Apple's Mac sales rock-steady despite Vista

[AppleInsider]

Apple Inc. had little to quarrel about with the latest figures from Gartner, which showed the Mac maker standing firm against a tidal wave of Windows PC sales triggered by Vista. For the first quarter of 2007, Mac unit shipments were up some 30 percent.

Research firm Gartner published a preliminary report on Wednesday saying that rapid Vista sales scarcely made a dent in Apple's marketshare during the first quarter of the year, declining only a tenth of a point to reach an even 5 percent of US computer shipments by the end of March.

Sales for other computer designers fell almost perfectly in line with fourth quarter results, with Toshiba edging out Apple for fourth place at 5.4 percent and Gateway claiming the third spot with 7.7. The most surprising change for Windows PC shipments was a narrowing of the gap between top-ranked Dell and close opponent HP as the latter's success with Vista took away from its struggling rival.

Though potentially dampening the hopes of those who would expect Apple's newfound success to translate to a larger piece of the market, the statistic reinforced Morgan Stanley's notion that the Calfornia system builder had weathered the storm both before and after Vista's release. Mac shipments grew at a steady 30 percent year-over-year to 741,000 in the US alone, the report said, which created a buffer for the company.



Better still for Apple was news that the surge in PC shipments could be just a momentary spike -- both at home and abroad -- rather than the start of a larger trend.

"Microsoft’s official consumer launch of Vista in January, [sic] had very limited impact on overall worldwide shipment demand on a quarterly basis," Gartner wrote. "On a monthly basis, mature regions experienced a bubble in demand following its release. Vista adoption was primarily in the consumer and very small business segments of the mature regions."

Nonetheless, the charts illustrated the challenge of breaking into the upper ranks of computer sales for the primarily US-driven Apple, which yet again was left out of the top five system vendors after southeast Asian strongholds Acer, Lenovo, and Toshiba occupied spots three through five.



This could be due to a surprising shift in power, according to the researchers. Although the US market fared better than southeast Asia in sales, a shift in power during the first quarter gave the upper hand to Eastern territories -- where homegrown manufacturers often take precedence over American opponents.

"The Asia/Pacific region surpassed the U.S. PC market to take the No. 2 position in terms of shipments for the first time," Gartner was careful to note.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[Ireland]

[reverie]

I'm pretty sure you mean east asian, not southeast asian. The 3 companies mentioned are from China, Taiwan, Japan respectively.

[pazimzadeh]

It sure looks like Apple could catchup to Toshiba within the next couple of quarters (at least in the US). And if Leopard hadn't been delayed this might have happened during Q2.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by Ireland

Huh?

Originally Posted by pazimzadeh

It sure looks like Apple could catchup to Toshiba within the next couple of quarters (at least in the US). And if Leopard hadn't been delayed this might have happened during Q2.

I think Apple will definitely overtake 4th place eitehr Q2 or Q3 2007 and probably take 3rd place a year later.

Either way, it's impressive that Apple is doing so well in a market that is saturated by cheap-ass computers.

[BenRoethig]

Originally Posted by pazimzadeh

It sure looks like Apple could catchup to Toshiba within the next couple of quarters (at least in the US). And if Leopard hadn't been delayed this might have happened during Q2.

Toshiba caught up to and passed Apple.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by solipsism

Huh?

Sorry, couldn't resist when I saw the title.

[Louzer]

Originally Posted by Ireland

Sorry, couldn't resist when I saw the title.

Sorry, call me ignorant ("You're ignorant!") but are we supposed to know what that picture is?

Originally Posted by solipsism

Either way, it's impressive that Apple is doing so well in a market that is saturated by cheap-ass computers.

Yeah, real impressive. You did notice that they only have 5% of the market, right? Compared to their previous share, sure, that's impressive. But its not really impressive to the 20+% of its competitors.

[Chucker]

Originally Posted by Louzer

Sorry, call me ignorant ("You're ignorant!") but are we supposed to know what that picture is?

The article says "sales rock-steady". The picture is of a character "Rocksteady" in the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

No worries, I didn't know either. But a minute or two of research on the web would have told you.

Yeah, real impressive. You did notice that they only have 5% of the market, right? Compared to their previous share, sure, that's impressive. But its not really impressive to the 20+% of its competitors.

