or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple sells estimated 1.4M Macs in US to capture 8% market share
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple sells estimated 1.4M Macs in US to capture 8% market share

post #1 of 47
Thread Starter 
Quarterly PC shipment estimates were released Wednesday, and Apple's share of the U.S. PC market grew 34 percent year over year to capture 8 percent of the total domestic market.

Gartner

According to research firm Gartner, Apple was the fifth-largest PC vendor in the U.S. for the three-month quarter to start 2010. With an estimated 1.398 million Macs shipped stateside, Apple was behind only HP, Dell, Acer and Toshiba.

Gartner said the hype around Apple's recently released iPad likely helped Mac sales for the quarter, which grew 34 percent from the same period in 2009. A year ago, Macs accounted for 7.2 percent of the U.S. market.

Total estimated PC shipments in the U.S. were 17.4 million for the first quarter of 2010, representing a 20.2 percent increase from the same frame in 2009. That amounts to two consecutive quarters of double-digit shipment growth for the U.S market.

"Although the first quarter is not typically a strong quarter for the consumer market, growth in the consumer segment was strong," said Mikako Kitagawa, principal analyst with Gartner. "We are expecting about 30 percent growth in the U.S. consumer PC market in the first quarter of 2010. The positive economic outlook and affordable system prices drove U.S. consumers to buy more PCs. These purchases either replaced aging PCs or became additions to buyers' households."

Preliminary U.S. PC Vendor Unit Shipment Estimates for 1Q10 (Thousands of Units) | Source: Gartner

Staying atop the domestic market was HP, but it and second-place manufacturer Dell saw year-over-year growth that came in below the industry average, at 7.1 percent and 7.2 percent, respectively. HP still managed to take 25 percent of the U.S. market, followed closely by Dell with 23.4 percent.

In third was Acer, which skyrocketed 50.9 percent from 2009 shipments, followed by Toshiba which grew an even 50 percent. Acer took 15.6 percent of estimated U.S. shipments, totaling 2.7 million. Toshiba accounted for 1.5 million and 8.6 percent of the market.

Worldwide, HP was also on top, with a total of 15.3 million shipments estimated for the first quarter, good for an 18.2 percent market share. In second was Acer, taking 12 million and 14.2 percent, followed by Dell (10.2 million, 12.1 percent), Lenovo (7 million, 8.3 percent), Asus (4.6 million, 5.5 percent) and Toshiba (4.6 million, 5.5 percent). Apple did not make Gartner's list of the top worldwide PC vendors.

IDC

Also released Wednesday were figures from IDC, which tracked estimated domestic Apple shipments at 1.13 million, good for a 6.4 percent market share. IDC, too, found Apple to be the fifth-largest U.S. vendor, behind HP, Dell, Acer and Toshiba.

Differing from Gartner, IDC found that Apple's year-over-year growth was just 8.3 percent, and total market share was down from 7 percent in the first quarter of 2009.

In all, the U.S. PC market grew an estimated 16.9 percent to 17.5 million units in the first quarter of 2010, according to IDC. HP captured 25.4 percent of the market, selling 4.5 million PCs, edging out Dell's 4.2 million and 24.1 percent share.

"As expected, the U.S. market was not able to maintain the spike of growth (more than 24%) seen in 4Q09, but momentum from the holiday season continued, resulting in stronger than expected sales across both form factors," IDC wrote. "Steadily improved business spending, as well as growing interest in niche desktop segments, yielded a strong desktop quarter."

Preliminary U.S. PC Vendor Unit Shipment Estimates for 1Q10 (Thousands of Units) | Source: IDC

Worldwide sales increased 24.2 percent, with total shipments in the first quarter estimated at 79 million. HP was the top company, shipping 15.6 percent in the first quarter, good for a 19.7 percent market share.

