Yeah, you are wrong. In the windows 3.1 era, macs were at least as stable and much easier to use and maintain than the Microsoft alternatives. It wasn't really

Yeah, you are wrong. In the windows 3.1 era, macs were at least as stable and much easier to use and maintain than the Microsoft alternatives. It wasn't really until Windows 95 came out that the stability of macs started to fall behind. Windows continued to close the gap on usabilitiy and ease of upkeep, but I'd argue that apple started opening their lead again once OS X was desktop ready. There are a lot of reasons for Apple's failures in the 90s. Many of their wounds were self-inflicted. They f The original System 8 was finally incomplete when it was cancelled well after it was expected to ship. It's successor also died in the womb or crib. Jobs's team finally got things in line by creating a roadmap for improving the legacy OS, readying OS X, and smoothing the tradition between the two. With competent leadership, Apple might have fared better in the later 90s, but I still think Microsoft would have remained the biggest benificiary of the growth of the market. Wintel just had better looking upfront costs at a time when people didn't think as much about ongoing costs. This led to a positive feedback on economies of scale, installed base, and software availability.