Microsoft vs. Apple infographic

In the personal computer market, Apple and Microsoft are two household names that the consumer recognises as key players. For many years, Microsoft and Apple have been fighting for marketshare and the consumer dollar.

Manolution.com has put together an infograhpic that compares these two industry giants. The graphic dates all the way back to 1984 and takes a stroll through history to present day.

Microsoft initially took a focus on software and has since dominated the industry in terms of marketshare. Apple has focused on hardware that is bundled with its OS, but each have managed to find their own spot in the market. While Microsoft domainted Apple for many years, in recent time, Apple has had explosive growth and is once again a major force in the market.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Report: EA in "late stages" to acquire PopCap

Next Story

FTC goes after Google in antitrust investigation

67 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

JamesWeb said,
8.3% of the OS market is still such a massive share it depresses me.
Apple's operating systems are pretty much the only thing giving any real competition to Microsoft's operating systems. Linux is basically no longer a factor. Why does it depress you to have competition? Windows 7 would not be what it is today without MacOS X.

sabrex said,
Apple's operating systems are pretty much the only thing giving any real competition to Microsoft's operating systems. Linux is basically no longer a factor. Why does it depress you to have competition? Windows 7 would not be what it is today without MacOS X.

Truth! Same reason I'm glad to have AMD around, even though I've only ever bought Intel computers my entire life. Where would Intel be without the competition from AMD? Where would Windows be without the competition from Apple?

Because when it reaches say $60, they split it in 2* $30. So you have more and more shares instead of a share with higher and higher value.

I never understand the point of these comparisons.

Microsoft is a software company. Apple is a Hardware/Software company.
Of course their total is going to be more than MS as they get the profit from their hardware.
If they only sold software, they'd be nothing. Though that isn't the case.

MS should acquire Lenovo, HP desktop/laptop, Acer, Toshiba laptops, ASUS laptops, every laptop/desktop OEM and then compare...again, that's not going to happen.

Apple should license MacOS to other OEMs again to allow clone PC's. Watch OSX market share take off then. However like the above, that's not going to happen.

Windows 2003? Is that suppose to be Windows Server 2003? and if so why doesn't it include other server editions? or is it Windows 2000?

nub said,
Windows 2003? Is that suppose to be Windows Server 2003? and if so why doesn't it include other server editions? or is it Windows 2000?

Maybe the source they used showed that Windows 2003 (server) had quite a bit of market share. A lot of people turned it into a workstation OS for example.

nub said,
Windows 2003? Is that suppose to be Windows Server 2003? and if so why doesn't it include other server editions? or is it Windows 2000?

They don't make any distinction between server and desktop OSes in the chart, and only Windows 2003 is large enough to make it into the pie slice. If the chart was more detailed, it would have Windows 2000, Windows 2008, Windows 2008 R2, OpenBSD - but they are too tiny to be included in the chart. This also helps the Linux portion of the chart, as there are a lot of Linux servers in use in a lot of devices and around the web, its 'desktop' saturation is a much smaller number.

Also since the chart doesn't show, there is a lot missing, but again is tiny in 'market share', although a good argument could be made to include the XBox 360, which uses a forked version of NT that is part Windows 2003 Server and part Vista.

The Smartphone marketshare is actually accurate, but most people don't realize that the USA is not the only basis of marketshare. Windows Mobile 5.x and 6.x is still used and sold and widely used in around the world, especially for employees in technology roles. If you worked for EDS or HP anywhere in the world, the chances are, up until this year, they gave you credit to buy a Windows Mobile phone, as you can do RDP and also run their Windows Mobile technical software on it. (There are other technical companies that have used them and still do, watch a cable installer, chances are many of them are still carrying Windows 6.x Mobile phones that run their provisioning software and have add ons for line and cable modem testing, and they can be on the phone at the same time with their office activating the account with the equipment.)

Many of the statements really make me cringe. It's biased.
The author likes Apple, but doesn't care about Microsoft.
There is iCloud, but no Windows Azure.
Microsoft Tablet PCs are missing.
"Windows 7 Phone" instead of "Windows Phone 7"
no Kinect
Microsft Zune is an "attempt"
no Windows Media Center (OS and PCs)
"Apple introduces the world to the iPhone"
no Windows Server 2008
no Windows 8

etc...

Quick Shot said,
seems to me that Mr. Ballmer is doing something wrong.

Microsoft are inbetween places at the moment. I'm sure when Windows 8 is ready, there will be a big boost.

