between what platform creative professional prefer (yes, the one out of Cupertino) and which one the rest of the world has been fed. IOW it would be deeply foolish of CL not to release P5 for OSX. Audity writes: "Steve Jobs and his team have spend the last 3 years only focused on design and propaganda instead of improving the system itself." Oh my, so very wrong. The people they acquired from Raycer Graphics, a company everyone here would have loved if they had survived, upped the quality of their processor team exponentially. What you're describing seems to be an impression based on advertising, which you spin as "propaganda," which is classier than most advertising by a long shot. Apple's form design is recognized throughout the world as top-notch, and has indeed attracted new interest and generated sales. If you honestly believe that they're only focussed on advertising and design, you haven't done your homework about the company. The real flaws of their recent strategies haven't even been mentioned in this thread. Pinto tells us: "Microsoft's Kevin Browne complained to News.com that Apple spent '20 times' more money advertising the iPod than it did marketing OS X." Since when are MS "complaints" about Apple an indicator of anything other than the war of words we've all known about for years? Since when can MS' allegations about Apple be trusted at all? Furthermore, why should Apple NOT have spent the alleged oodles on the I-Pod? It represented a quantuum leap forward in portable MP3 players. It can work as much more than an MP3 player. It's now available for PC users. Apple knew that the OSX release was primarily of interest to existing Mac enthusiasts/owners, whereas the I-Pod is still in such global demand that the manufacturers still have a backlog. Its appeal goes way beyond Mac-land. The alleged discrepency in advertising was wise, not lame. I-Pod is a brilliant product which has been profitable, and which remains in very high demand. Watch others struggle to catch up. I'm sorry, normally I'm such a nice diplomatic guy 'round here, but some comments in this thread are underinformed, more attitude than substance. Every year since its inception people have been indicating the approaching demise of Apple. They've always been wrong and they're wrong now. I'm not saying it's impossible, but puh-leeze. P5 for Mac will exist unless CL folds very soon, also unlikely. Quoll: You're a level headed guy, I appreciate your call for moderation. Just for that I'll buy more of your fine textures as soon as I can afford to.

"There are a number of entities that appear to be convinced that M$ is a Monopoly." First, that's not at issue. It's been proven in court that Microsoft IS a Monopoly; and anyone with any knowledge at all of the market has to agree. It's simply common sense. There's nothing inherently illegal about BEING a Monopoly; but it's also been proven in court that Microsoft has ILLEGALLY used its Monopoly power to advance its own fortunes at the expense of others. The only problem is that they hold so much political power that the government isn't willing to stop them. The Mac represents a big profit center for Microsoft. They realised that sales were slipping because Microsoft products for the Mac had become trivial ports of the Windows versions; and that's simply unacceptable in the Mac market where usability and interface elegance are far more important. So they created an entire Mac product group to focus on developing Microsoft technologies into Mac native products that are equal to (and by many reports sometimes better than) the Windows versions. That's just not the behavior of someone who'd like to abandon a market, so you can forget about that story. If they were supporting the Mac under duress, or didn't believe they were recouping their investment, you can be certain a business savvy company like Microsoft would be, at best, continuing to ship cheap Windows knockoff ports. This is all just basic business -- it's got nothing to do with platform religion. Apple might do something that violated common business sense, but it's highly unlikely that Microsoft ever would; their entire company has been based on business and nothing but. Besides, Chimera is a better web browser, and OpenOffice.org is a far better office environment. The "need" for Microsoft is smoke and mirrors. Losing the Mac market won't hurt Microsoft much -- but ultimately losing Microsoft won't hurt Apple much, either. In the meantime, the "uneasy peace" is good for both of them, and they know it. Apple sure does need a faster machine -- but the ones out are plenty fast for nearly any application; and the next move is up to Motorola -- or perhaps IBM, which has shown much more commitment to the PowerPC. (And PowerPC is a far better architecture than than X86 or even IPF... the problems have been in chip production technology.) The latest Apple machines do DDR RAM -- but are hamstrung by the PowerPC chip interfaces to far less throughput than that should represent. New versions of G4 will solve the problem. It's amazing how anytime someone says the word "Macintosh" hordes of Wintel people charge to the attack. Feeling defensive? If not, just leave it alone, OK? You're not going to convince anyone, and you're just making yourselves look silly.

