Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Desktops > Apple Market Share slips from 4% to 2.8%

Apple Market Share slips from 4% to 2.8%
Thread Tools
Switched2Mac
Baninated
Join Date: Nov 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 09:33 PM
 
This is why I am so intense about Apple getting their butt in gear and producing the new G5's.

http://macnn.com/news/24415

IDC reports that Apple marketshare dropped from 4% to 2.8%.

They need to produce more regular updates across all their product lines and continue the relationship with Microsoft.

Microsoft Office is very important to Apple. The loss of this product would signify the further decline of Apple. The fact that I have VPN software that works with my company VPN servers and Microsoft Office, means that I can work from home with my Mac. This is important to me and many other switchers

Where are the new G5's?
     
Lateralus
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 09:39 PM
 
Not again...
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 09:42 PM
 
Where does it say anything about the loss of Microsoft Office? Perhaps you haven't heard that MS is releasing Office X 2004 soon?

Don't panic.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Switched2Mac  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Nov 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 09:54 PM
 
Originally posted by KarlG:
Where does it say anything about the loss of Microsoft Office? Perhaps you haven't heard that MS is releasing Office X 2004 soon?

Don't panic.
It doesn't and I won't.

I was merely stating that Office, IMHO, is important to the success of Apple in gaining marketshare.

The pending release of Office 2004 for the Mac is a wonderful thing. I will buy it the second it hits the shelves in CompUSA.

Apple does not need to get 50% marketshare to make profit and have happy users. They are profitable with satisfied customers now.

I am one of them.

But why not have a goal of, say, 10% marketshare by 2010. That is not unrealistic and is very attainable. But that requires:

- constant innovation (apple has this in barrels, for now)
- regular product refreshes and updates (i.e. every 6 months)
- information (hey, tell us there are delays!)
- corporate sales (office, visio, project and VPN - so very important)
- server sales (especially to non-OSX client companies)

Here is a thought!

Teachers and students get large discounts now. Why not extend this to corporate IT staff members?!?! They become instant internal sales reps within their companies.

Your thoughts?
     
discotronic
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Richmond,Va
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 10:07 PM
 
Marketshare = the amount of new computers sold by all companies and a percentage is given to each company after all the statistics are done.

Marketshare does not = the actual amount of people using computers from those companies.

In other words...I don't buy into the statistics. Is Apple losing users to the PC side? I am willing to bet that Apple is gaining more users from the PC side than they are losing. I would like to see some stats on that. Mac owners usually don't upgrade as often as PC owners and I contribute that to superior quality hardware and OS. We ARE a much smaller user base and that will probably never change. I don't think Apple will ever grab 10% or more of the "marketshare" again.

If everybody who owned a Mac where to convert a PC user, what would the marketshare be then?

I could be wrong in my thinking but I think that it is better than the whole marketshare arguement.
     
chabig
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 10:08 PM
 
Pretty soon, the people that claim to measure market share will find a way to show Apple with less than 0% of the market. Mark my words.

Chris
     
Switched2Mac  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Nov 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 10:12 PM
 
Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
Not again...
You again.

I thought you and Kelly Ripa were off sharing tips at the "World is So Wonderful and Happy" seminar.

Back already, are you?
     
Switched2Mac  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Nov 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 10:18 PM
 
Originally posted by discotronic:
Marketshare = the amount of new computers sold by all companies and a percentage is given to each company after all the statistics are done.

Marketshare does not = the actual amount of people using computers from those companies.

In other words...I don't buy into the statistics. Is Apple losing users to the PC side? I am willing to bet that Apple is gaining more users from the PC side than they are losing. I would like to see some stats on that. Mac owners usually don't upgrade as often as PC owners and I contribute that to superior quality hardware and OS. We ARE a much smaller user base and that will probably never change. I don't think Apple will ever grab 10% or more of the "marketshare" again.

If everybody who owned a Mac where to convert a PC user, what would the marketshare be then?

I could be wrong in my thinking but I think that it is better than the whole marketshare arguement.
Agreed.

It seems Mac users tend to hold onto and use their computers longer than their WinTel counterparts.

However, new sales drive the profitability of Apple (or any other company). And more Mac users is not a bad a thing either.

I might disagree with you on your comment about Apple getting to the 10% mark. Long time ago, I was a Mac Hater. It was easy. OS9. Game over. Goofy looking iMacs with clown-like colors. Then came OSX and professional (i.e. brushed metal) looking Macs. Suddenly, I took notice and investigate further. I like what I saw and so did about a dozen of my coworkers too.