IDC found that Acer was the No. 2 overall worldwide PC manufacturer, with 10.8 million PCs shipped and a 13.6 percent market share. Dell took third, with 10.5 million shipments and 13.3 percent of the market. Lenovo (7 million, 8.8 percent) and Toshiba (4.6 million, 5.8 percent) rounded out the top five.
post #2 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Quarterly PC shipment estimates were released Wednesday, and Apple's share of the U.S. PC market grew 34 percent year over year to capture 8 percent of the total domestic market.


34% growth is amazing.

What's up with Toshiba and Acer? They each increased sales by 50% or more.

Dell and HP are neck and neck. They're both HUGE! Together, they make up fully half of the entire market. Amazing.
post #3 of 47
I'd love to see the revenue, operating profit and net profit from these vendors. This Business Week chart from 23-MAR-2010 shows that Apple is the market leader.


Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG View Post

What's up with Toshiba and Acer? They each increased sales by 50% or more.

Netbooks are counted as PCs. Rightly so, but it does skew the unit sales until you look at more valuable data like revenue, profit and average price per unit.. That shows that unit sales are a pointless metric unless qualified.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #4 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG View Post

34% growth is amazing.

What's up with Toshiba and Acer? They each increased sales by 50% or more.

Dell and HP are neck and neck. They're both HUGE! Together, they make up fully half of the entire market. Amazing.

Netbooks. It's a mad race to the bottom.
post #5 of 47
will ipads be counted in this in the future? Do they qualify? I understand that apple plays them as alternatives, but I'm not sure if they should be counted. If so, that might give apple a huge market share jump next quarter
post #6 of 47
To be clear these aren't the actual quarterly results, but rather, estimates.

The results will come on April 20th.

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/earningsq210/
post #7 of 47
Will be nice to see an updated drilldown for what %age of the >$1000 PC market Apple's got.
post #8 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalG View Post

will ipads be counted in this in the future? Do they qualify? I understand that apple plays them as alternatives, but I'm not sure if they should be counted. If so, that might give apple a huge market share jump next quarter

It doesn't run a desktop-class OS so it won't be counted. Nor should it be since it's designed to be a satallite computing device to your PC*. If we count devices based on OS X then we have Mac OS and iPhone OS, but that doesn't really matter.

The HP Slate would likely be counted since it's running Windows 7 but there may be some analysts who will not include it. Tablets may finally find themselves in their own category since this market is finally picking up. I think the results from last year were 1.09 million tablets and convertible notebooks sold. With Apple selling a half million in a week and estimates now at 7 million for the year creating a new category seems likely, as well as separating out tablets with idealized OS from the ones that are shoehorning Windows 7 into them.

* Macs are PCs
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #9 of 47
.

Believe this article and statistics relate to "personal computers"

But only in an ancient and limited sense - like some "box" that sits on a desk

Why limit ourselves to the aged and antique ?

iPhone can "compute" with the best of them - and better than many "netbooks"

Also is about as personal of a personal computer as personal computers can get

So let's Get Real about our definitions and include iPhone

.

Ergo - add in iPhone's 8,700,000 sales last quarter (number via Wiki)

Appears Apple is selling a chit load of "personal computers"

And believe that puts them at #1

.

Oh yea - and here comes the iPad


BC
post #10 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by BC Kelly View Post

.

Believe this article and statistics relate to "personal computers"

But only in an ancient and limited sense - like some "box" that sits on a desk

Why limit ourselves to the aged and antique ?

iPhone can "compute" with the best of them - and better than many "netbooks"

Also is about as personal of a personal computer as personal computers can get

So let's Get Real about our definitions and include iPhone

.

Ergo - add in iPhone's 8,700,000 sales last quarter (number via Wiki)

Appears Apple is selling a chit load of "personal computers"

And believe that puts them at #1

.

Oh yea - and here comes the iPad


BC

During the iPad presentation in January Steve Jobs mentioned that they are the largest vendor of mobile devices in the world. That is unit sales and includes the iPhone, Touch, and their laptops. I;m not sure if it included other iPods. Either way, they are making it known how big they are.