If my statement was seen as an attempt to say that CL shouldn't put out P5 for the mac thats not true they should and will. I want the Mac to succeed my statement was that the likelyhood is not as good that they will survive in their present form in the long run. sure they are profitable on paper. if one doesn't include $316 million in long term debt (they did retire 1 million of that debt last year which is I guess a good sign) but these cool new Imacs were not as much of a success as they wished for (doesn't mean I dont want one, they're so cool!) they're sitting on 34 million dollars in inventory almost twice that of last year. not a good sign. but then I could be wrong.

Hmmm........ well if my software company was in desperate financial straits and key staff was reduced to working With no Pay and i had to make the hard decision to pawn off an incomplete bugg ridden application on the largest number of unsupecting buyers as possible. I would release it for windows first too.

I think most computer sellers have drops in sales because of the overall slow economy. However I read in USA Today about 2 weeks ago, that the new IMac is selling faster than they can be stocked. Probably because the new school year starting.

I used to have an Amiga. 4-processor based machine - and it was the first PC to do true multi-tasking.

The Amiga did 3D animations before anyone else - remember the red & white bouncing ball TV ads?

The Amiga was always much more popular in Europe than in the U.S.. I'm not sure why.

However, the Amiga is now in the dust-bin of history, although I seem to remember hearing that a German company bought the rights to the Amiga's design back when Commodore went under.

But you know - I've got my doubts that the Mac will go the way of the Amiga. If Apple is about to go under, then Mr. Gates will probably buy $500 million worth of "non-voting" Apple stock. I.E. - a gift to Steve Jobs.

I wonder why? Self-interest, perhaps? $500 million might be cheap at the price.

Now, back to my WinAMD machine (why do some people insist on using the insulting term "Wintel"? As a dedicated Athlon user, I'm deeply offended.)

"First, that's not at issue. It's been proven in court that Microsoft IS a Monopoly; and anyone with any knowledge at all of the market has to agree. It's simply common sense." I agree. I was just trying to phrase things diplomatically. I know how passionate we are about our computers and I've seen that no one ever wins in the Mac vs. PC thing so I was trying to use cautious language. ------------ Wolf, I agree 100 %. It makes sense to amek something avaiable to the largest potential total number of users. I've come to peace with the fact that I'm in a minority group. ----------- Jerr3D - This hasn't been the first time Apple hasn't been able to keep up with the demand. Usually it's lack of chips. From Motorola. Apple stores are still opening. Gateway stores are closing.

There are so many wobblys here I dont know who to troll about what. How exactly does one COUNT a Mac? I point to the Mac and say ONE, then I point to the other Mac and say TWO, do any of these statisticians do the same? I estimate that 1 person in 8 is a Mac user. Of the other 7 only 1 or so is an MS-only-ever, 2 or 3 made some sort of decision often weighted by everyone else having one, the rest play games and steal software. Am I in the wrong crowd? It would seem that a certain software company may have been in desperate financial straits, whats their market share? Not 2.5 percent is it? (!) As for that monopoly case, where does even Netscape get off charging for there product when BT and Cern, where lots of the early work was done, get nothing. I still believe the missing code story. Apple are still umm and arrring about Power4 or GPuL or x68 or Motorsmoulder chips and would put their hand up to all sorts of weird and wonderful behaviour before they tell people what their working on. Except that they could have brought out a 9.2 version for the extra money, and published the sales figures. Lets see what the percentage really is.

