>>Like you, I believe that software applications provide the real
>>driving force for hardware buying. Unfortunately, I can't see
>>anything near term that will spur upgrading. Incidentally, the drop
>>in PC prices from plus $2,000 to under $1,000 has only added 2 to 3
>>percentage points of household penetration. That is the best
>>definition of "saturated market" that I can think of.
The studies I've seen say 5% (37% to 42%) and the cheap boxes have been out for less than one year. I think it's premature to consider the market saturated, especially if $599 PC's come out this year. IDC just predicted 13.5% world-wide pc growth in 1998. Granted, the growth rate is slowing, but most makers of "commodities" would love such a market.
Question: if there is a price war coming, doesn't it make sense to place bets on the companies that you think will be standing when it's over? In other words, how is this price war different from the previous pc price wars?
>Windows 98 is not going to drive any kind of real buying spree,
>because it doesn't offer anything new or of consequential value
That may make sense, but didn't they say the same about Office 97? and the business contacts I know have mostly upgraded anyway. There are always incremental improvements, and not upgrading is risky unless you are willing to commit yourself to not changing or developing anything. New software is always tested on the latest OS.
It's a nice racket, I agree. |