Having played with Longhorn, and being sadly disappointed, I see that 2006/2007 is a chance for Apple to pick up many more switchers who are tired of the same old Windows interface and problems.

There is an opportunity for Apple to reach double-digit marketshare between now and then. I think anyway.
     
Link
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hyrule
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 10:27 PM
 
That is pretty screwy, I think.

Last year they reported what.. a 3%? Some people said barely 2%.

Where are they basing the last market share reading off of? I could have sworn it was lower than 4%. To me it sounds like it actually grew but they're comparing it off a higher number. Bastids.
Aloha
     
discotronic
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Richmond,Va
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 10:29 PM
 
I would love to see Apple reach 10%. There are some things that need to change in order for this to happen. I think that they need to advertise more. The only thing I ever see is ads for the iPod. More games. If we had that more people would make the switch. Of course there are more things that could help but I see these as big.

Have we ever seen Apple just come right out and say (in an advertisement):

OSX has no known viruses.
OSX will not contract the dreaded spyware.
Our OS and hardware is the best out there and they always will be.
Our hardware will be worth something in 4 years while others will not.
What can you do on your PC that can't be done on a Mac?

I think if they exploited the market with ads like this they will get someones attention.
     
djohnson
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 10:36 PM
 
THose are some great advertising points. However, once you make those claims, some clown will come by and prove them wrong and then everyone will jump on the Apple sucks boat...

btw, doesnt this belong in the Lounge?
     
Lateralus
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 10:47 PM
 
Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
"World is So Wonderful and Happy"
Try some.
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
Switched2Mac  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Nov 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 10:54 PM
 
Originally posted by djohnson:
THose are some great advertising points. However, once you make those claims, some clown will come by and prove them wrong and then everyone will jump on the Apple sucks boat...

btw, doesnt this belong in the Lounge?
Perhaps.

Let me swing it back to PowerMacs.

OK. Apple is having problems with the G5 and that is obviously pulling the PowerMac sales down.

Why not get a drop dead date internally and then make a big marketing thing out of the delay? Offer some freebees and shirts.

Like:

"I waited and waited and waited, and all I got was this AWESOME PowerMac!"

Something like that. Give them away free with each order.

Everyone knows you are late to the party, so why not make a big thing out of it and get some positive publicity from it?
     
MindFad
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2004, 10:59 PM
 
     
Graymalkin
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: ~/
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 01:11 AM
 
As I've said before in other threads along this vein, I think this summer will be a good sales period for Apple. Apple's in a good position now with Panther, it is a switcher's OS. While Jaguar was pretty nice for us Mac user folks it wasn't quite ideal for people switching from Windows in Windows-centric environments. Panther works much better with Exchange and Active Directory than Jaguar did and finally has working print sharing via Samba. This is really important for people trying to get a Mac on their desk to replace a PC in a larger organization with lots of Windows services. Office v.X might be nice but without access to Windows-based services it won't do a Mac user much good.

The hardware is also much improved from where it was just six months ago. By this summer new G5 PowerMacs ought to either be available or announced and up for order. I seriously think many people have been putting off purchases of G5s because 3GHz machines were promised for summer. The people with upgrade cycles ending last summer had to buy G5s but those who could wait are likely waiting until this summer. The eMacs and notebooks have recently seen a really nice upgrade and will also do well this summer. I think the new eMacs and iMacs (when they're released) will do well for the '04/'05 school year. This year's low end eMacs are almost 60% faster than last year's.

Between Panther's Windows affinity and the new hardware I don't think Macs will sell too badly this summer. The only "lagging" aspect of their sales have been the PowerMacs which is morely likely due to the promise of faster boxes than anything else. Their other high end systems like the 17" PowerMac have been selling which means $3000 isn't too much for people to spend on a new computer even in our relatively sour economy.
     
Socially Awkward Solo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hanging on the wall at Jabba's Palace
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 01:20 AM
 
I think Apple waits to damn long between updates. Even if they just bump the hard drive and RAM every few months would help. Plus what they charge for extra RAM in criminal.

"Laugh it up, fuzz ball!"
     
gururafiki
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Good question...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 02:55 AM
 
Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
This is why I am so intense about Apple getting their butt in gear and producing the new G5's.

http://macnn.com/news/24415

IDC reports that Apple marketshare dropped from 4% to 2.8%.

They need to produce more regular updates across all their product lines and continue the relationship with Microsoft.