Apple for me were pointless, then they released the iPod and made great products ever since. Shame they are a soooooo expensive. Apple should lower their prices and get more people buying their products.

Jmixmaster said,
I'd hate to be the person who had to make that graphic.

+1. Looks like the single worst infographic I have ever seen.

Apple is a monster now, probably one of the most powerful companies out there.
I use to hate Apple until I got an iPhone, and then seeing the iPad I fell in love...

TheNay said,
Apple is a monster now, probably one of the most powerful companies out there.
I use to hate Apple until I got an iPhone, and then seeing the iPad I fell in love...

They won't keep up the market price, they'll crash sooner or later. Not to sound like an arse, but I think if Steve Jobs left or died (god forbid because of his previous conditions), they'll crash in the market. Steve Jobs turned the company around, Apple went on without him for awhile and nearly went bankrupt. Not saying that would happen again, but Steve Jobs is like a hero to a lot of fanboys, if he left, it would be bad news for Apple.

I don't get it, I don't care if my computer's OS developer is better than another in terms of stock price. I'd just like my computer's OS to be better than the others. And thats why I chose Windows, because I personally find it better. Why don't other people feel the same way.

Xerax said,
I don't get it, I don't care if my computer's OS developer is better than another in terms of stock price. I'd just like my computer's OS to be better than the others. And thats why I chose Windows, because I personally find it better. Why don't other people feel the same way.

Because they have a religious need to push their favorite OS on other people. They want to be secure with their choice.

alexalex said,
Smartphone market share should be switched .

It's life to date marketshare not current in use/currently sold marketshare.

HawkMan said,

It's life to date marketshare not current in use/currently sold marketshare.

That's the craziest measure of marketshare I've ever heard of. It should be the percentage of mobile OS installed on all smartphones sold in the previous quarter or year worldwide, otherwise it's pretty much meaningless.

This article is absolutely insane. Share price is NOT what's important. Use market capitalization because at least that takes into account SHARE VOLUME. MSFT has split in '87, '90, '94, '96, '98, '99, '03, and had 3-for-2 splits in '91, and '92. I am a huge fan of Apple's stock and I think it has the potential to become the first company to reach a trillion dollar valuation. No doubt, even now Apple has a much higher market cap than Microsoft, but this article's use of share price makes me think the author doesn't understand the market.

If Apple wants to have a larger marketshare and eventually being used in more computers than Windows, what they have to do is very clear: unlock Mac OS X for every PC that meets their requirements. As long as they force you to buy pretty but grossly overpriced hardware to run their OS, they're going to keep on having a small share, at least on PCs.

sebazwin said,
If Apple wants to have a larger marketshare and eventually being used in more computers than Windows, what they have to do is very clear: unlock Mac OS X for every PC that meets their requirements. As long as they force you to buy pretty but grossly overpriced hardware to run their OS, they're going to keep on having a small share, at least on PCs.
I don't think they want the larger marketshare. It benefits them to be the under dog, and financially they are doing incredibly well. They make most of their profits from their hardware business, and it absolutely benefits them to limit their software to officially run on select hardware (less drivers, and therefore less effort and bugs).

sebazwin said,
If Apple wants to have a larger marketshare and eventually being used in more computers than Windows, what they have to do is very clear: unlock Mac OS X for every PC that meets their requirements. As long as they force you to buy pretty but grossly overpriced hardware to run their OS, they're going to keep on having a small share, at least on PCs.

They could control the 'specifications' but they can't control the things people hook up to the computers, and this is where the driver nightmare for Apple would begin.

Even 'specifications' could be hard and would be 'specific hardware' as even Apple themselves have issues with just the limited hardware revisions they ship in their hardware today, let alone if you added in an exponetially rising complexity of just 10 mainboards and 2 video cards and 2 brands of RAM and 4 brands of Hard Drives, etc...

The model OS X uses just is condusive to a ton of hardware variations or options, especially if you look at the 'hybrid' bandaids Apple tacked on top of the XNU kernel that became Darwin. Even multi-core CPUs and multi-CPU systems take a performance hit for the modifications Apple made to Darwin to improve multi-tasking on a single CPU - hence why an 8 or 12 core/cpu Mac Pro is often shoving most processing though one core/cpu while resolving queue states. Bing/Google Funnel Locks OS X

OS X is not something strong enough to be a general purpose OS without a lot of architectural changes that would also break a lot of things because it is using the UNIX OS model where IPC is rigid and even variations in 'types' or parameters can cascade to requiring rewrites of large portions of the OS. (This is also why Microsoft RAN from the UNIX model and chose to develop a new model that is Object Based, so things work with objects, and changes in the objects won't break old code and will also work with new code. This is how the WDDM/WDM was added so easily to Vista/Win7 and is so 'transparent' to the users, that they don't realize that their application from 1999 is being processed and rendering on an entirely different code base, yet looks exactly the same as it did in 1999.