A long time ago, you had two choices: 1) One hell of a competent and wonderful machine, but it was very expensive and you couldn't do all that much with it in the way of modification. You also could not write and sell apps for it without the manufacturer's blessing. Coem to think of it, you couldn't do jack on iot without the manufacturer's blessing. The CEO was getting more and more egotistical by the day, and at his zenith had an attitude that made Bill Gates' arrogance look like that of a timid Girl Scout. ...or, you could get hold of: 2) An insanely cheap machine that you could buy a zillion parts for from anybody! - sure, there were bugs and there was the occasional hardware hiccough, but damn the options were endless! AAnd, it was all backed up by the biggest and most respected name in the computer industry, even though IBM sold relatively few of "IBM Compatible" machines themselves. The headaches were legion, but the flexibility was ungodly, and best of all it was CHEAP! This is why "IBM Compatibles" blew Apple right out of the water. Apples were (and in many cases still are) vastly superior machines. However, especailly nowadays, I can get a LOT more performance for a LOT less money. Problem is, if I'm Joe Sixpack I have to kowtow to the gawds of Microsoft. (fortunately, I can play double agent and dual-boot with Linux :) ) The Amiga rocked. If Commodore came out with it (and the Geos GUI) two years earlier, we would all be here seeing the tiny minority of Microsofties asking when Curious Labs would come out with a Windows edition, and would get the answer: "As soon as the Amiga and Mac Editions are done!" However, Commodore missed the boat, at a time when it didn;t pay to do so. If there were, in 1995, still competition between the three companies, then whichever one got TCP/IP natively first would win... and Microsoft damned near missed the boat on that count. Fortunately for M$, they were top dog by then, so it didn't damage them too harshly. /P

Don't get me wrong - I've worked with Macs in the recent past, and I think that the Mac is a great machine.

But, on balance, the Mac is too pricy, and Apple is too restrictive in its company policies. The betaMAX comparison is entirely apt.

At our local CompUSA store, the Mac section used to occupy about a quarter of the floorspace; now, the Mac section occupies about an eighth of the floorspace.

Of course Gateway stores are closing. Gateways are too expensive. Just like Macs.

Being a great, high-quality, wonderful machine isn't enough. You also need to SELL IT.

But, as I said in an earlier post, I doubt that the Mac will totally go away. Then again, I could be wrong.......who knows what computer system will dominate the market in 30 years? Provided that a market exists in 30 years.

xoconostle: "I'm sorry, but this one reported market share, even if accurate, ignores the huge disparity between what platform creative professional prefer (yes, the one out of Cupertino) and which one the rest of the world has been fed." I'm not disagreeing or agreeing with the rest of your comments. I just resemble the above remark and find it insulting to those of us who actually chose to use a PC. We're not all sheep, nor stupid, nor non-creative. Including insults in your arguments has a tendency to invalidate them in the eyes of the people you're trying to convince. dbutenhof: "It's amazing how anytime someone says the word "Macintosh" hordes of Wintel people charge to the attack. Feeling defensive? If not, just leave it alone, OK? You're not going to convince anyone, and you're just making yourselves look silly." I reread the original post and the answers, and I've come to the conclusion it is pretty much the opposite. Or at best BOTH sides are just as guilty. The following makes just as much sense: It's amazing how anytime someone says the word "Macintosh" hordes of Mac people charge to defend what they assume is an attack. Feeling defensive? If not, just leave it alone, OK? You're not going to convince anyone, and you're just making yourselves look silly. ::wanders off shaking her head::

It didn't come out first for two very sound reasons- Money and Market CL was running low on money and windows is a bigger market from which to get money which in turn will aloow CL to afford to make the Mac version. Those market research duds can't even agree on what size the share is according to them it's anywhere from 2.5 to 7.5 depending on who talk to but they totally ignore the graphics and music industries where Macs have a commanding lead and it's not getting any smaller either and in the web server biz windows (any version) is #3 behind assorted flavors of unix and apple based setups. I think some of them still use 'Pentium math' in their calculations. As for Apple being a computer Betamax? Give it a rest! Sony was their own worst enemy there, beta tape, at max record time came up half an hour shorter than vhs did so that caused lots of problems and complaints when someone's tape ran out with half an hour left in what they were taping. Sony, seeing the 'writing on the wall' admitted defeat and bowed out of the home market but they are still very much around since EVERY BIT of news video you see on the news was shot on beta tape, unless it was sent in by amature video, aka home viewer. As for Apple being dead in 3 years? That horse has been beating so long even the bones no longer exist so get off it! Penguinisto, on your comment on Commadore missing the boat, hell they weren't even at the dock when the boat left!