Since a netbook is technically designed to be a computer it should be considered in the PC stats, but as the chart posted above shows, it just makes Apple's revenue and profit look even better. Netooks are like sporks. They can used as spoons or as forks but they aren't great as either, while the iPhone and iPad are more like corkscrews that have a specific purpose that are designed for.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #11 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I'd love to see the revenue, operating profit and net profit from these vendors. This Business Week chart from 23-MAR-2010 shows that Apple is the market leader.



Netbooks are counted as PCs. Rightly so, but it does skew the unit sales until you look at more valuable data like revenue, profit and average price per unit.. That shows that unit sales are a pointless metric unless qualified.

You are so right! This is the real story here! 8% and 6.4% whatever from Gartner and IDC is just not relevant or interesting at all. It's clear that Acer and Toshiba's unit figures are massively padded by cheap low margin netbooks and make the concept of a unit incomparable. Revenue an profit are far more useful to demo Apple's success.
post #12 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stashman View Post

You are so right! This is the real story here! 8% and 6.4% whatever from Gartner and IDC is just not relevant or interesting at all. It's clear that Acer and Toshiba's unit figures are massively padded by cheap low margin netbooks and make the concept of a unit incomparable. Revenue an profit are far more useful to demo Apple's success.

Well what that chart clearly shows is how large their margins are on each computer they sell. There is simply no argument to say that Macs are not overpriced when you look at that. They objectively are massively overpriced compared to everyone else. That we as mac users decide to pay what Apple asks for is a different matter, but there is clearly no need in trying to claim that Macs are not extremely expensive machines relative to the others, and that Apple pockets that difference big time.
post #13 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisTheXIV View Post

Well what that chart clearly shows is how large their margins are on each computer they sell. There is simply no argument to say that Macs are not overpriced when you look at that. They objectively are massively overpriced compared to everyone else.

Actually the chart does not say that (it does not say the opposite either). It mainly reflects that Apple does not play in some price categories. It is normal that a higher priced device also carries a higher margin. Top of the line Sony, Lenovo, HP and Dell models do also carry a huge mark-up, maybe even a higher one as they are less well designed and use less custom parts, and they would certainly love to sell them... just the majority of their customers goes for the cheaper models. Not Apple's fault.
post #14 of 47
Given that 1Q09 actual numbers are available why do Gartner and IDC have different figures for that time period? Showing growth from their incorrect 2009 estimates to their probably incorrect 2010 ones makes the entire exercise pointless.
post #15 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

It doesn't run a desktop-class OS so it won't be counted. Nor should it be since it's designed to be a satallite computing device to your PC*. If we count devices based on OS X then we have Mac OS and iPhone OS, but that doesn't really matter.

That is certainly one way to look at it, but how do we subtract the thousands of Dell and HP PCs in enterprises that are only used as clients, only being satellite devices to a server/mainframe? Does it make sense to ignore a $829 computing device (yes, it is personal and yes, it is a computer), when there are $200 netbooks included in the list that can barely surf the Web or play back video as well as the iPad (not true for all netbooks, but there are definitely a few that would lose here)?

It is an interesting question and I do not know the answer, but I am not sure that the case is anywhere that clear.
post #16 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

Given that 1Q09 actual numbers are available why do Gartner and IDC have different figures for that time period? Showing growth from their incorrect 2009 estimates to their probably incorrect 2010 ones makes the entire exercise pointless.

Most of the numbers are not yet available as the companies have not yet reported. Apple doesn't report until next week.