That is the worst presented infographic I've ever seen. Anyone can do a timeline, should try and be a little imaginative with it (and have decent grammar...).

what said,
That is the worst presented infographic I've ever seen. Anyone can do a timeline, should try and be a little imaginative with it (and have decent grammar...).

I like how the firefox(possibly safari) fanboy who made if concluded IE6 as the most hated browser of all time. well at the time of release it was anything. Should it really be hated because idiots are still using it 10 years later.

wow... look what Apple did in last 4 years.. brilliant!..
I really wish Microsoft made a mobile too. . not just software
the Zune body looked sleek!.. put WP7 on it and yay!

Tpiom said,
The stock value was interesting to see... Especially Microsoft's - sinking like a stone!

sinking? look at all the spits they did, its not sinking its flat out flat lining... MSFT seems to have 15 splits for every 1 split apple has

like right now AAPL has 921.28 Million shares at $324
MSFT has 8.43 Billion shares at 24.29..... so to equal it out MS on Apples scale right now is worth ~ $222 a share if equal number of shares where out

Stewart Gilligan Griffin said,
like right now AAPL has 921.28 Million shares at $324
MSFT has 8.43 Billion shares at 24.29..... so to equal it out MS on Apples scale right now is worth ~ $222 a share if equal number of shares where out

Yes, I don't think this graph accurately depicts the company's worth. Maybe it should reflect Market Cap instead?

redhaze said,
Yes, I don't think this graph accurately depicts the company's worth. Maybe it should reflect Market Cap instead?

Apple is still higher in that regard as well.

dotf said,

Apple is still higher in that regard as well.

It is, but it's not this $338/$24 level of difference

Share value is completely artificial and can crash on a whim anyway. as has happened a lot in Apple's history whereas MS seems to have been a lot more stable, especially if you take splits into account.

Does anyone really think Apple can continue to stay that high, much less keep climbing. They're gonna crash and they'll crash hard. it's just a matter of time.

after all 90% if not more of their value right now lies in iPods and iPads.

O5M3L said,
lol @ 1999 -> The G4 was classified as a weapon because of the speed. wow!

Same thing happened to the Nintendo 64 due to its math calculation ability and the PS2... export restrictions and all

O5M3L said,
lol @ 1999 -> The G4 was classified as a weapon because of the speed. wow!

Yeah, that gave me a laugh too. I'm surprised the one with the two CPUs wasn't classified as the same...

Stewart Gilligan Griffin said,
stock price doesn't seem to be adjusted for splits and number of shares out

+1000
That makes the information COMPLETELY CRIPPLED.

Stewart Gilligan Griffin said,
stock price doesn't seem to be adjusted for splits and number of shares out

exactly.. microsoft split shares to make it easier for people to afford a few shares if they like.. it seems like now adays google and apple are wanting to keep the stock price fairly high to make them look "better"

Leonick said,
Am I the only one highly sceptical to that smart-phone market percentage?
Keep in mind that this includes all of Windows Mobile 1 through 6, as well as Windows Phone 7.

Leonick said,
Am I the only one highly sceptical to that smart-phone market percentage?

It's very highly possible, as they are probably counting any and all devices that are running Windows CE and Windows Mobile 5/6 on top of it all, which is a very large share due to large warehouses globally using scanning devices with those Operating Systems, which are still on sale today with them.

If, however, you look at actual mobile phone devices, that percentage would be a lot smaller.

James_H said,
Keep in mind that this includes all of Windows Mobile 1 through 6, as well as Windows Phone 7.
It should really only include mobile phones "in use today"

Leonick said,
Am I the only one highly sceptical to that smart-phone market percentage?

Yeah probably they are predicting the Nokia use of Win OS in their phones.

Leonick said,
Am I the only one highly sceptical to that smart-phone market percentage?
Yup, looks like a mistake.

Leonick said,
Am I the only one highly sceptical to that smart-phone market percentage?

I agree. Apple has a *smart*phone??

DerpDerp said,

I agree. Apple has a *smart*phone??

What do you call a ditsy blonde that looks pretty and does nothing but landed a rich man. Now that's smart.