Shitty products..but they've had their best quarter in nine years?
yes?
Sorry, I just don't get how that works. Bad products usually don't equal profit..
They do in a monopoly situation, or something close where people don't have a choice.
If Microsoft was to roll out a totally awful OS (I won't say that they did, but I also won't say that they didn't, it's irrelevant right now), it would still be wildly successful. Why? Because everybody who buys a computer is forced to buy it. I legally own half a dozen copies of Windows that I promptly deleted simply because I had no choice.
That's garbage nowadays. Apple has hardware/software solutions, Dell offers Linux and so do other OEMs.
I do believe that their market penetration greatly attributes to it (as it does the inverse for the Zune vs iPod), I don't think it's the sole reason -- or even one that's really all that of a deciding factor.
Take for example the Zune. It entered an Apple dominated market, where iPod is synonymous with MP3 Player and it still did very well. They've sold about two million units in about a year, and stolen a great portion of the market. This is very well possible with alternative OSes but is not happening. Why?
It's not the market cap much more than it is the fact that the product is not ready for consumers. Gutsy Gibbon is a step in the right direction, but I don't think Linux will ever be to the point where it's ready for consumer use. It will however have a significant roll in niche markets and enterprise solutions. There's no denying that.
OSX is the only one with true potential on the desktop, but they've stagnated in Desktop market share. Why? They choose to be the sole distributors of their Operating System. It, like Linux at the moment appeals to a very small market.
I think the fact that Windows Vista sells 80 Million copies (20 Million in the first two months) is amazing. It may not be immediately evident but Vista has the toughest opponent out there when it comes to sales: Windows XP.