As MacDailyNews reported this weekend (please see related articles below), Aliso Viejo, CA-based Net Applications announced November 2007 Operating System (and Browser) usage stats. With a new, enhanced marketshare site, Net Applications is now able to analyze global marketshare trends in much greater depth.
Net Applications now tracks more trends, summarizes OS versions better, and are now able to view market share by continent, country and even by state/province. Their new Mac OS usage map for the US provided “an immediate visual impact,” Net Applications ask in their December 1st Newsletter.
Net Applications writes, “Higher percentage Mac usage states almost perfectly match up with states that typically vote for Democrats. So, do Democrats prefer Macs? The correlation is striking.”
2004 US presidential election results by state:
(red=Republican, blue=Democrat)
2004 US presidential election results by county:
(red=Republican, blue=Democrat)
Meanwhile, the Mac continues to gain ground in Net Applications measurements of online share. November 2007 usage statistics show that globally, 6.8% of all computers online are Macs. That is the highest percentage Net Applications has seen to date.
More info via Net Applications’ report – “Democrats Vote for the Mac?” – here.
MacDailyNews Note: For what it’s worth:
Apple’s U.S. Retail Store Locations:
Also, via Wikipedia:
Prior to the 2000 presidential election, there was no universally recognized color scheme to represent political parties in the USA. The practice of using colors to represent parties on electoral maps dates back at least as far as the 1950s, when such a format was employed within the Hammond series of historical atlases. Color-based schemes became more widespread with the adoption of color television in the 1960s and nearly ubiquitous with the advent of color in newspapers. A three-color scheme — red, white and blue, the colors of the U.S. flag — makes sense, and the third color, white, is useful in depicting maps showing states that are “undecided” in the polls and in election-night television coverage.
Early on, the most common—though again, not universal—color scheme was to use red for Democrats and blue for Republicans. This was the color scheme employed by NBC—David Brinkley famously referred to the 1984 map showing Reagan’s 49-state landslide as a “sea of blue”, but this color scheme was also employed by most newsmagazines. CBS during this same period, however, used the opposite scheme—blue for Democrats, red for Republicans. ABC was less consistent than its elder network brothers; in at least two presidential elections during this time before the emergence of cable news outlets, ABC used yellow for one major party and blue for the other. As late as 1996, there was still no universal association of one color with one party. If anything, the majority of outlets in 1996 were using blue for the GOP and red for the Democrats.[citation needed]
But in 2000, for the first time, all major electronic media outlets used the same colors for each party: Red for Republicans, blue for Democrats. Partly as a result of this near-universal color-coding, the terms Red States and Blue States entered popular usage in the weeks following the 2000 presidential election…
The choice of colors in this divide is counter-intuitive to many international observers, as throughout the world, red is commonly the designated color for parties representing labor, socialist, and/or liberal interests, which in the United States would be more closely correlated with the Democratic Party. Similarly, blue is used in these countries to depict conservative parties which in the case of the United States would be a color more suitable for the Republicans.
More here.
To Macdaily news
came a whirling flooze
in the name of Frank
and his mental crank
He mocked us and bugged us
crappered on our tour bus
and just wodn’t leave us alone!!!
good night all, be reading you in the morning sirs.
“I don’t think that punk should have the right to disrespect us when it’s obvious he ought to be grateful.”
Freedom of speech is a beautiful thing. Get angry. Speak your mind. It’s o.k. to be a disrespectful punk. Even stupid has its place. Life is too short to be angry for long.
However, if you try to take away my any of my rights, I’ll spend the rest of my life hunting you down to kick your ass. That’s as Frank as I will get.
Democrats suck. Commie-Terrorist-Loving Morons. Love my Mac.
“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe”
That’s only the real universe. The imaginary universe in which Apple is a successful computer company is not bound by any laws of science or logic.
“The Macintosh experience is defined by the manner in which the (now commodotised) hardware components are integrated into the software environment”
That’s actually NOT what fanboys used to say before the Intel switch on Macs. Back then Intel sucked, PPC ruled, and the PPC was going to rise again and take over the world.
Now Intel rules and the processor is unimportant.
