Personal Computing Case Analysis

729 Words2 Pages

The personal computing industry had two main suppliers in 2010, one having significant bargaining power. The two main suppliers included one that made products with many sources and one that made products with few sources . The criteria used to analyze the bargaining power of these suppliers features: if there were a few large suppliers with many industry firms, if the suppliers’ product was highly differentiated, if there was a lack of substitutes to the suppliers’ products, if the suppliers’ product had high switching costs, if the suppliers posed a credible threat to entering the focal industry, and if the individual industry from was significant customer or not for the suppliers. Suppliers that Made Products that had Many Sources Suppliers …show more content…

Of these suppliers, there were only two large suppliers with many industry firms. For microprocessors, Intel supplied 80% of the market until competitors, such as Advanced Micro Devices and VIA Technologies, came into the market in the 90s. However even though competitors entered, Intel was able to remain the market leader with more advanced technology, manufacturing scale, and a powerful brand . Also for operating systems, Microsoft supplied the operating systems in over 90% of PCs. One of Windows’ greatest hits, Windows 7, was released in 2009 . Another competitor to Microsoft was Apple that created its own operating system called OS X v 10.6 Snow Leopard . Also, these suppliers had products that were highly differentiated. For Intel, they had more advanced technology than their competitors, making their products more up-to-date with the changing technological times. For microprocessors, Windows was very different from the Snow Leopard, containing different layouts and programs. Even though these two characteristics did not seem to make a huge difference, they were what attracted consumers to Apple’s and Windows’ products. They created a difference in what the consumer would buy. Next, there were no close substitutes for the suppliers’ products because the function of microprocessors and operating systems were non-substitutable. Lastly, there would be high switching costs for microprocessors and operating systems because they would have to develop all new computers to incorporate the new operating system and to have the ability to run the computer more

Open Document