Many people especially analysts who should know better seem to think that because Apple Macs are personal computers, the company, its products & its market conditions should be judged under the same criteria as Windows PC’s in the personal computer marketplace … however, the evidence is clear that they are in DIFFERENT market segments.

Of course, as with any market – whether it’s cookies with cream filing, European sedans or personal computers, there are many factors that go into consumer buying decisions but for personal computers, it is evident there are three distinct buying segments that sum up the marketplace.

a) Corporate/enterprise buyers.

b) Consumers who buy on price.

c) Consumers who value other factors in making a personal computer buying decision.

And of course, in many ways, personal computing BUYING GROUP A & B are not very dissimilar. There might be some vendors they favor or give an advantage to but the bottom line is unless the price is close, they will switch brands. This consumer segment group simply view PC’s as a purchase that is a necessary object for their house but the out-the-door cost is the over-riding factor.

Research company TBR has tracked it over the past few years. You don’t need to be an analyst with piles of data to recognize the ads you see every week in the Sunday circulars … What was $999 a few years ago has now dropped to $499 or even to $299. WIN PC buyers will clearly hop from brand to brand as long as the cost is the lowest – from Packard Bell to Dell to HP and now to Acer.

On the WIN PC side, it’s clear that WIN PC buyers believe their best buying decision is based solely on price. Whatever the reason, whether they don’t have the budget to spend more, whether they don’t care to spend more (It’s “just” a PC – perhaps soured by years of using Windows and dealing with viruses?) – they believe that the PC experience is worth $999, $799, $499 and now $299. Even those who want to use Linux or load Linux onto a netbook – it’s just a pile of circuits and a screen, I will load or make or modify my own OS, thank you very much. The bottom line is that WIN PC’s are not valued other than by its low price. The reason doesn’t matter as much for this analysis as it does for HP, Dell, Acer or Microsoft to figure out – that’s the burden and price they have to pay … this is not necessarily a bad nor a good thing. It’s just a fact.

The corollary to this is why Microsoft cannot sell an upgrade OS – the OS has a value of ZERO in the consumer’s mind or at least a value in proportion to a $299 device. How much would you pay to upgrade your Blu Ray DVD player or some other $300 device? A few dollars? $30? $129? $249?$399? Is it any wonder MS cannot sell Vista and other than corporate upgrade contracts, will not sell many standalone Win7 OSes? Nothing wrong with XP, Vista or Win 7 but is it worth $249 or $399 to the average WIN PC consumer? No, they might want Win7 but they would rather just buy another $299 or $499 machine where it’s included for “free.” Why pay about the same for an OS when they can get a “new” computer with it?

Of course, this is the market condition that Microsoft wanted, they wanted thousands of people to sell their OS but how do these companies stay in business or gain marketshare … of course, cut prices.

For a while, speed and features were important considerations to WIN PC buyers but about 5 years into the consumer internet era (or about 5 years ago), people stopped caring too much about that – all they wanted a computer was to view the internet, send email and do some list making. All the important reasons for buying a “fast” PC fell by the wayside. Play games? Most PC gamers simply bought an XBox or PS – it’s easy to get online, no driver issues and instead of having to outlay $5 to $6k for a powerhouse PC, for less than $500, they had a supercomputer disguised as an Xbox or PS. As more things moved online – from photos to home finances and so forth, the speed of your connection was much more important than the speed of your personal computer – sure it made some differnce but as prices fell and chip speeds increased, it all became a non factor – the difference from uploading 10 photos with a 3 GHz computer and a 2 GHz computer is essentially nothing … again, you just have to look at the evidence of WIN PC buying … in 10 years – moving from elaborate desktops to slower notebooks and now the computer stripped down to a 10″ or 12″ screen. They don’t even want a 17″ screen anymore – just the raw essence of getting online is “good enough.”

And of course, as this is the only growth area of the WIN PC market, analysts and the clueless seem to think that Apple must get into this segment? It IS important for WIN PC makers to get in this segment because this is the ONLY kind of WIN PC that WIN PC buyers are clamoring for (sales in other WIN PC segments have dropped up to 25%) but it’s also a segment with hardly any room for profitability. If a personal computer sells for $299, where exactly are the margins?

That brings up TWO important issues that get skirted over. IF Apple Mac sales were “tanking,” and ALL-MOST personal computer buyers are ONLY looking at sub $500 machines, then sure – Apple should get into this market immediately but there is no evidence beyond a much slower growth in Mac sales because of the economy. During the last quarter, Mac sales “only” grew 9% – how many companies last quarter had an increase – let alone 9% (that’s just Mac sales alone – every other line segment at Apple was up).

As the analyst also notes …“Apple