1.49%, maybe prices matter afterall?
It ain't pretty folks
It's starting to look ugly, and it WILL effect the platform if the trend isn't reversed, not just in NA consumer markets, where Apple's fortunes are picking up nicely, but in foriegn markets everywhere -- where the price premiums for Apple products are grossly exagerrated.
It's starting to look ugly, and it WILL effect the platform if the trend isn't reversed, not just in NA consumer markets, where Apple's fortunes are picking up nicely, but in foriegn markets everywhere -- where the price premiums for Apple products are grossly exagerrated.
Comments
Volume shipments are an excellent measure, but they don't account for the substantial numbers of white box builders, nor do they account for older machines still in use, and of course they don't account for how those machines are used (though we can make some assumptions based on price, ie 399 PC's aren't used to run financial information for you bank's head office.) The internet is a spceific usage, and telling because of it.
Originally posted by Matsu
[B
Volume shipments are an excellent measure, but they don't account for the substantial numbers of white box builders, nor do they account for older machines still in use, and of course they don't account for how those machines are used (though we can make some assumptions based on price, ie 399 PC's aren't used to run financial information for you bank's head office.) The internet is a spceific usage, and telling because of it. [/B]
Bzzt. Wrong. Gartner-Dataquest and IDC both include white box shipments. After all, they have multiple sources of data to scrutinize...chip sales for one.
And who do you think benefits most WRT installed base numbers?
Until Instat publishes their method, these numbers are useless. For all we know these numbers could be based on polling web browser User Agent strings from server logs.
EDIT: Instat is famous for their "conservative" FireWire adoption rate numbers, IIRC.
If they respond, they can only do so by buying Macs or switching to Linux. If they don't respond, then Mac continues down its road to obscurity.
Mac usage is mainly a Caucasean phenominon. So as the demographics of developed nations changes and as the under-developed nations grow, the Mac market share continues to shrink. For some reason, people feel the need to share a platform between home and work. This means that Mac may be pushed into the market by Window's failure at a full blown operating system in the corporate world. Or Mac may be pulled into the market by making it competetive in the corporate world.
Originally posted by Matsu
actually, i think those usage numbers are particularly interesting because the internet is a killer app. Any web designer can look at such surveys, see the mac penetration and just decide to, well, fvck it, when it comes to mac compatibility.
Ummm no? This is the year 2003. Three years ago that would have been a valid argument. Nowadays with the fragmentation of browsers (I use firebird on XP for example), anyone who is writing an explorer specific web site is an idiot. You can't even assume that explorer is the default browser on a PC. Why would some web designer be loading explorer specific content into a web page?
Here's another way in which you are wrong. Quicktime is in use FAR more than Apple's marketshare would suggest. The reason is because it is a good cross platfom standard and that is why people use it.
So standards rule the day, even when they come from companies with a small market share.
I frankly do not see the link between higher prices and poor marketshare that you are trying to establish. I think that you are excluding quite a few other more obvious reasons (for example the fact that Apple has a totally different OS, making a switch quite a commitment). Even if it was there, do you really expect Apple to try to compete with eMachines or Dell? Apple actually has a strategy that is working (unlike most every PC manufacturer in existence right now).
I think that your argument could be used to justify why it is that there are fewer apps for the Mac, and I would agree with you that the marketshare is worrying in this sense. I would simply disagree that the cause of the marketshare drop is price.
While American Apple prices range from acceptable/high (laptops and high-end workstations) to ludricous (e/iMacs), worldwide prices start at idiotic and get worse from there. I find it easily believable that Apple's market share in certain European and Asian markets is at 1.5% or less, and will only get worse unless prices improve.
Anyway, back to the article. Such research informs companies who then have to make support decisions. When your bank/trust/trading company decides not to support mac clients, this kind of thing is the reason why. And, it is far from being a wholly illegitimate consideration.
Eugene, white box numbers were a recent inclusion, and they (naturally) impacted mac marketshare numbers. Of course those are better numbers for determining overall marketshare, but such surveys are still interesting for devs, businesses, bureaucracies, etc etc... Neither number is "real" but the combination of information over time does highlight problems, the most threatening being M$'s ability to create de-facto web standards (afforded by their dominant position over web traffic) Yevengy thinks that's no longer a threat, but time after time market and institutional and legal decisions show us that it continues to be. Nearly ALL of the windows market not on an older version of AOL, uses Explorer. We are a very small minority, and while thrid party browsers exist, their penetration is absolutely minimal.
A lot of production machines aren't hooked up to the net.
Think about those Macs in the video/audio studios....
Did these guys grab the data from the porn sites? <-----j/k
Originally posted by Matsu
Apple has been steadily improving in the North American consumer space. Some estimates peg them up to 6% of the consumer market. But overall marketshare has only crept up a bit (lost edu share eating away many gains). And while the North American position strengthens, the global position (apart from Japan and the UK) does not.
While American Apple prices range from acceptable/high (laptops and high-end workstations) to ludricous (e/iMacs), worldwide prices start at idiotic and get worse from there. I find it easily believable that Apple's market share in certain European and Asian markets is at 1.5% or less, and will only get worse unless prices improve.
On an indirectly related note. It is not quite true that prices will determine the small market share in most Asian countries.
I have been using, including for my staff, Macs and PCs in China over the last decade. We consistently ran into problems with the language problem. Apple devoted tremendous resources to the Japanese market to make sure the Japanese version is seamlessly integrated into the Mac OS.
But for the biggest market in the world today, also the fastest growing market in the world today, China, there has been such sloppy work done that we end up with no native Chinese version- only patched up from the orginal English version of the OS. Dell, HP and others are seeing their sales figure growth PRIMARILY FROM THE CHINA MARKET but we are all forced to have windows machinese next to our Macs to deal with Chinese language documents.