The billion-dollar-a-year movie, recording and advertising industries are all Mac-centric. It's preposterous to talk about user share when you're talking about the world--literally the world--of computer users. The majority of the Earth's PC machines are owned by hobbyists. I work in motion picture post-production and you'd be laughed off a sound stage if you asked where the PC's were. Initially, Windows machines were used in the offices for accounting and data processing, because no one wanted to waste a good Mac doing those tasks. Now PC's are beginning to disappear there as well.

Give Industrial Light And Magic (George Lucas' company) a call. Ask them what machines they use. Then call Disney, Pixar, Warner Bros., Universal etc. When you're done there, dial up Sony Records, Arista, Dreamworks (Geffen). This is not a niche market. These are hugely successful companies creating major product for the world. They don't give a rodents tushie about platform wars. They care about the best product that can be produced in both a cost effective and quality effective way. And they don't do Windows. Sorry, they simply don't.

"this is something i have never understood, most apps and games are written, built and desiged on amc but, the mac always get the final product last. Thanks Micro$oft" Where did that little meme come from? Because I would LOVE to see any evidence at all to back it up.

It might be shortsighted for any company to write Apple off with the 2.5 % figure. The reason is, that this does not at all reflect the market at all. Why then does Alias Wavefront make 25% of its net gain with Maya for Mac ? Usually net gains are higher in the Mac market. This is the reason why Microsoft pressures Apple to the introduction of OSX . Too many warez kids outsde in the PC world. How many PCs are actually in 3DCG and not in third world countries or used for surfing the net during coffee breaks ? And how many of them use legal software ? Thats the question, if you start calculating. Karl Karl

"How many PCs are actually in 3DCG and not in third world countries or used for surfing the net during coffee breaks ?"

Well Karl, StudioMAX is the most widely used pro 3D software, yet it doesn't run on MAC (neither Houdini, Softimage, Final Render, NEXT LIMIT Real Flow, Electric Image Universe, etc...). So this should answer your question...

By the way, I think it's cool that "third world countries" can also use computer !

:) Eric

Let me answer your message :

"Audity writes: "Steve Jobs and his team have spend the last 3 years only focused on design and propaganda instead of improving the system itself." Oh my, so very wrong. (...) If you honestly believe that they're only focussed on advertising and design, you haven't done your homework about the company."

The G4 processor is old and slow. There hasn't been any serious improvement on it since 2 years. PENTIUM and ATHLON processor are now far ahead. Any serious benchmark can show this. You know, even 3D software companies complain about this.

The MAC G4 dual 1.25 GHz PowerPC (with 512 Mb of RAM and a 120 Gb HD) costs $ 3500. You can get a faster PC for $1000. Good design, but poor perfomance...

But Apple still claim that MACs are "the best you can get". So YES this is only "design and propaganda". Look at the whole "Switch to MAC" adverstings (http://www.apple.com/switch). How would you call this :

• "I coudn't do video. I couldn't do audio. I couldn't do anything on my PC" -

• "You can do things on a Mac that PC users only dream about" -

So, am I wrong by saying that "Steve Jobs and his team have spend the last 3 years only focused on design and propaganda instead of improving the system itself" ?

There isn't much left that you can't do on a PC that you can do on a Mac, practically every high end Mac program that used to be Mac only is now available on the PC & NT based OS for the PC are at least equal to MacOS. Name any piece of software that is still Mac only & you can find at least 3 equivalents on the PC that are either cheaper or even free & better. Sorry to say this but Apple are killing off their own machine slowly but surely.

It is interesting to go to security conferences where zero percent of the laptops run Windows. The mix tends to be 70% openBSD and OS X is next in line. Windows, by its popularity, is target number one to those who would cause problems. There is a general agreement that most of the attacks to date have been the work of amateurs, but more serious people are beginning to get involved. Several of the world's top security people basically say that no business or government should put invest in a monoculture if they wish to operate smoothly in the future. There are many non MS environments that can be used, but Mac OS is the only one that supplies a desktop useful for most people (hopefully Linux will continue to improve along with free and open BSD). When the serious guys get involved many Windows users are going to have very interesting problems. Microsoft and Intel are approaching this by moving to a very hard form of security that locks down the hardware. It will give Microsoft (and potentially the government) an impressive level of control... of course everyone trusts Microsoft to not abuse this:-) Niches can be important. Note that Porsche has less than 0.2% marketshare and clearly doesn't have the number of cup holders or the ability to roll over in an accident that appears to be necessary for success in the American market. They are horribly overpriced and the technology of the lower priced models is fairly old. I'm noticing the folks who are hardcore Unix users are moving to OS X Macs in numbers that are surprising. At some level you buy what you need and what doesn't stand in your way.