For most Mac users their identity is defined by whatever diminishing differences they can point out between what they use and and a Windows PC, and as those differences disappear, so the rationalizations change.
Believe it or not, this kind of rationalization behavior is well documented with other cults, where for example the cult leaders will predict the end of the world, and the faithful they will go out and evangelize to all their friends. But when the end of the world as predicted doesn’t come they don’t regard this as something that tears at the very foundations of their faith and causes them to abandon it. Rather they will concoct fantastic explanations which strengthen it, e.g. that their faithful evangelical efforts caused whatever vengeful being was going to destroy the world to relent and allow it’s continued existence.
In analysing the Church of the Mac, it’s clear that the loyalty is to Apple not to any fundamental truths. If Steve blesses a thought or concept that last week was part of what the Church taught to be Heresy, the Faithful will immediately change tune and find ways to justify the changes in it’s teachings. In fact over time they will rewrite history and begin to deny that something ever was ever heresy.
Thanks Brother MCCFR for your demonstration of the truth of this.
The Church of Mac is a really interesting social phenomenon.
“The imaginary universe in which Apple is a successful computer company is not bound by any laws of science or logic.”
Did you read that before you hit “submit”? I imagine not.
@ Ampar
So, you’re such a big supported of freedom of speech, eh? What are you doing the people who are being silenced by the American government, by the American media? Do their voices just not count? Or perhaps you just don’t understand it is happening? Tell me this: what news do you receive from outside the USA?
Freedom of speech? You make big statements about it while patting yourself on the back, but have you done anything to defend it while your government is taking it away?
This is exactly what happened in the Soviet Union. The communists were brought in with the promise of freedom, but very quickly rights were taken away, bit by bit, until they became a totalitarian state. And how did it all start? The government spun it as a necessary in order to counter “spies” and “terrorists”. You think the terrorist line is a NEW idea??? It’s old, let me tell you. It’s just that no one is aware of it nowadays.
@ American
I’m pretty speechless. Mixing calls for banning other MDNers while writing crappy poetry? This site gets stupider every day. Go ahead, ban me asswipe. You just are too full of yourself to see beyond your myopic American coke bottle lenses.
Another thing to all of you: censorship always starts somewhere, and it’s started here. Where is it going to go is up to you.
@American
You comments about saving the world from the nazis sort of sums up why many normal people get irritated by Americans….in one word…arrogance. Please realize that ‘other’ people were involved in that conflict not just the US ( I am from a military family). Canada was fighting in 1939..the americans only jumped in much later. In the battle of Britain, it was Canadian pilots who helped save the day and the country. I am sure you didn’t mean it but your statement is pure arrogance which makes puts you on the same level as Frank. Please be careful when writing angry.
“have you done anything to defend it while your government is taking it away?”
Frank…many people in the US and Canada are currently fighting and dying in courtrooms and battlefields to defend democracy and freedoms including speech. Don’t be such a tool.
“Go ahead, ban me asswipe.”
Ummm…I do not think that American had any role in banning you. MDN probably banned you because they are less tolerant of your drivel that the others in this site.
Gee I hate being last post.
“Did you read that before you hit “submit”? I imagine not.”
What particular piece are you referring to, the perpetual insistence by fanboys that a company with 2%-3% worldwide market share is successful? The perpetual delusion that you have that in the computing world Apple will matter in the long term rather than become a footnote in history?
Phew…am glad I wasn’t last post!
Ummmm………
Jumping in so Buster doesn’t feel like the caboose.
Ampar… you’re one in a million on this thread bro. Killin me, yer just killin me.
I can’t believe it. Five pages and you all are still at it. I’m even more surprised I’m about to do what I’m about to do…
American, Buster, don’t get into a pissing match over who contributed more to the various war efforts in history. Recognize the US made significant contribution to the allied effort in WWII. Done. So did the English, French, Canadians, Soviets, Italians (they fought both sides), Australians, and the Poles (sorry to those I left out). Hell, the Poles were the only allied nation to fight on every front.
My point is, we shouldn’t be beating each other down for being proud of our nation’s contributions. Damn right we should be proud. We all should be proud of the efforts our parents and grandparents put forth.