Also, IDC's estimates look way off. Most analysts think Mac sales jumped about 35-40%, but that includes international sales, which lately have been growing faster than US sales. Still, for IDC to think Apple only grew 8.3% in the US is a shocker.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #17 of 47
edit: Pipped by dreyfus2.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #18 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreyfus2 View Post

That is certainly one way to look at it, but how do we subtract the thousands of Dell and HP PCs in enterprises that are only used as clients, only being satellite devices to a server/mainframe? Does it make sense to ignore a $829 computing device (yes, it is personal and yes, it is a computer), when there are $200 netbooks included in the list that can barely surf the Web or play back video as well as the iPad (not true for all netbooks, but there are definitely a few that would lose here)?

It is an interesting question and I do not know the answer, but I am not sure that the case is anywhere that clear.

I see your point, but the simplest answer is not to count devices with embedded OSes or OSes that require a connection to a traditional PC to activate, as the iPad does.

The iPad was designed to be a satellite device. We both know that it would be trivial to make it stand alone, requiring no PC iTunes connection, allowing for Finder to be added, allowing media to be synced to it and allowing iPhone/iPods to sync to it. Those Dells and HPs that are used by corporations to work with a server started out with a desktop OS on them (a traditional PC) even if they are now locked down to only offer a connection to corporate server and nothing else.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #19 of 47
Who are these people buying Acer & Toshiba PCs!? I've never met or known anyone that's purchased from these vendors. My company would do anything to save a penny. But, they would never consider Acer or Toshiba.
post #20 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisTheXIV View Post

Well what that chart clearly shows is how large their margins are on each computer they sell. There is simply no argument to say that Macs are not overpriced when you look at that. They objectively are massively overpriced compared to everyone else. That we as mac users decide to pay what Apple asks for is a different matter, but there is clearly no need in trying to claim that Macs are not extremely expensive machines relative to the others, and that Apple pockets that difference big time.

It isn't that Macs are overpriced. It's that PC manufacturers are making very little profit at all. They can't keep this up. When margins are so close to the edge, it doesn't take much to drive off it. Many technology and software companies make much bigger margins than Apple does. It's called "good management".

When you look at net margins (profit), Apple makes almost 19% at times. So if we cut that to a still respectable, but not wonderful 10%,
then we can cut prices by what? 5%? 7%? 10%?

Would that really make that much difference?

One reason why Apple charges more is because year after year, they come home with by far the best service ratings. That's expensive!
post #21 of 47
I'm of the opinion that the iPad meets the definition of a NetBook as put out there by the industry before the iPad was rumored to be on the way: A low cost, very portable, limited OS device meant for browsing the web, reading email, and light computing duty (e.g word processing, etc.).

Only when it was convenient for the pundits and Apple naysayers to do so did a NetBook become a computer to be counted in the market share numbers, to counter the phenomenal growth the Apple is seeing in laptops and desktops.

Windows 7 Starter Edition is to WIndows 7 as iPhone 3.2 is to OSX 10.6.

Take the iPad expected sales, add them to the Mac sales, and by this time next year Apple is number 1 in PC market share in the US.
post #22 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougMcNerd View Post

Who are these people buying Acer & Toshiba PCs!? I've never met or known anyone that's purchased from these vendors. My company would do anything to save a penny. But, they would never consider Acer or Toshiba.

I bought my daughter a Toshiba netbook for last summer.
post #23 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by dustbag View Post

I'm of the opinion that the iPad meets the definition of a NetBook as put out there by the industry before the iPad was rumored to be on the way: A low cost, very portable, limited OS device meant for browsing the web, reading email, and light computing duty (e.g word processing, etc.).

Only when it was convenient for the pundits and Apple naysayers to do so did a NetBook become a computer to be counted in the market share numbers, to counter the phenomenal growth the Apple is seeing in laptops and desktops.

Windows 7 Starter Edition is to WIndows 7 as iPhone 3.2 is to OSX 10.6.

Take the iPad expected sales, add them to the Mac sales, and by this time next year Apple is number 1 in PC market share in the US.