"Penguinisto, on your comment on Commadore missing the boat, hell they weren't even at the dock when the boat left!" Unfortunately, you're right, which is why I said that if Commodore had put out the Amiga "two years earlier..." "I'm noticing the folks who are hardcore Unix users are moving to OS X Macs in numbers that are surprising. " Huh? Err, not exactly. OSX does have an open-sourced alternative called "Darwin", and otherwise I can make my KDE desktop 1000000000x more flexible, more useful, and far better looking than OSX. I apologize for any hurt feelings, but if I want an OSX interface lookalike that badly, I can honestly tweak GNOME, splash on some pretty icons, and get an exact clone of the OSX interface, and one that won't eat near as many resources. The one and only point of attraction for OSX is the fact that a big-name company is making cool toys (like Poser) for it... and that is something I can respect. OTOH, how many *ix-heads really go looking for toys? I dual-boot for a reason - my toys are mostly on 'doze (Poser, Vue, Rhino, etc), but my tools (and email reader) are all in the Linux partition. You are right in that the majority of serious machinery usually has a LILO, GRUB, or *ix prompt at boot-time, even on the laptops. By the by, the hardware problems Mac was having are not necessarily their fault... the reasons are two-fold - First, Motorola (the folks who make Mac's processors), simply couldn't make a stable chip at high speed using their particular type of architecture. Second, marketing duped zillions of users that more speed = better. This is not necessarily so, as AMD is finding out. An AMD 1.4GHz processor kicks the crap out of an Intel P4 2.2GHz processor in most arithmatic functions. A G4 processor @ 866 MHz can fairly match the performance of an Intel P4 running at 1.6GHz, and is nearly an even match for the Athlon, performance-wise, IIRC. All this being said, I would simply kill to get my hands on a 17" Mac LCD monitor. /P

audity Electric Image Universe V5 is available for Mac OS 9 & X. EI is a featured reseller for Apple branded products. It's interesting to watch many former "PC" only apps expand to new OS's. Perhaps they know something? True that the Mac is weak in the 3D, CAD & game markets (for now) but all other "creative" vocations are very strong into the platform. As for Poser 5, wolf359 "hit the nail on the head", the need for quick cash is a decision maker. I'm sure that CLs' market sales for Mac Poser are much better then 2% (probably more like 20 - 30% at least).

This is why I would NEVER buy a Mac..... "I would use OSX if I 1) could afford the outrageously expensive hardware and 2) didn't have to re-buy all my apps for a Mac " Marque

Like Xenophon and Penguinosto I owned 3 Amigas and still gaze fondly at the Amiga 4000 still sitting under the desk. Amiga users can still chuckle at the stale hype of both PC and Apple, and reminisce about the advanced machine we once had that is still years ahead of the present generation of consumer machines. I reluctantly joined the Mac camp after Amiga's demise and am glad I didn't go the other route.

Spit, you've misunderstood my comment (the one you quoted above) and have, I assume unintentionally, mischaracterized them and me. I didn't insult anyone. If there was any "attitude" in that comment, it was directed towards Microsoft's aggression, not buyers of PCs! I'm a PC owner by choice (although I confess I'll have a new Mac in a month or so.) By no means did I mean to insult the intelligence of PC users/buyers. All I meant is to indicate is the fact that more of what I called creative professionals prefer Macs to PCs. I'm unapologetic because I'm innocent as accused. :-) Yikes, one really risks being misunderstood in these forums!