Microsoft Office is very important to Apple. The loss of this product would signify the further decline of Apple. The fact that I have VPN software that works with my company VPN servers and Microsoft Office, means that I can work from home with my Mac. This is important to me and many other switchers

Where are the new G5's?
Ever think think that maybe the computer industry is growing faster than apple?
     
iNeusch
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris, France
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 05:08 AM
 
Originally posted by discotronic:
Marketshare = the amount of new computers sold by all companies and a percentage is given to each company after all the statistics are done.

Marketshare does not = the actual amount of people using computers from those companies.

In other words...I don't buy into the statistics. Is Apple losing users to the PC side? I am willing to bet that Apple is gaining more users from the PC side than they are losing. I would like to see some stats on that. Mac owners usually don't upgrade as often as PC owners and I contribute that to superior quality hardware and OS. We ARE a much smaller user base and that will probably never change. I don't think Apple will ever grab 10% or more of the "marketshare" again.

If everybody who owned a Mac where to convert a PC user, what would the marketshare be then?

I could be wrong in my thinking but I think that it is better than the whole marketshare arguement.
That's true, but these stats show that Apple sells less and less computers compared to the other PC side, even I thay got more people switching than they lost to the PC world.

I think this IS a bad thing, even if they don't need to be at 10% of market share.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 09:28 AM
 
Apple are also getting a ridiculous amount of publicity because of the iPod.
I don't think they are taking full advantage of this.
There are other online music stored available all over the world now, but still no news of iTMS Europe.

I would like to see Apple indulging in more PR stunts. Their advertising recently has not been up to its usual standard. (G5 TV ad)

Take this lawsuit brought by Eminem. He's an iPod lover. Apple should offer him an overspec, diamond encrusted, platinum cased one-off iPod as a settlement.
Imagine the free publicity if he accepted!

Plugging the virginia tech machine, I do approve of.
My university just ordered two supercomputer clusters, both based on AMD chips as far as I know. they say they wangled a killer deal, but I doubt its got the same bang for buck as the VT cluster. $5M for the 3rd fastest machine in the world?
I can't see Dell or whoever it was beating that. After you factor in the rest of the setup costs. And they are convinced it was the best deal. I doubt they even looked at G5s.
From what I gather, Apple gear is alot more prominent in US Univrsities than the UK ones.
They pop up in the occasional office of a die-hard mac lover (alongside several PCs usually). There is only one sub-sub-dept. in the whole Uni that I am aware of using almost exclusively Macs (Surface Science Physics).
No-one in our computing services department (as they laughably call themselves) has a clue about Macs. Took them several days to burn me a copy of Office a couple of years back. And I suspect the only reason there is instructions to connect a Mac to the Uni wireless net, is because I emailed the instructions to them.

If this is the case in the rest of Europe, Apple are missing out big.


Another idea they should consider, is software aimed at people who have (or would like to have) Macs because of style. Think posh salons and fashion houses.
Software to scan in your face and change your virtual hairstyle before you get it done, or see yourself wearing an item of clothing before its been made. Nothing technically original, just a few easy to use incentives for those sorts of people.
     
osiris
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Isle of Manhattan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 10:11 AM
 
IMO If Apple wants more market share, they should lower their prices and update their product line more frequently. Beef up the video cards in these things - the top of the line G5 still has a mediocre video card.

But the biggest complaint I hear is 'that they're too expensive'... and they are way too expensive. Sell a headless iMac for $600 fer goodness sake.

They should also use a billion or so in cash to bribe developers - get more entertainment titles out there, more more more... It kills me to walk into a Kmart/Walmart/Whatevermart and see PC software everywhere. Even CVS friggin drug store carries software for PCs. Better market penetration is needed.
"Faster, faster! 'Till the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death." - HST
     
freakboy2
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 01:02 PM
 
Originally posted by discotronic:

If everybody who owned a Mac where to convert a PC user, what would the marketshare be then?
5.6%
     
Lateralus
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 01:06 PM
 
Originally posted by discotronic:
If everybody who owned a Mac where to convert a PC user, what would the marketshare be then?
Problem with that is that most Mac owners don't really know or care that they have a Mac. To them, they have an Apple computer. It doesn't mean enough to them one way or another to go out and convert friends.

You're not gonna see nanna wearing a 'Buy a Mac!' tshirt.
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
Kissargi
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 02:34 PM
 
i try very hard to convert people to macs. They just think im crazy tho, ill damn well convert someone from the dark-side to the light one day.... When i turn my computer on i think wow, all those pc using idio...... i mean windows users *ahem* should be able to experience the wow factor too.
     