Right now, an iPad isn't an independent device. It requires a computer with iTunes. So its more like a peripheral than a separate device like a netbook. That might change at some point, but not yet.
post #24 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisTheXIV View Post

Well what that chart clearly shows is how large their margins are on each computer they sell. There is simply no argument to say that Macs are not overpriced when you look at that. They objectively are massively overpriced compared to everyone else. That we as mac users decide to pay what Apple asks for is a different matter, but there is clearly no need in trying to claim that Macs are not extremely expensive machines relative to the others, and that Apple pockets that difference big time.

So what's your point? Is someone torturing you into buying a Mac, or are you a willing purchaser? If the latter, what does 'over'priced mean? That you are, willingly, a fool? That what is 'over'priced for you is also overpriced for me and everyone else?

C'mon. If something is overpriced, don't buy it. If you do, don't complain about it (unless you chose to return it).
post #25 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I bought my daughter a Toshiba netbook for last summer.

So, are we to discern you're too cheap to splurge for a Macbook, think she's too young for a Macbook or both?
post #26 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

So, are we to discern you're too cheap to splurge for a Macbook, think she's too young for a Macbook or both?

I've told this story now at least a dozen times here.

My daughter is going to the University of The Arts, London. She had to go last summer as other foreign students did, before the year started. She's a photography major. She wanted a cheap, small netbook for IM, Skype, the internet, and to listen to her iTunes collection with, as well as having a machine to plug her new, bought in London 3GS into. As going to the UK was new to her, she was afraid to take a bigger, more expensive machine then, because she was afraid she might lose it.

After she came home from the summer, and before she went back in the fall, I bought her a new 15.4" 2.80 GHz 500 GB 7200 RPM HDD MacBook Pro (matt), plus a 9 x 12 Wacom tablet, and installed CS4 on her machine, just as she has it in her 24" 3.06 GHz iMac at home.

The netbook stayed here.

I hope that answers the question.

As an addendum, the Toshiba cost, with 1 GB RAM upgrade, $479, not counting tax.
post #27 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisTheXIV View Post

Well what that chart clearly shows is how large their margins are on each computer they sell. There is simply no argument to say that Macs are not overpriced when you look at that. They objectively are massively overpriced compared to everyone else. That we as mac users decide to pay what Apple asks for is a different matter, but there is clearly no need in trying to claim that Macs are not extremely expensive machines relative to the others, and that Apple pockets that difference big time.

I'm glad Apple is not interested in becoming a bottom-feeder. Too many junk-slinging companies these days that make money from volume, not quality. Apple is starting to achieve volume by adhering to quality. I admire that.
post #28 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I've told this story now at least a dozen times here.

My daughter is going to the University of The Arts, London. She had to go last summer as other foreign students did, before the year started. She's a photography major. She wanted a cheap, small netbook for IM, Skype, the internet, and to listen to her iTunes collection with, as well as having a machine to plug her new, bought in London 3GS into. As going to the UK was new to her, she was afraid to take a bigger, more expensive machine then, because she was afraid she might lose it.

After she came home from the summer, and before she went back in the fall, I bought her a new 15.4" 2.80 GHz 500 GB 7200 RPM HDD MacBook Pro (matt), plus a 9 x 12 Wacom tablet, and installed CS4 on her machine, just as she has it in her 24" 3.06 GHz iMac at home.

The netbook stayed here.

I hope that answers the question.

As an addendum, the Toshiba cost, with 1 GB RAM upgrade, $479, not counting tax.

It's such a great story, we just can't hear it enough.
Emailing video from iPhone to Apple TV , sort of..
Reply
Emailing video from iPhone to Apple TV , sort of..
Reply
post #29 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by walshbj View Post

It's such a great story, we just can't hear it enough.

Yeah,

By the way, just as a point of interest, every time we spoke on the phone, or through Skype, she would ask me; "Dad, do you know I hate Windows?. You know I hate Windows, don't you? You know, I REALLY hate Windows!"
post #30 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Yeah,

By the way, just as a point of interest, every time we spoke on the phone, or through Skype, she would ask me; "Dad, do you know I hate Windows?. You know I hate Windows, don't you? You know, I REALLY hate Windows!"