They're on the path to become the fourth-largest vendor of PCs (including desktops, laptops and servers, so all market segments) in the US within a few years from now. If that isn't impressive, I don't know what is.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by Louzer

Yeah, real impressive. You did notice that they only have 5% of the market, right? Compared to their previous share, sure, that's impressive. But its not really impressive to the 20+% of its competitors.

You can't see that Apple's position here isn't something to be admired with Gateway, Dell, Toshiba, and HP selling most of their computers at well under a $1,000?

Car analogy warning: Imagine Bentley grabbing 5% of the entire US auto market.

I wish I could see a marketshare report that focused on either $1000+ computers, Core (2) Duo or greater (even anything dual core for that matter), or some other criteria that isn't saturated by cheap-ass PC with outdated tech.

[BlackSummerNight]

Mac Mini, iMac (low end), and the Macbook are pretty much on the same level as low end Windows PCs. They all are right at or below $1000. The only reason Apple is gaining the little marketshare they are is because they finally found out that not many people can afford Bentleys.

Originally Posted by solipsism

You can't see that Apple's position here isn't something to be admired with Gateway, Dell, Toshiba, and HP selling most of their computers at well under a $1,000?

Car analogy warning: Imagine Bentley grabbing 5% of the entire US auto market.

I wish I could see a marketshare report that focused on either $1000+ computers, Core (2) Duo or greater (even anything dual core for that matter), or some other criteria that isn't saturated by cheap-ass PC with outdated tech.

The Car analogy is dead, can we finally put it to rest.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by BlackSummerNight

Mac Mini, iMac (low end), and the Macbook are pretty much on the same level as low end Windows PCs. They all are right at or below $1000. The only reason Apple is gaining the little marketshare they are is because they finally found out that not many people can afford Bentleys.

So you are saying that Apple increased sales are being carried by the Mac mini and educational iMac? That is funny!

[BlackSummerNight]

I don't consider the Ed Mac the low end, it's not available to everyone. So would you want to sell 1 MacPro or 20 Macbooks. It's been well stated that the Macbook is Apple's best seller. I'm sure you can do the math....well not sure, but you have a calculator.

Originally Posted by solipsism

So you are saying that Apple increased sales are being carried by the Mac mini and educational iMac? That is funny!

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by BlackSummerNight

It's been well stated that the Macbook is Apple's best seller.

Exactly, and it's over a grand and is sporting a Core2Duo.

[Chucker]

Originally Posted by BlackSummerNight

It's been well stated that the Macbook is Apple's best seller.

Whereas all other companies in the top market share spots have low-end models as their best sellers. You only need to compare average selling points.

[Porchland]

Originally Posted by Louzer

Yeah, real impressive. You did notice that they only have 5% of the market, right? Compared to their previous share, sure, that's impressive. But its not really impressive to the 20+% of its competitors.

I'm still waiting for the halo. Apple has sold millions of iPods, hundreds of millions of iTunes tracks and Apple's share of the PC market has inches up one or two percentage points?

It's good to see Apple selling a third more computers in the January quarter than it did the same quarter a year ago, and hopefully the iPhone and Apple TV will torque up Mac sales even more, but why the tiny halo?

[rickag]

Be nice to know the breakdown between desktop and laptop sales.

[Louzer]

Originally Posted by solipsism

You can't see that Apple's position here isn't something to be admired with Gateway, Dell, Toshiba, and HP selling most of their computers at well under a $1,000?

No, not really. I do look at it and go "Gee, just imagine if apple sold a low-cost 15" laptop, or a low-cost mini-tower". But I'm just annoying that way.

Originally Posted by solipsism

I wish I could see a marketshare report that focused on either $1000+ computers, Core (2) Duo or greater (even anything dual core for that matter), or some other criteria that isn't saturated by cheap-ass PC with outdated tech.

Just to make you go insane (and I'm sure it will launch the really stupid "Yeah, but if you upgrade it...." comparisons), but my boss yesterday just bought a Dell Dimension 9200, with a Core 2 Duo E4300 processor, 1GB RAM, lot's of room for expansion, all for $650. (If he went for the Dell E520, he could have gotten the same basic specs for $599). Apple can't even be bothered doing something like that, they have to go "Let's make a cheap mac, but we'll make it look really nice, because people care only about looks, so who cares if its not upgradable, has a laptop drive in it, and even to change the memory requires the use of tools usually left to those who break into homes".