Lateralus
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 02:55 PM
 
When I first came to Mac, I put a lot of time and thought into trying to convert people. Then, one day, I realized that most people are too stupid to ever want to listen. Plus, trying to convince everybody how great my Mac was was actually keeping me from enjoying it because it got me into too many debates with zealots. So, I stopped trying to convert people. And now I am in Mac user bliss.
( Last edited by Lateralus; Apr 27, 2004 at 03:15 PM. )
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
itai195
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 03:38 PM
 
Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
Teachers and students get large discounts now. Why not extend this to corporate IT staff members?!?! They become instant internal sales reps within their companies.
Actually I've found that a lot of IT people do use Macs at home...

One of the problems is that a decision of this scale is more of a business decision than a technology decision. There's no way Macs will be able to service everyone within a large corporation, so why waste resources supporting an additional platform? That's the big question. Heck, even Sun, a longtime corporate darling, is being put to the test with that question now.
     
Graymalkin
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: ~/
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 05:49 PM
 
I'm not pained in the slightest not seeing a plethora of boxed Mac software on store shelves. It costs a lot of money to keep those boxes there. I'd rather download the latest release of the software and pay the developer directly than get a box I'm just going to throw away.

The difficulty in getting Macs in large organizations is not the cost of the hardware, a competent IT manager should be able to perform a TCO analysis. Macs have a higher up front cost but typically a lower long term support cost than PCs. The real difficulty is integrating the Macs into existing networks and have them performing the same tasks as the PCs they're replacing. They are slowly but surely getting better at this and from all appearances will only continue to improve. Not too long ago we couldn't print to SMB shared printers to save our lives, now we can print to them willy nilly. For a while we were stuck with crappy Active Directory support while now we can fully integrate with it. Up until Panther we were stuck without support for Exchange servers, now using them is almost trivial.

It doesn't seem too far-fetched that Macs will have decent sales to large organizations this year and next. Mac notebooks have been selling like mad to all classes of customers, the desktops once at a price/performance point people are waiting for will begin to sell as well. Last year sales of Macs were up 12% from the previous year while the entire industry was up 15%. That is not sagging sales! It is foolish to look at a ridiculous statistic like market share and declare that the Mac is a failing platform. OSX has an installed base of over nine million which is a nice size market for Mac developers.
     
beb
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Kill Devil Hills, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 06:43 PM
 
I'm wondering who is an investor in IDC. Who stands to gain from reporting that Apple has only a 2.8 marketshare—which for various reasons is inaccurate.
     
Kissargi
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 08:09 PM
 
apple can send me a free g5 and power book if they need a few more 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000001 % of products out there *begs*
     
Switched2Mac  (op)
Baninated
Join Date: Nov 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 08:28 PM
 
Originally posted by gururafiki:
Ever think think that maybe the computer industry is growing faster than apple?
That is an excellent theory.

How can we further examine this? This might be the case.

Especially since PC sales overall have "supposedly" been down over the last few years. Now there could be a large burst of purchases to make up for aging consumer and corporate PC's.

Hmm.....
     
pliny
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: under about 12 feet of ash from Mt. Vesuvius
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 08:43 PM
 
AFAIK the marketshare figures cited in the story are percentage of computers shipped in 2003, not percentage of computers being used.
i look in your general direction
     
itai195
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 09:26 PM
 
Originally posted by Graymalkin:
The difficulty in getting Macs in large organizations is not the cost of the hardware, a competent IT manager should be able to perform a TCO analysis. Macs have a higher up front cost but typically a lower long term support cost than PCs. The real difficulty is integrating the Macs into existing networks and have them performing the same tasks as the PCs they're replacing.
I'd say they're both difficulties.

It may be that over the long term, a Mac needs less support than a PC. But in a TCO analysis, you have to consider the additional support staff you'll need, the additional training they'll need, how much repair parts cost, how much repair labor costs, how long it takes to perform repairs, costs of Mac support tools, etc, etc ad nauseam. Add training for end users as well, most of whom are much more familiar with Windows than Mac OS. Overall, I don't believe that the long term cost will be lower.

Macs are integrating into Windows networks better than they used to, but it's still quite likely that corporations will have a lot of apps that don't run on Macs -- collaboration software for example.

When it's all said and done, as much as I love using a Mac at home, I'm not capable of making a legitimate case for enterprise use. And trust me, I wish I could, I work on IT strategic planning and research analysis at a Fortune 100 company.
     
