Those who surf the Web using a Mac tend to be better educated and make more money than their PC-using counterparts, according to a report from Nielsen/NetRatings.
The study also said Mac users tend to be more Web savvy, with more than half having been online for at least five years. And the Mac faithful are 58 percent more likely than the overall online population to build their own Web page and also slightly more likely to buy goods online, according to the report.
"With above-average household income and education levels, the Mac population presents a very attractive target for marketers, both online and offline," the research group said.
TS Kelly, director and principal analyst at NetRatings, said that his company decided to publish the study after noticing the differences between the demographics of Mac owners compared with overall PC owners. Kelly said Apple Computer is a client, but he said Apple did not commission the study nor was it made aware of the results prior to the report's publication.
Kelly said the greater affluence and education level of those who surf using a Mac is attributable in part to the company's comparatively pricier machines, as well as to their perception as a status symbol and their greater market share among those in the publishing and design industries.
"Any time you lower a price point you always see a broadening of the audience that is probable to buy it," Kelly said.
"Apple customers may be educated, but our customers are smart enough to have chosen Gateway, which offers the best value," said Brad Williams, a spokesman for the PC maker.
Apple has been aggressively targeting PC owners in its latest ad campaign.
Although Apple sales typically represent less than 5 percent of the overall U.S. personal computer market, 8.2 percent of Americans who surf the Web at home do so using a Mac, according to the study. Nearly all the rest of those who go online--89.4 percent--do so using a Windows-based PC.
Nielsen/NetRatings said that 70.2 percent of Mac users online have a college degree, compared with 54.2 percent of all Web surfers. That, combined with their longer surfing histories and their greater willingness to buy products via the Web, makes Mac consumers a prime catch for marketers, Kelly said.
"In many cases that is a market advertisers are looking at when they are promoting new products or upscale products," Kelly said.
A representative for PC maker Dell noted that it doesn't seem to be lacking for customers and that half of those customers buy their PCs over the Web--a sign that Windows users are also adept online.
Bar, et al;
Admitting a mistake that some do not see as a mistake or lost opportunity would open the flood gates to DRF lawsuits. That is why, there will never be any official "Monday Morning Quarterbacking" of many of these issues.
Sadly, pilots have continued to sue, and we are all lawyered up, just like everyone else.
The decision of the MEC at the time was a result of looking at the representational issues with the same MEC representing two pilot groups that "may" have diverging goals. It was not looked at as an opportunity to stop the small jet outsourcing, bring flying back to mainline, tie down Section one, and put forth a yet untried process with pilots that were not Delta Pilots.
The MEC did what they thought was was the best course of action for the pilots on the Delta Pilot Seniority List, not ones that wanted to be on it. The result was more of the same, and not intrinsic value being placed in being part of ALPA.
Many feel that this seat segment is a dead segment, and the actions point in that direction.
Simply put, the decision has been rendered, and the results have already played two predicted chess moves down the board. We now have TSH owning CPS and their Anti-Union, ALPA Section 6 busing Go Jets operation has been rewarded with flying that has been preformed by ALPA pilots. All legal mind you, and that is why if we want to show value in ALPA as an association, we need to write language that protects the flying for Delta and ALPA pilots. Bar, I know you will state that our MEC wants this flying to go to the lowest bidder, and Go Jets helps move that ball forward, and the result is more money for Delta Pilots. It may be true, but the fact is that we as of yet, do not control where the flying goes, and have yet, so show value in belonging to ALPA in this regard.
Sunsetting these agreements should be priority one. Making the flying go to ALPA pilots should be priority two. Putting value in your association that pilots that are non-alpa and those that are alpa should be priority.
For now, CPS is water over the dam, but we are still seeing the results of what happens when we look at an issue in one or two dimensions. Having that flying awarded to Go does nothing positive or negative to the Delta Pilots, and as a result will get little attention. It is what it is until this pilot group demands that it be a priority.
Last edited by acl65pilot; 08-30-2011 at 07:38 AM.
Position: Douglas Flight Test & Work Around Engineering Field Representative
Respectfully, you are mistaken. The legal issues are clear enough that you surely know better.
The Statute of Limitations on any possible scope DFR claim has expired
Honesty is encouraged, and would not trigger a DFR claim*
ALPA's own justifications for its handling of scope are now being used in an effort with the goal of decertifying ALPA
If one of your students broke an aircraft limitation, then acted like he did not understand he had done wrong, then gave a lame excuse, how would you react? If it was a mistake with imperiled safety of flight, would you let it go? ALPA's mistakes are going to kill it. You and I and the others who understand are going to have to insist on change.
The good news is, change is happening. But, an acknowledgement of the mistake is required to ensure the same errors are not repeated. There was no representational requirement for the Compass divestiture, in fact the representational consolidation acted to prevent conflicts of interest. The answer to any and every conflict of interest is unity. Not unity in the "we drink beer together" meaning, but in the real, structural, we are one list and one MEC sort of unity. The kind of unity which management interprets as "a monopoly on the productive power of our Company."
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 08-30-2011 at 08:14 AM.
We did get the ALK Code Share agreement in full though.
Yea, funny how that worked out, huh?
I'm not saying the fNWA NC was any bed of roses. During our BK contract, they managed to keep the NRT laundry expenses, but took away the pitiful amount of "international override" that the NB guys got for going to Canada and Mexico. I mean, good grief.
But this was a power play, plain and simple. "Constructive engagement" at its best...to the point where you wonder who the building inspector was working for...the builder or the client.