I used to be pretty gung ho for Windows, but there is nothing about Windows 7 tempting me to go back.
Emailing video from iPhone to Apple TV , sort of..
Reply
Emailing video from iPhone to Apple TV , sort of..
Reply
post #31 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by walshbj View Post

I used to be pretty gung ho for Windows, but there is nothing about Windows 7 tempting me to go back.

She's been a Mac user since she was 2 1/2. She's now 18 1/2, so she's been using Macs longer than most people here in this forum.
post #32 of 47
your page

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ket_share.html

has estimates of 1.398M & 1.130M units shipped in 1Q10 calendar yr from Gartner &IDC respectively

whereas your page FROM THE SAME DAY:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...mac_sales.html

has estimates of 2.9m (believe you mean M) & 3.1million Mac sales from Piper-Jaffrey's Munster & Caris' Robert Chira respectively for the 2q10 fiscal

since 1Q10 calendar roughly equates to 2Q10 fiscal, how can you justify two articles in the SAME DAY with conflicting numbers - with one set being 2-3x larger than the other set!!!!!
post #33 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by netfoolin View Post

your page

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ket_share.html

has estimates of 1.398M & 1.130M units shipped in 1Q10 calendar yr from Gartner &IDC respectively

whereas your page FROM THE SAME DAY:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...mac_sales.html

has estimates of 2.9m (believe you mean M) & 3.1million Mac sales from Piper-Jaffrey's Munster & Caris' Robert Chira respectively for the 2q10 fiscal

since 1Q10 calendar roughly equates to 2Q10 fiscal, how can you justify two articles in the SAME DAY with conflicting numbers - with one set being 2-3x larger than the other set!!!!!

What's conflicting? It looks like one article is reporting on estimates from two different firms. These aren't AppleInsider's estimates.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #34 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by BC Kelly View Post

.

Believe this article and statistics relate to "personal computers ...

Also is about as personal of a personal computer as personal computers can get...

So let's Get Realâ„¢ about our definitions and include iPhone...

Ergo - add in iPhone's 8,700,000 sales last quarter (number via Wiki) ...

And believe that puts them at #1

Oh yea - and here comes the iPad

BC

Even Apple would not agree with your definition. It separates its "computers" revenues from its iPod, iPhone revenues.

If you add those beyong what are technically defined as computers, to include smart phones, other mobile computing devices,,, then the players would change to include phone companies ,,, Nokia, RIMM, HTC, LG, Samsung, etc. Even cars are operated by much simpler computers these days.

It will muddy the waters.

There;s a reason why Apple dropped the "Computer" in "Apple Computer". Apple no longer considers itself solely as computer company.

Steve Jobs (S)) bragged Apple as the largest mobile computing company ... mainly because of its increasing mobile computing devices, i.e., the iPhone OS devices -- iPhone, iPod Touch and starting this year iPad. Apple may indeed become the largest mobile computing device in the near future, but when SJ claimed Apple is the largest mobile computing company in the world -- based on its estimated annual revenue -- it is questionable.

As of the end of 2009, Apple computers (not mobile computers) still comprise almost a third of its gross revenues. This may change this year because of increasing sales of its mobile computing devices.

One other thing:

Quote:
Originally Posted by BC Kelly View Post

Ergo - add in iPhone's 8,700,000 sales last quarter (number via Wiki) ...

Your numbers more than likely include total world sales, not US sales. The article refers only to US sales.

Apple need not be #1, in terms of unit sales. It can be a viable company and a very profitable company provided Apple is perceived to have high end quality products, just like Mercedez, BMW, Nordstrom, etc.