What we are seeing in the new markets in Asia, especially China, is a rapid growth of an affluent class, who would be willing to pay more for a better product. The ipod is selling like there is no tomorrow here in China. Language is not a problem there. But unless and until Apple deals with the language issue, even though masses of people love the Macs here but won't buy them. Wake up, Apple!!!!
Originally posted by Yevgeny
Nowadays with the fragmentation of browsers (I use firebird on XP for example), anyone who is writing an explorer specific web site is an idiot. You can't even assume that explorer is the default browser on a PC.
Pure conjecture. Where's the proof?
I've read recently that Internet Explrorer's domination is still as high as 95%. A quick google search showed Internet Explorer holding a strong 93% share as of July '03.
Why would some web designer be loading explorer specific content into a web page?
If the VAST majority of visitors use IE and IE has certain bugs, the designer will most likely rewrite the code to accomodate IE's misrendering even if it breaks on other browsers. Besides, why put in lots of extra work and fight to maintain compatibility with a browser that practically none of your visitors use?
Quicktime is in use FAR more than Apple's marketshare would suggest. The reason is because it is a good cross platfom standard and that is why people use it.
Again, pure conjecture.
This Nielson report is a year old, but I have found nothing that can legitimately claim a dramatic change since the report was published.
In the home market, RealMedia has a 16% reach, Microsoft's Windows Media has a 14.5% reach, and QuickTime is third with a meager 7.5% reach. In the work place, Windows Media has a 28% reach, RealMedia has 27% reach, and QuickTime has 13%.
Standards rule the day, eh?
Originally posted by BJer
...But unless and until Apple deals with the language issue, even though masses of people love the Macs here but won't buy them. Wake up, Apple!!!!
It seems like you're preaching to the choir. Apple is incredibly devoted to making the world's first truly multi-lingual operating system. They've designed the OS and APIs specifically with the goal of being able to distribute a single version with support for all languages. A perusal of typical package contents is quite enlightening and reveals just how forward thinking their strategy has been.
I agree that in some areas, Microsoft's products have better support for Chinese. However, this is a result of MS having a software development budget a couple orders of magnitude greater than apple. On the other hand, an insignificant company in comparison, Apple, is willing to restructure their OS in such a way that all languages have equal footing.
Now that the architecture is in place to natively support all languages, it comes down to market analyses and time related translation logistics. While I understand ranting about poor Chinese support, perhaps you should reconsider who your allies are.
Originally posted by Brad
If the VAST majority of visitors use IE and IE has certain bugs, the designer will most likely rewrite the code to accomodate IE's misrendering even if it breaks on other browsers. Besides, why put in lots of extra work and fight to maintain compatibility with a browser that practically none of your visitors use?
I was thinking specifially about an eweek article I red a few months ago discussing the changing face of web design. Specifically, web designers realize that quite a few "high brow" surfers do NOT use IE. The prevailing thinking when Netscape went under was that it would be an IE world, and while that was true for a time, it is chainging and web designers are having to realize this.
For another example, I would refer to AppleInsider's own minor bugs about half a year ago. AI had some bad Javascript code in its pages and for those of us who have debuggers on our machines (myself included), browsing to an AI page would bring up several opportunities to debug the HTML. We complained and now the offending code is gone and we can browse just fine. Web sites do the same thing for specific browsers.
What % of sites do you think use IE specific content? Coding around IE bugs is NOT the same thing as coding for IE. One is defensive coding, the other is specific content addition.
In the home market, RealMedia has a 16% reach, Microsoft's Windows Media has a 14.5% reach, and QuickTime is third with a meager 7.5% reach. In the work place, Windows Media has a 28% reach, RealMedia has 27% reach, and QuickTime has 13%.
Standards rule the day, eh?
Yes they do, and thanks for proving my point that good technology standards will pervade the marketplace. For example, as you point out, Quicktime has 7.5 to 13% of the user marketshare. How is Apple's marketshare? 4% tops? How come Quicktime has 13% in the workplace which is overwhelmingly PC? It is because people like me install it on our Dells so that I can view movies (and I shun Real Media like the plauge). If OS penetration was an indicator of standard penetration, then would you say that windows only has a 28% OS percentage on the desktop? No way. Standards do become pervasive when they are good standards.
Originally posted by dfiler
It seems like you're preaching to the choir.
Now that the architecture is in place to natively support all languages, it comes down to market analyses and time related translation logistics. While I understand ranting about poor Chinese support, perhaps you should reconsider who your allies are.
Not quite sure what you mean by your last sentence about allies?
When I moved here a decade ago as head of an international investment bank's operations in China. I forced Macs on the entire operation of several dozen people. It worked well for a couple years when most of our work involved English and French, not Chinese. When most of the stuff converted to Chinese, we started to have problems. Recalling the history though, I think you are right. The problems rested with incompetent Apple (China)rather than the company's technology. Current problems also seem to stem from really really poor management at Apple China. Apple Hong Kong is much more sophisticated and has done well. Apple China has only managed to get into some of the major western advertising firms and THATS IT. I have a new 15 inch PB (along with an IBM desktop) on my desk and my partner has a new 17 incher on his as his only machine(he doesn't travel much). You would be absolutely amazed at the wooing and wowing that we get from senior corporate or governmental visitors to our office. Many would love to buy it but when they see scrambled text in word and PP, they get nervous. I think these problems can be addressed either through tech support(which is very poor) or Apple China's own development team (but has not). Marketing has been dreadful also. Alas, as someone who has been consumed with apple from as far back as the IIe days until now, it is just the desparate hope that Apple should do much better in my immediate environs.