Stelliform
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 09:28 PM
 
Originally posted by itai195:
Actually I've found that a lot of IT people do use Macs at home...

One of the problems is that a decision of this scale is more of a business decision than a technology decision. There's no way Macs will be able to service everyone within a large corporation, so why waste resources supporting an additional platform? That's the big question. Heck, even Sun, a longtime corporate darling, is being put to the test with that question now.
I am a PC tech, and I own a small company servicing M$ products. I am typing this on my 17" iMac at home. I have a TiBook in my Dell laptop bag.

I just plant the seed of switching where ever I go, but I don't push it. I have more Mac users this year than I did last year. OS X is an easy sell, and Office makes integration into a PC network seamless. I would have an easier time if there was a OS X native Outlook version. (Connecting Entourage to an Exchange server is about as good as Outlook web Access.) If they had Outlook in OS X, then I might be able to talk a few more people into switching.

I think the poor market share is an example of the poor line up of Powerbooks and iBooks last year. The 15" Powerbook was delayed forever, and then it was buggy once released. The 17" is too big for main stream, and the 12" is too small for the user with money to burn. And IMHO laptops are the growth section of the market.

I think the current update is pretty strong, but they really need to get a G5 in a powerbook in the 3rd Qtr of this year.
     
itai195
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 09:30 PM
 
I agree regarding Outlook.

I try to get people to switch whenever I can, of course. I think I've gotten about four or five to in the last three years. Macs are an excellent platform for home use, most people just don't realize it.
     
atomicon
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 10:49 PM
 
Macs are still more expensive than most PC's, and although you get what you pay for, that's the main reason that offices (that could otherwise happily use Macs) go with a fleet of 50, 100, 200 Dells -- because of the price. Apple should create its own clone brand, sort of like the Toyota to Apple's Lexus. They could be made with cheaper components, still run OS X, and be sold at Circuit City, Best Buy, Good Guys, etc., and they'd be CHEAP. They would increase market share for the Mac OS without stealing hardware sales from Apple, and without "sullying" the high-end image of Apple computers... They would sell millions, I know it.
     
klinux
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 10:55 PM
 
Originally posted by gururafiki:
Ever think think that maybe the computer industry is growing faster than apple?
I don't buy this. Apple makes computers. HP makes computers. It's great Apple shipped 5% more than prev Q prev Y and we can all cheer but it is not good when the industry shipped 15% more in the same period.

Now, tons of people here argue mindshare. Well, from financial point of view that means diddly squat. You think Jobs would rather you hold on to an old G3 and crow on Macnn on how fast 10.3.3 is on it and how long you will keep G3 instead of getting a G5.

The fact is everyone at Apple and on Macnn want Apple's marketshare to increase. To speculate why it is decreasing is one thing. To defend it, well, I don't see why one would do that.
One iMac, iBook, one iPod, way too many PCs.
     
discotronic
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Richmond,Va
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2004, 11:21 PM
 
Originally posted by atomicon:
Macs are still more expensive than most PC's, and although you get what you pay for, that's the main reason that offices (that could otherwise happily use Macs) go with a fleet of 50, 100, 200 Dells -- because of the price. Apple should create its own clone brand, sort of like the Toyota to Apple's Lexus. They could be made with cheaper components, still run OS X, and be sold at Circuit City, Best Buy, Good Guys, etc., and they'd be CHEAP. They would increase market share for the Mac OS without stealing hardware sales from Apple, and without "sullying" the high-end image of Apple computers... They would sell millions, I know it.
Making a Mac out of cheaper components would ruin Apple's high-end image. Even if it is a clone made by Apple it is still made by Apple. Apple isn't trying to be in competition with the $399 Dell or eMachines. Apple is about quality and cheap components isn't quality.
     
jeepandmacfan
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2004, 12:15 AM
 
Apple is in a tough spot. They don't have what it takes to compete with Dell (and others) on price for business clients. I could not get our business to switch even thou I am 1/3 of the voting body required. The others LOVE Dell [type] machines. They don't see Dell as cheap, they see them as the best! No lie, ask any Joe Smoe off the street "who makes a good PC?" and 9 out of 10 would probably reply Dell right away. Many people are affraid of Macs. Everyone in my family likes my iBook, but won't put their hands on it. It's like a neat looking alien thing that they think looks cool, but would get them sick from if they actually touch it. (Thank God for the Apple retail stores in high traffic area)

My brother wants to buy a new computer for his music recording studio, so he asks me about the $499 Dell special. I replied, "are you kidding!? How could you consider anything outside Apple? They own the audio world." To him Apple wasn't an option. He'd rather spend $500 on a Dell, and 1,500 more on other equipment, then $2000 on a Mac. (And the eMac repells people, even thou they have great performance for the buck.)