Apple these days though is attempting to be both the market leader in the new fields it entered by being the trailblazer, the game changer and still maintain its aura of high quality and its advantage in ease of use. In fact, Apple has even shown that it can be price competitive -- iPod, iPhone and more than likely the iPad -- in response to competing company market strategies.

CGC
post #35 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I'd love to see the revenue, operating profit and net profit from these vendors. This Business Week chart from 23-MAR-2010 shows that Apple is the market leader.



Netbooks are counted as PCs. Rightly so, but it does skew the unit sales until you look at more valuable data like revenue, profit and average price per unit.. That shows that unit sales are a pointless metric unless qualified.

In retail merchandising, the profit margin of Walmart may be much lower than Target. I am making this up, but if the volume sales per unit area is higher for Walmart vs Target, then in this area of business, Walmart is more profitable than Target, In fact, the number of Walmart stores is more than Target so that the total profit of Walmart is greater than Target,

In this sense, the total unit sales matter. Thus, while it is true that

Quote:
...shows that unit sales are a pointless metric unless qualified.

the table itself in the article was about ranking based on gross revenue. Now, if you rank them based on gross income of the computer component, do the math and HP and Dell still rank higher than Apple.

However, Apple only gets about a third of its sales from computers as of 2009. This year computers may account for even less of Apple's gross revenue; and decreasing, in the future.

The aforementioned trend in revenue sources is the reason why Apple dropped "Computers" in "Apple Computers".

This diversification in sources of revenue is one of the reasons why Apple is more stable than Dell. Further, the perceived higher quality and ease of use of Apple products make them more desirable, especially among those who can afford them.

Ergo, the higher profit margin of Apple products. With higher profit margin, Apple had more price elasticity, and it used this several times to drop its prices, for the iPhone, iPods to thwart the competition, or respond to economic hardship (i.e., drop in prices of its computers in 2009).

These qualitative advantages are among reasons why Apple need not be the leader in terms of total unit sales and why Apple was able to amass more than $40 billion "cash reserve" with no debt; I believe the highest among any company in the world. This cash reserve is in itself a weapon that Apple has used to its advantage.

The aforementioned advantages created an Apple that was almost recession proof Apple in 2009, while most tech companies experienced drop in sales and profit, or even a net income loss.

In this aense, Apple need not be the leader in total unit sales (as is the case with its computer products) and still be commercial company. It thrived when all these years, even if it had only 3% of the market, much like high end companies, e.g., Mercedes, BMW, etc., are well-managed, and have higher profit margin.

There is a price to pay though when you are smaller, especially in technology where the company is dependent on the products of other companies. Apple and its customers knew this too well.

A much better situation is a company with a higher profit margin (for reasons stated above) and the market leader in unit sales. The new Apple is trying to achieve this.

CGC
post #36 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

My daughter is going to the University of The Arts, London. She had to go last summer as other foreign students did, before the year started. She's a photography major. She wanted a cheap, small netbook for IM, Skype, the internet, and to listen to her iTunes collection with, as well as having a machine to plug her new, bought in London 3GS into. As going to the UK was new to her, she was afraid to take a bigger, more expensive machine then, because she was afraid she might lose it.

You're responsible for importing Windows netbooks into London? As if we don't have enough pollution here already!

post #37 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreyfus2 View Post

That is certainly one way to look at it, but how do we subtract the thousands of Dell and HP PCs in enterprises that are only used as clients, only being satellite devices to a server/mainframe? Does it make sense to ignore a $829 computing device (yes, it is personal and yes, it is a computer), when there are $200 netbooks included in the list that can barely surf the Web or play back video as well as the iPad (not true for all netbooks, but there are definitely a few that would lose here)?

It is an interesting question and I do not know the answer, but I am not sure that the case is anywhere that clear.

You don't.