This silly bickering about appearing arrogant is, well, silly. Honoring one group’s achievement does in no way detract from another’s.
On a side note, I strongly encourage people read up on Poland’s role in the war. The 1939 invasion wasn’t nearly as one-sided as many people thing. The Warsaw Uprising is hard reading at times, but it worth it.
Oh, and Frank. There are a great many Americans who remember what our country is about. We’ll be where we need to be and do what we need to when it needs to be done. Well, we might be late, but never too late. Our voices are quite, but we aren’t silent nor are we idle.
” . . . you’re one in a million on this thread bro.”
See, it’s not the size that counts but the motility!
@Fario
I understand what you are saying and in fact if you read my post carefully, you are essentially repeating what I said. ‘Others’ were involved. I merely gave examples of Canadian involvement as I know them best.
It would have been hypocritical if I would admonish someone then do the same.
@ Farlo
Yeah American are right where they need to be. In WW2 they were sitting on the sidelines, selling arms to the Nazis, even proclaiming Hitler “Man of the Year”. IBM, Prescott Bush, and many other prominent figures of the USA all supporting the Nazis. Except when the Soviet Union got invaded, then the Nazis didn’t have a chance fighting a war on 2 fronts. Then those Nazi supporters in the US knew they were on the losing side and came riding in so valiantly to save the world (and pick up a fair bit of loot), after millions and millions had already died.
But that’s besides the point. That’s where you WERE and it says nothing about where you ARE NOW and GOING TO BE. Right now you’re in a lot of places you’re not told about, and doing a lot of evil deeds you also aren’t aware about. If the USA commits an act of aggression and kills thousands in a population of some country, would your news outlets report? No. Would your news outlets call attention to it and inform the US population? No, and they don’t. If the USA committed an act of terror, would they be called on it? No, by the American logic it is “impossible” for the USA to commit and act of terror.
So pay attention to that: nothing the USA does can be considered and act of terror, even when they do commit acts of terror. Try to prove me wrong: tell me when the USA could be considered to commit an act of terror? You can’t do it because that’s the underlying axiom that your whole country has gobbled up. And with that reasoning in the air, your government is free to do ANYTHING is the United States. They have inoculated themselves from the judgement of “terrorist” and can commit unspeakable acts all over the world. You don’t and cannot see it because you accept the logic that it is impossible for the USA to commit acts of terror. And THAT is frightening. If it doesn’t frighten you, it should.
The people of a nation are the conscience of it’s government; but in the USA, their conscience is blind. Working, but blind.
@ Ampar
You make big claims about defending people’s freedom of speech? Are you going to make good on that promise for the thousands being held at Guantanoma Bay?
Frank, minus the hate and vitriol, much of what you say is true. Remember, however, the adage about arguing on the internet…
I say, gentlemen and gentle ladies, let me get a word in edgewise. Macs are becoming very popular with today’s politicians because you can run both OS X and Windows on it. And why does that make them popular with politicians? Because it allows them to flip-flop!! Nyuk-yuk-yuk-yuk! …..er, I mean …..muah-ha-ha-ha!!
Last post? Hope so!
“Last post? Hope so!”
I hope so too for you, Abdullah. I was just on my way out the door. I’m headed to Cuba with lawyers, guns and money. Wish me luck.
Jaysus Frank….chill out. You make it sound like Ampar pissed in your soup.
@Ampar…bring back some cigars. By the time you get back, we may even hit 6 pages albeit 6 pages a crap.
By the way, where the hell is Guantanoma????
“Guantanoma”
Skin lesions caused by frequent contact with bat excrement.
Yeah, that’s really funny. You’re right, “guantanamo”. You’ve said it all. Make jokes about it. Maybe it won’t be so funny in 10 years.
Would you make jokes about all the children you burned alive with napalm? Why is funny then to make jokes about the fathers you kidnapped, stole from their families, and imprisoned and held without rights?
Do you realise the USA has been convicted of war crimes – not just accused, but convicted. By the UN security council? But because the USA vetoed those convictions. Vetoed them.
Think about that, if you can.