[Louzer]

Originally Posted by rickag

Be nice to know the breakdown between desktop and laptop sales.

Yeah, but you know apple, they no longer breakdown their sales (Do they even break it down by laptops/desktops anymore)? Guess they got tired of being embarrassed to see their towers selling in such small quantity.

[vinea]

Originally Posted by Louzer

Yeah, but you know apple, they no longer breakdown their sales (Do they even break it down by laptops/desktops anymore)? Guess they got tired of being embarrassed to see their towers selling in such small quantity.

Why? Mac Pro's are pro workstation class machines which are a limited market.

Desktop sales would be low overall but within the AIO segment they dominate and I suspect that Apple looks good in comparison to other SFF makers.

If there were cheap towers and laptops then Apple numbers would look like Dell or HP numbers but with far lower volumes. Profitability would drop and the only positive thing we'd get is that we'd show up on the worldwide charts for unit sales.

Apple ASPs are fantastic and volume is reasonable. That's a damn good combo.

Vinea

[AISI]

Originally Posted by pazimzadeh

It sure looks like Apple could catchup to Toshiba within the next couple of quarters (at least in the US). And if Leopard hadn't been delayed this might have happened during Q2.

In the U.S. Apple was already selling more than Toshiba in the full calendar years 2004, 2005 and 2006.

Originally Posted by Chucker

They're on the path to become the fourth-largest vendor of PCs (including desktops, laptops and servers, so all market segments) in the US within a few years from now. If that isn't impressive, I don't know what is.

Apple was the already the fourth largest U.S. vendor in the full calendar years 2005 and 2006. Fifth in CY 04.

Originally Posted by Louzer

Do they even break it down by laptops/desktops anymore?

Of course they do.

[physguy]

Originally Posted by Louzer

No, not really. I do look at it and go "Gee, just imagine if apple sold a low-cost 15" laptop, or a low-cost mini-tower". But I'm just annoying that way.



Just to make you go insane (and I'm sure it will launch the really stupid "Yeah, but if you upgrade it...." comparisons), but my boss yesterday just bought a Dell Dimension 9200, with a Core 2 Duo E4300 processor, 1GB RAM, lot's of room for expansion, all for $650. (If he went for the Dell E520, he could have gotten the same basic specs for $599). Apple can't even be bothered doing something like that, they have to go "Let's make a cheap mac, but we'll make it look really nice, because people care only about looks, so who cares if its not upgradable, has a laptop drive in it, and even to change the memory requires the use of tools usually left to those who break into homes".

As an Apple shareholder all I can say is 'OMG I hope not' Just look at dell's business performance.

[iPeon]

Originally Posted by physguy

As an Apple shareholder all I can say is 'OMG I hope not' Just look at dell's business performance.

Admit it, Apple needs to plug that hole. Where's the consumer upgradable mini tower? Take that mini and do something with it. It's a nice little computer for mom and dad, but it's not designed for the typical PC user who is accustomed to upgradability. There's a huge market here that Apple isn't acknowledging.

[Chucker]

Originally Posted by iPeon

Admit it, Apple needs to plug that hole.

That must be why their market share has grown by 30%.

Oh wait.

[physguy]

Originally Posted by iPeon

Admit it, Apple needs to plug that hole. Where's the consumer upgradable mini tower? Take that mini and do something with it. It's a nice little computer for mom and dad, but it's not designed for the typical PC user who is accustomed to upgradability. There's a huge market here that Apple isn't acknowledging.

Why? Doesn't seem to be a market that is currently profitable. As a shareholder I really don't care about market share numbers. They have enough market share to attract developers (the absolute numbers are more than enough for that). Dell is killing itself serving that market at the moment.

[BenRoethig]

Originally Posted by physguy

Why? Doesn't seem to be a market that is currently profitable. As a shareholder I really don't care about market share numbers. They have enough market share to attract developers (the absolute numbers are more than enough for that). Dell is killing itself serving that market at the moment.

Tell that to PC makers like Velocity Micro and Polywell. Your confusing the entire high end prosumer market with the bargain basement makers.