Actually I don't care what other people use, and would never encourage anyone to buy either one over the other. I just tell people they need to do a lot of research on both, and not go by the hype or what each type of user says so much as hard facts. I have a friend who bought a Mac, really nice one, top of the line, and she ended up going back to PC because she hated using the Mac and the fact that everything seemed to cost more for it. She had asked me first and I told her to do the research. She was in a Photoshop class and the instructor advised her to buy the Mac, so she did. I think they both have their strong and weak points, and people will always argue which is best. I know what works best for me, and that is what I use. As for Amiga, I've often wondered why they haven't come back. Heard a rumor that they were, then nothing. Marque

Hi Audity! At the risk of getting into a rhetorical argument, I've still gotta say, I call that advertising, not propaganda. In my opinion the statement is correct. There are things that are far easier on a Mac, for example, home DVD production. However, I did read your rebuttal respectfully, and see that what we have is more a matter of word useage than a real disagreement. I'm sorry if I came off rudely or arrogantly. I lost a family member this past week and should have known better than to post in a distressed mood. This apology goes to anyone else who felt insulted by my tone. I certainly didn't mean it that way! I just get fiesty now and then. Imagine that, in these forums! Have a great weekend, all...

no problem xoconostle... have a great weekend you to ! :) Eric

How much I would like to see the Mac platform from the point of view of a Windows user. It must just seem like another brand of computer. Things we keep hearing like $1500 for $900(?) of hardware circle around in my head as I search it for meaning. The debate as to which system to release Poser 5 on first are weighted by the routine that Curious Labs were in financial trouble and possibly also in trouble with EGI-SYS. Its presumed by some that maybe CL should merge with DAZ and by others that they should sellout completely, and theyre saying TO APPLE. That makes sense doesnt it? Poser returns to its roots for a recharge, releases one final version for WinPC, and becomes a kick dick 3D application. Support for the various other platform versions continues for one year after which said users go back to 3Dsmax etc and abandon Poser to what must not be a very large portion of the 3D on PC community. BTW, for want of a bit of information, does anyone know, (not think, know) what the percentage is of Poser licencing on PC compared to the variety of applications available for that platform? Is it about 2 or 3 percent? If so, why use Poser at all if one has a choice? How much would you be prepared to pay if the purchase price went into 3 figures. Marque (NEVER buy a Mac, blah blah hardware etc) Wasnt that the argument for not getting WIN95? You didnt get suckered into getting that did you?

So, another much heated debate. I have nothing much to add. Just my my little 0.02 dollars. Computers are like cars: you have to use them to go from A to B, you have got to maintain them in a good working order, and it's going to give you some good service. The PC/Mac discussion always turns sour with each side getting very, very, very emotive. Please, grow up. I basically am a Mac User. I grew up liking this kind of computer because I did lose less time trying to find why it did not work (or it's only my perception ?). Less pain, more pleasure is the directing principle in here. What I use on the mac is the full fledged kit of graphical tools, be them 3d or animation stuff (I might not use them to the full extent of their possibilities...), plus the usual business stuff. I use some pc's here, though, not powerful ones, but machines ok for the basic tasks at hand (word processing, business stuff, a bit of Photoshop/Painter, even a bit of Poser too, Internet surfing and downloading, html dabbling). A little bit less attractive to me, but they work. I admit I spend more time with the head under the hood with my pc's than with my macs. PC's need a wee bit more physical maintenance than macs, and the sofware to me seems less stable thant on the mac (but it might only be my perception, remember...) In both worlds, you have got to modulate the OS for the task at hand and the memory requirements (not to mention disk space, and the used program version). Most of the major programs developers have ported them on both platforms very successfully (maybe less true in the 3D realm...though...). So what's the problem ? If you're happy to use a Mac, then fine, use it and stop the bitchin' about the Wintel users. Same goes with PC users. Hardware and software are TOOLS, first and foremost, and not status symbols. Yasser and Ariel have hordes adopting their self-righteous attitudes, and this is not a pretty sight. Please stop the insanity... I'm happy to be a Mac user because I feel I can get results (or: get things done) faster with a Mac than with a PC. But if you are PC user and just feel the same about your relationship with your machine then fine. 'nuff said, back to lurking... Purplehayes

... so is there anyone who has any light to shed on the pie-graph of the market for the various 3D apps? Is Curious Labs realy only going to get a tiny profit from all that Mac programming? Thank you purplehayes btw, the problem is that there isnt a Mac version of Poser 5.