We just double the numbers for each Mac sold. After all, it can be used as a PC at the same time. Seems fair to me.
post #38 of 47
So we all know how all the pundits (and other "movers and shakers") have at various times demanded to know what keeps Apple going. In that light a quick, movie quote based review of the top mortality quotes about Apple:

a frustrated Freddy "Steve Ballmer" Krueger asks Jason "Apple": "Why won't you DIE?"

"Michael Dell" Janus: Why can't you just be a good boy and die?
Bond/Jobs: You first.

Hugo "Thurrott" Drax, (with a side of How Many Times Must I Kill You):
"Mr. Bond, you persist in defying my efforts to provide an amusing death for you."

"Enderle"Creedy asking V/Apple "Why won't you die! Why won't you die!" after V/Apple massacres him and his men despite having been shot dozens of times. Apple: "Because beneath this mask there is more than flesh, there is an idea. And ideas are bullet proof."

Cramer/Jafar to Aladdin/Apple: "How many time do I have to kill you boy??!!"




Doesn't this reflect on the continued frustration brought to this forum by so many contra-commenters like SpotOn, TechStud, et al?
post #39 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post

In retail merchandising, the profit margin of Walmart may be much lower than Target. I am making this up, but if the volume sales per unit area is higher for Walmart vs Target, then in this area of business, Walmart is more profitable than Target, In fact, the number of Walmart stores is more than Target so that the total profit of Walmart is greater than Target,

In this sense, the total unit sales matter. Thus, while it is true that



the table itself in the article was about ranking based on gross revenue. Now, if you rank them based on gross income of the computer component, do the math and HP and Dell still rank higher than Apple.

However, Apple only gets about a third of its sales from computers as of 2009. This year computers may account for even less of Apple's gross revenue; and decreasing, in the future.

The aforementioned trend in revenue sources is the reason why Apple dropped "Computers" in "Apple Computers".

This diversification in sources of revenue is one of the reasons why Apple is more stable than Dell. Further, the perceived higher quality and ease of use of Apple products make them more desirable, especially among those who can afford them.

Ergo, the higher profit margin of Apple products. With higher profit margin, Apple had more price elasticity, and it used this several times to drop its prices, for the iPhone, iPods to thwart the competition, or respond to economic hardship (i.e., drop in prices of its computers in 2009).

These qualitative advantages are among reasons why Apple need not be the leader in terms of total unit sales and why Apple was able to amass more than $40 billion "cash reserve" with no debt; I believe the highest among any company in the world. This cash reserve is in itself a weapon that Apple has used to its advantage.

The aforementioned advantages created an Apple that was almost recession proof Apple in 2009, while most tech companies experienced drop in sales and profit, or even a net income loss.

In this aense, Apple need not be the leader in total unit sales (as is the case with its computer products) and still be commercial company. It thrived when all these years, even if it had only 3% of the market, much like high end companies, e.g., Mercedes, BMW, etc., are well-managed, and have higher profit margin.

There is a price to pay though when you are smaller, especially in technology where the company is dependent on the products of other companies. Apple and its customers knew this too well.

A much better situation is a company with a higher profit margin (for reasons stated above) and the market leader in unit sales. The new Apple is trying to achieve this.

CGC

If in fact these numbers also do not separate out HP's other lines, like Printers & All-in-ones, Ink, Toner & Paper, Monitors, Accessories & Software, Scanners, Handhelds, Calculators, Storage devices, Home Media Servers and of course services for the devices. And you have to consider HPs other services for the enterprise: warranty servicing, application services, business process and infrastructure outsourcing, support center operations and leasing/financing.

Dell largely mirrors this same product and service delivery portfolio as well - we use both in our infrastructure operations. You are looking only at the consumer side of these companies. By not taking into account the enterprise deliverables you miss out on significant profit centers for both Dell and HP. But by rights, this discussion should only be about profitability in the desktop/notebook markets based on the article.
post #40 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I bought my daughter a Toshiba netbook for last summer.

How is it working out for her? Why a Toshiba?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple sells estimated 1.4M Macs in US to capture 8% market share