[BenRoethig]

Originally Posted by Chucker

That must be why their market share has grown by 30%.

Oh wait.

It's why they still make up only 1 in every 20 computers.

[Chucker]

Originally Posted by BenRoethig

It's why they still make up only 1 in every 20 computers.

Successfully so.

[physguy]

Originally Posted by BenRoethig

It's why they still make up only 1 in every 20 computers.

And how many of those 20 do Velocity Micro and Polywell make??? This is the whole point. Why should apple do this. If they want to increase market share they will HAVE to complete with Dell, not Velocity Micro and Polywell. If they do that they don't make money. If they compete with Velocity Micro and Polywell the might make some tiny amount of money but they don't make market share. It's a lose-lose at this point.

[Hiro]

For arguments sake:

Dell vs Apple stock prices

Dell down over 5 years. Apple up OVER 600%!!!

yeah. Apple is killing itself not fighting in the commodity low-end market.

[iPeon]

Originally Posted by Hiro

For arguments sake:

Dell vs Apple stock prices

Dell down over 5 years. Apple up OVER 600%!!!

yeah. Apple is killing itself not fighting in the commodity low-end market.

I don't see the relevance, nor is anyone arguing that Apple is killing itself by not having a consumer tower. Nor is Apple's rate of growth proof that Apple doesn't need to add said product.

The logical argument against it would be to say that there isn't a market for said product. I think there is. It's either "there is" or "there isn't", anything else is irrelevant.

[Chucker]

Originally Posted by iPeon

The logical argument against it would be to say that there isn't a market for said product. I think there is. It's either "there is" or "there isn't", anything else is irrelevant.

There is a market for inline skates. Apple should make some.

[BenRoethig]

Originally Posted by physguy

And how many of those 20 do Velocity Micro and Polywell make??? This is the whole point. Why should apple do this. If they want to increase market share they will HAVE to complete with Dell, not Velocity Micro and Polywell. If they do that they don't make money. If they compete with Velocity Micro and Polywell the might make some tiny amount of money but they don't make market share. It's a lose-lose at this point.

The boutique market makes up roughly a quarter of the market.

[lkrupp]

Originally Posted by Louzer

Sorry, call me ignorant ("You're ignorant!") but are we supposed to know what that picture is?



Yeah, real impressive. You did notice that they only have 5% of the market, right? Compared to their previous share, sure, that's impressive. But its not really impressive to the 20+% of its competitors.

5% of the market yet closing in on double the market cap of Dell (last time I checked Dell was at $52 billion, Apple $80 billion). Market share is the current straw man of the Apple bashing crowd. Of course by that logic cockroaches are superior to humans because there's more of 'em on the planet. A Ford Escort is better than a BMW Z5 for the same reason.

[physguy]

Originally Posted by BenRoethig

The boutique market makes up roughly a quarter of the market.

That really doesn't answer my question. If the boutique market is 25% (and I'm not say I don't believe you but I will admit I'm surprised. Is there a link I can look at?) how many vendors serve it. If its like other boutique markets its served by many many vendor each finding a quite small niche that they can serve uniquely. That's how they add enough value to make a profit. If that's the case then my argument still stands. If Apple had to create 10's of products/services to gain a significant market share it would be more like them building in-line skate (thanks Chucker) than their current product - i.e. a different market/service model.

[iPeon]

Originally Posted by Chucker

There is a market for inline skates. Apple should make some.

Fishing is a dull sport.

[Hiro]

Originally Posted by iPeon

I don't see the relevance.

Well, there you go.

[iPeon]

Originally Posted by Hiro

Well, there you go.

So you are saying that Apple shouldn't offer a consumer tower because Dell is losing money? Is Dell solely in the business of making consumer towers?

[physguy]

Originally Posted by iPeon

So you are saying that Apple shouldn't offer a consumer tower because Dell is losing money? Is Dell solely in the business of making consumer towers?

No. I think what we're saying is that 'consumer towers' are not a very good market. Dell makes little money. Others need to find appropriate niches.

[Hiro]

Exactly. The low end consumer desktop market that Dell is playing heavily in is so bad that their high end servers and services packages can no longer keep them consistently above water financially. They make a ton on their high end stuff, and loose a ton and more in the commodity market. When you don't make lots of profit, you get punished in the market.