These MAC vs PC "discussions" always get so heated. lol Since some of you obviously dont know, Market Share reports are based on sales. If you have a MAC you have been using for a while and decide to go buy an Intel based machine, you just helped raise Intel's market share. If you then go buy an AMD machine, you just helped them as well.. etc etc. Your MAC was counted back when you bought it. :) So today, MACs represent about 2.6% of computer sales. "this is something i have never understood, most apps and games are written, built and desiged on mac but, the mac always get the final product last." I dont know where you get your info, but most apps and games are developed in an NT/Win2k/Unix environment. Heck, it isnt even a close race. I say buy what you want. Get what you need. But dont buy a machine the CEO of the company gets on stage and feeds you a bunch of BS about, because he knows you will buy it. Do the research. Check the numbers. Hate to sound like a PC zealot, but the latest Mac marketing campaign looks like it was built based on the knowledge that most Mac users are computer ignorant. They may as well replace the commercial with some guy saying: "Spend $1000 more on this slower system, because you are too stupid to use a computer". Do many PC users spend a lot of time under the hood? You might need to go in there from time to time, but the majority dont. Most the ones who do, do it BECAUSE THEY CAN. And by doing it, you become more informed about your system and what it does. The more informed you are, the more BS you can filter out of all the marketing BS you see on TV (from everyone, not just Mac).

Both platforms have their pro and cons. True there are more Windows computers sold but what are they used for? My job has all Windows computers and no one there even knows what to do with them except get on the internet or create a Word doc. A large no. of Windows computers are used in everyday businesses for Word or spreadsheets and business stuff. I'd venture to say a very large percent are not used for 3D work of any kind. A large number of the 2.6 Macs are in graphic production or audio production houses. Everything I read about MAC in that regard is that they are used because of their stability. Sure Macites would like a faster computer and that's down the pike a bit. But I don't think the graphic and audio production houses are too unhappy with their MACS. As someone else stated they are tools. Use what you got or be like the folks on my job who don't even know what Explorer is or how to find it. They would be no more competent on a MAC. MAC lovers are MAC lovers for a reason. Unless you use one you'll never know why.

mikes - "Like Xenophon and Penguinosto I owned 3 Amigas and still gaze fondly at the Amiga 4000 still sitting under the desk. Amiga users can still chuckle at the stale hype of both PC and Apple, and reminisce about the advanced machine we once had that is still years ahead of the present generation of consumer machines. I reluctantly joined the Mac camp after Amiga's demise and am glad I didn't go the other route. "

I sold Amiga's from their first release, wrote code and developed hardware for the beasts. I loved the Amiga. I still have a few that run (1000's, 500's and a 2000). There is a lot that can be said about the Amiga... but two persistent myths keep cropping up:

That the Amiga ever had a prayer of being mainstream

That the Amiga design was ahead of the current generation machines. hell, the Amiga design fell behind right around the 486 generation of PC systems and it isn't even remotely competitive now. The co-processors were a nice touch - but the modern graphics cards stomp all over the power of the dedicated Amiga chips - the chip ram/fast ram thing was a cute hack but doomed to be obsolete almost instantly and the processor itself was anemic after a year or two.

The Amiga was nice, but it isn't even remotely competitive with the current generation of consumer boxes... or the last generation... or the one before that.

1Freon1 - Hate to sound like a PC zealot, but the latest Mac marketing campaign looks like it was built based on the knowledge that most Mac users are computer ignorant. They may as well replace the commercial with some guy saying: "Spend $1000 more on this slower system, because you are too stupid to use a computer".

Well yeah. But what I find even more interesting is that a lot of these people were paid to switch, and it isn't at all clear they they actually USE the Macs they were given in exchange for their 'testimony". Sounds desperate to me.

Of course, I don't think the point is to sell Mac's to new users. I think the point is to take potshots at the PC crowd to make current Mac users feel all warm and fuzzy while Apple switches the OS :)