The average person views buying a computer like buying penics. If you need one, you go get the best price. Oooh a 17" monitor, I'll pay $80 more! They don't consider a computer purchase like they would consider a car purchase. They don't get the value in the operating system. They rationalize it with "why buy one G5 for 1,800 when I can get 3 or 4 Dells for the same money. How can a Mac be that much better?"

Clearly the answer lies in the FUN and EASE of using OS X, compared to the frustration and overall hell you live through when you use Windows. After a day at work on WinXP, I just smile when I get home and plop down in front of my Mac and make things happen.
This side of the blackest meadows
I make my winter dwelling
And crush my bones
     
gururafiki
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Good question...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2004, 06:19 AM
 
Originally posted by klinux:
I don't buy this. Apple makes computers. HP makes computers. It's great Apple shipped 5% more than prev Q prev Y and we can all cheer but it is not good when the industry shipped 15% more in the same period.

Now, tons of people here argue mindshare. Well, from financial point of view that means diddly squat. You think Jobs would rather you hold on to an old G3 and crow on Macnn on how fast 10.3.3 is on it and how long you will keep G3 instead of getting a G5.

The fact is everyone at Apple and on Macnn want Apple's marketshare to increase. To speculate why it is decreasing is one thing. To defend it, well, I don't see why one would do that.
A lot more compaines ship wintel computers per quarter versus Apple, who is the only company who is shipping Macs. We don't know how this marketshare info was gathered, but if it is worldwide then I would bet on my original thought, which is the industry is growing faster then apple. As more people buy computers, they are not going to all buy macs. The majority of them will buy PC's, and a smaller population will buy macs. So, it is not that less people are buying macs then before, it is that the majority of people are buying PC's, and the minority are buying macs. This is how it has been for years, and at this point there is no reason to believe that there will be a strong shift in the other direction. I am not defending Apple's "shrinking" marketshare. I am merely posing a theory as to why it seems their numbers are getting smaller.

Other Thoughts:
•Does IDC count servers/workstations when counting marketshare?
•Does IDC count marketshare by region, or the world?
     
Graymalkin
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: ~/
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2004, 06:38 AM
 
Originally posted by itai195:

Overall, I don't believe that the long term cost will be lower.
I suppose Fortune 100 companies might have a harder time switching to non-Microsoft solutions than smaller businesses. I've personally found that non-Microsoft solutions tend to work out very well for small and medium sized organizations. The up front cost is indeed higher than equivilent PCs but even with training and support the Macs have significant advantages over Windows PCs down the road.

The first big advantage is the relative low cost of OSX Server. A G5 XServe with unlimited client licenses for OSX Server costs less than Windows 2003 Small Business Server and CALs to serve a decent number of users. Say your organization has 45 or so users needing file and print sharing along with centralized group and application management. The cost of Windows Small Business Server with enough CALs runs about $5,000. OSX Server with unlimited client licenses is $999, three years of updates costs an additional $999 with an AMP subscription. To add Software Assurance (free upgrade if the server product is upgraded within the license's timeframe) to the Windows server costs an extra $2,500. That is a huge difference in back-end software cost for a medium sized organization. The OSX solution actually scales quite a bit better since new systems can be added to the network at no additional charge.

The second advantage the Macs have over Windows PCs in smaller businesses is far less downtime due to viruses and worms and their ilk. For a multitude of reasons there's few if any malicious virus attacks against MacOS in a given year. This makes them quite a bit more manageable and cheaper to operate than their Windows running cousins. The cost of Windows PCs has gone up in the past several years due to the increased need for security products. OSX is inherently safer on an open network than Windows is and will continue to be until Microsoft gets its act together with regards to basic security precautions. Not having to worry about your users taking the network down by opening e-mail attachments is a major load of a network admin's mind.

Training is really not the hobgoblin to be feared as contemporary business mythology would have you believe. While people might be "familiar" with Windows they rarely really know what they are doing. They can be trained to run whatever programs they need to accomplish their task no matter how familiar or not they are with the underlying system. I've trained several dozen people in quite a few programs and as long as pressing keys makes text appear and clicking the mouse button selects things people tend to do pretty well on a computer.

