« | Home | Categories | »

Several Asinine and/or Risky Ideas Regarding Apple’s Strategy That Boot Camp Does Not Portend

Posted on April 11th, 2006 at 11:30 by John Sinteur in category: Apple, Software -- Write a comment


Regarding anything related to Apple’s strategy going forward, it’s essential to keep in mind just how Apple functions as a business. It’s not very complicated. Apple now has two fundamental businesses: selling Macintosh computers and selling iPods. And I think if you wanted to, you could argue that this is really one core business, selling computers, and that some of their computers are Macs and some are iPods.

I’m not offering this as anything other than a statement of the obvious, but it’s apparently not so obvious to many of the pundits speculating on Apple’s future plans.


Boot Camp doesn’t pit Mac OS X against Windows, and so it doesn’t pit Apple directly against Microsoft. What Boot Camp does is pit Mac hardware that can run both Mac OS X and Windows up against all other PC-hardware that can only run Windows.

Excellent reading. But check this out as well:


And this is the big point to remember, folks: it’s all about Toshiba and Sony. This is most emphatically not about Apple vs. Microsoft – instead, this is about Apple taking a nice, big slice of the high-end Windows PC market to double their share. If I’m Sony, and I sell high-end Vaio laptops, Boot Camp is Steve Jobs’ way of telling me that my customers are now in play. (Frankly, skywriting it would have been more subtle.) After all, Apple makes the tastiest hardware in the computer business and it’s priced competitively with other quality PC brands. So if I’m a consumer, and I see a Sony laptop for $2000 that runs Windows alongside an Apple laptop for $2000 that runs Windows and Mac OS X, well, which is the better value? The Mac is. No question. It’s the no-compromise choice. In one fell swoop, Apple has just captured all of the value of its rival PC makers, while continuing to provide the same great stuff (iLife, OS X) that comes with their own machines.

If I were Sony, or Toshiba, or HP, I’d be freaking out right now.

  1. I think this is overstated. I’m technically capable, and I find the idea of running two OSes and having two maintain two installs unattractive. Being able to run both OSes is only an advantage if I’m considering using OS X but must have some access to Windows as well. Otherwise, forget it.

    Furthermore, at least theoretically, people who are looking primarily for a Windows machine would be wiser to buy one from a company that has years of experience with Windows installs, drivers, etc. Why would you go for the new guy on the block which has limited motivation to make Windows work well on its hardware, seeing how it sells a competing OS?

    In my mind, Bootcamp provides peace of mind to buyers who are on the fence: if they don’t like OS X, they won’t end up with a door stop, they’ll still be able to run Windows.

  2. It also provides for departments where the company standard says “windows computer” – they won’t have to go through all kinds of red tape to buy the Mac they want.

previous post: More xml/xslt numbers

next post: OS X vs Vista