While switching computer platforms in any organization is obviously going to cost money, there are plenty of situations where switching ends up being far cheaper than keeping the old system. Windows based servers are quite a bit more expensive for smaller organizations than the Linux and OSX based alternatives. A Linux or OSX Server system can easily replace a Windows SBS and oftentimes at quite a savings year to year. On the desktop Windows is a security liability and its downtime from various exploits adds up to real money lost. For every time a network is down due to a virus or worm business is not being conducted as usual. I've been seeing more and more companies realize this and look for a way out of the "Microsoft trap". This is true in larger businesses like your Fortune 100 company as well as the small office down the street that got hammered by the last big Windows exploit or reamed with licensing charges after hiring some new people.
     
daftpig
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Singapore
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2004, 11:37 AM
 
Actually it might be good for Apple to improve its marketshare, even if just a little bit. I was thinking of the possible implications of what is perceived of the IDC report.

In real terms the statistics may not be too useful. But the perceptible impact on a potential customer due to a lower marketshare "score" may be hugely negative. The arguably flawed perception of how large a network of Mac users there is can negatively impact someone's purchase of a Mac, in view of the fact that Macs are an information good.

That what you can do on a PC can also be done on a Mac (and better) may be useful in orientating someone to a Mac, but it is usually insufficient to allay the fear that there will be incompatibilities and inconveniences (and there are). And that might be a key factor given that, perceptibly or otherwise, Macs are different from Windows machines.
     
atomicon
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2004, 12:48 PM
 
"Making a Mac out of cheaper components would ruin Apple's high-end image. Even if it is a clone made by Apple it is still made by Apple. Apple isn't trying to be in competition with the $399 Dell or eMachines. Apple is about quality and cheap components isn't quality."

I'm not suggesting that Apple should make cheap Macs, I'm suggesting that they spin off a clone company and call the cheap boxes something new. Toyotas don't ruin Lexus' high-end image, even though they're the same company. The same goes for Acura and Honda, or Audi and VW. If there was a brand of computer called, say, a "Peach", and it was sold at all the huge electronics stores alongside Wintel boxes, was comparatively priced, and it ran OS X, people would buy it in droves. They wouldn't necessarily even be aware that it was made by Apple computer. People like Macs, but too many times I hear people say that they're too expensive. How many people buy a Toyota because they don't want to spend the money on a Lexus, even though they like the Lexus better?
     
kupan787
Senior User
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: San Jose, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2004, 02:10 PM
 
Originally posted by gururafiki:
Other Thoughts:
•Does IDC count servers/workstations when counting marketshare?
•Does IDC count marketshare by region, or the world?
Yes. And the funny thing? The one time did a consumer figure finding, Apple had a 7% marketshare (this was 2001 I believe). I have not seen IDC (or Garner) do consumer numbers sense. Here is a post I made over at Appleinsider last October:

However, Apples "low" marketshare is do to Garner/IDC defining the "market" in a piss-poor way. When they say PC marketshare, they are actually counting servers sold, and large corperate purchases. Why is this a bad thing? Well for one, when a developer wants to look at the "market" to see if his game should go on the Mac, he sees it has only 2% marketshare, and goes the other way. However, what the developer doesn't take into consideration is their product is targed at consumers. Big business purcahses and servers would have no barring on their sales. Hence they need to look at consumer sales.

If a true consumer marketshare figure was put out (I ran the numbers once, using Apples 10k, IDC consumer figures, etc), Apple is really up closer to 7% of the consumer marketspace. Why is this number never quoted or spread? Who knows, maybe too many dumb ass analysts out there?

And just to show I am not talking completly out of my ass, here is the info I had dug up awhile back:

Ok, I have found some numbers:

Consumer Market - 2001 (this is only laptops and desktops, servers aren't counted)

HP - 10.6% of worldwide market
Compaq - 9.1% of worldwide market
Dell - 8.9% of worldwide market
Apple - 7% of worldwide market
Fujitsu Siemens - 6.1% of worldwide market

44.1 million consumer units shipped worldwide (according to IDC)

If you decide to try a similar approach, make sure you don't count overall PC sales. I found lots of figures for overall PC sales (which counted desktops, laptops, and server sales), but that doesn't help in this calculation. The figures above were collected from a few articles, and some SEC 10-K filings. Apple's % was figured from their SEC 10-K filing divided by total consumer units shipped (as listed by IDC).

This estimated market share is at least a better estimate than total PC sales (which counts servers according to dataquest and gartner). So it looks like Apple is fairing a bit better than the often quoted 2%. I am not saying that my findings are 100% correct, but I feel pretty confident in my methods and findings.

Just for comparisons sake, if you look at overall PC sales:

Compaq/HP - 16.2%
Dell - 15.2%
IBM - 6%
NEC - 3.4%
Toshiba - 3.2%
Apple - 2.40%

And we get our nice 2% number. So if you look at the more fitting market share numbers, Apple is fairing pretty well. I just wish developers would look at consumer numbers instead of the other ones...

Also, an interesting find:

Apple units shipped

2002 - 3,101,000
2001 - 3,087,000
2000 - 4,558,000
1999 - 3,448,000
-------------------------
14,194,000 units shipped in 4 years.
     
gururafiki
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Good question...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 29, 2004, 02:24 PM
 
Originally posted by kupan787:
Yes. And the funny thing? The one time did a consumer figure finding, Apple had a 7% marketshare (this was 2001 I believe). I have not seen IDC (or Garner) do consumer numbers sense.
....
Interesting. So maybe before anyone says apple is screwed because their marketshare is shrinking, we should see a consumer marketshare, and compare those numbers year by year. Incuding servers and workstations in in a marketshare is stupid at this point because Apple is not yet a major player in that market. Yes they have the Xserve, but this is still new when compared to Sun or IBM's length of time in the business, so they still have not saturated that market enough. They have, however, been in the consumer market for quite a long time, and those are the numbers we should be looking at.
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 29, 2004, 07:41 PM
 
Those marketshare points are rediculous. They often include non-user terminals, ATMs, and cash registers.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
sniffer
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Norway (I eat whales)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2004, 08:50 AM
 
There is a lot of talk here in this thread about the impact of the G5. I don't think it matters so much in its self, since the i and e machines are the real top and Joe sellers for Apple. But the G5 have a great impact as the companys flag-ship. If the roadmap for the G5 goes as planned and Apple once again makes the fastest desktops on the planet by a good margin (it could very well happen), I predict its status alone will increase sales on all modells. If general public get convinced Macs are the fastest, they are likely to think low end Macs are fast too (which they, might not or might be, compared with x86s in the same segment), even if the real speed demons are the top modell(s). It could be milked just like the well known Megahertz Myth.

Sniffer gone old-school sig
     
Thain Esh Kelch
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2004, 02:15 PM
 
Google still says we're up to 4%. Thats okay, 10% would be the magic place I think.
     
klinux
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2004, 05:15 PM
 
Originally posted by olePigeon:
Those marketshare points are rediculous. They often include non-user terminals, ATMs, and cash registers.
Ridiculous how? Are you sure they include non-user terminals, ATMs, and cash registers? I would love to see some citations to back up your assertion.

And so what if they were? If Apple can make a profit by making those products, ship more units, and increase their marketshare - why not? You are making it sound it's like a bad thing to make money selling those machines.
One iMac, iBook, one iPod, way too many PCs.
     
kupan787
Senior User
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: San Jose, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2004, 06:17 PM
 
Originally posted by klinux:
Ridiculous how? Are you sure they include non-user terminals, ATMs, and cash registers? I would love to see some citations to back up your assertion.

And so what if they were? If Apple can make a profit by making those products, ship more units, and increase their marketshare - why not? You are making it sound it's like a bad thing to make money selling those machines.
The problem is that consumers and developers always look at the marketshare numbers, and use that as a reason to not switch or develop for the Mac. "Oh, it only has 2% marketshare, why target it". If there were true consumer numbesr put out, things would look very different. For example, in 2001 the number of consumer machines sold, accordding to IDC, was around 44 million. Now the number of total PCs sold was 100 million. See why people complain about market share numbers?
     
Lateralus
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2004, 06:21 PM
 
Originally posted by klinux:
And so what if they were? If Apple can make a profit by making those products, ship more units, and increase their marketshare - why not? You are making it sound it's like a bad thing to make money selling those machines.
So you're saying that you want Apple to start making cash registers so that they can look better in the marketshare estimations...
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
lngtones
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2004, 06:58 PM
 
Originally posted by Waragainstsleep:
Software to scan in your face and change your virtual hairstyle before you get it done, or see yourself wearing an item of clothing before its been made. Nothing technically original, just a few easy to use incentives for those sorts of people.
I really hope they don't this... I almost threw up just reading it.

     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:42 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,