or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Neeham sees Macs capturing 8.3% PC share by 2016
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Neeham sees Macs capturing 8.3% PC share by 2016

post #1 of 102
Thread Starter 
Needham & Co.'s Charles Wolf has joined the ranks of several other Wall Street analysts who recently boosted their outlook on Apple Computer, raising his 12-month price target on the company's shares to $115.

Following a survey that measured the impact of the Mac's ability to run Windows applications on the switch rate of Windows users, the analyst in June upgraded shares of Apple to a buy rating with a price target of $90.

"Subsequent events, most importantly stronger than anticipated growth in Mac shipments in June and September, indicate that our interpretation of the survey results that triggered our upgrade was conservative," he told clients in a research note issued Thursday morning.

Wolf said his new price target of $115 is based on a" more realistic reading of the switch rates among Windows users" that should ensue from the Macs ability to run Windows applications through Boot Camp under the upcoming Leopard operating system.

"We effectively assumed that no Windows users would switch in the absence of the Macs ability to run Windows," the analyst said of his survey analysis back in June. "Even then, our $90 price target was almost 60 percent higher than Apples share price at the time."

Wolf told clients he had not expected Apple's stock price to reach his $90 target until the company introduced Mac OS 10.5 featuring Boot Camp in the spring of 2007, but acknowledged that two quarters of upside revenue and earnings surprises helped it achieve the milestone much faster than he could have predicted.

"A key reason for the upside was stronger than anticipated Mac sales," he wrote. "Evidence that Windows switchers played an important role in the growth of Mac sales even before the introduction of Boot Camp indicated that our previous assumption -- that no Windows users would switch to a Mac in the absence of its ability to run Windows -- was unrealistic."

Under the analyst's revised valuation model, he employs the actual mean switch rates of Windows users rather than the increase in the mean switch rates. He assumed that the only Windows users who switched were those in the U.S. and European home markets -- which represent about 20 percent of the worldwide PC market.

"Our forecast has Apples share of these two markets increasing dramatically -- from 9 percent in 2006 to over 40 percent in 2016," he told clients. "A significant portion of the increase results from our plausible assumption that once they switch, a high percentage of Windows users will stay with the Mac platform when they subsequently upgrade."

Still, Wolf noted that only a third of Mac sales are generated in the U.S. and European home markets, adding that its likely the Windows-on-Mac effect will invade other segments of the worldwide market, most notably education and the small and medium business markets.

"A more accurate measure, then, of the iPod halo and Windows-on-Mac phenomena is Apples share of the worldwide PC market," he wrote. "This increases more realistically from 3.5 percent in 2007 to 8.3 percent in 2016, the last year in our forecast."
post #2 of 102
Buried in the article is the assertion that by 2016, Apple will have 40% of the US and European home markets. That's pretty huge, and means good things for software availability.
post #3 of 102
When Apple is at $114.00 in 12 months, and 8.1 % share in 2016 analysts will bash the company mercilessly for missing projections and targets.

This will drive the stock price down and fuel further rounds of pump and dump.
post #4 of 102
An increase in Mac market share is to be welcomed. But a 5.5% increase over 10 years seems disappointing to me. I thought there was supposed to be a tipping point, where total Mac sales would accelerate exponentially as potential developers and buyers realised it was gaining popularity, and joined the party. Does this not come into the estimate at all?
"If you put your mind to it, you can accomplish anything" Robert Zemeckis/Bob Gale/Robert_E._Lee
Reply
"If you put your mind to it, you can accomplish anything" Robert Zemeckis/Bob Gale/Robert_E._Lee
Reply
post #5 of 102
Based on the fact that MS and the PC platform have over ~95% of the market and that Apple has ~5% of the market, it can only go downhill for MS and the PC platform and uphill for Apple (well...it could go downhill for Apple but Apple has certainly made a comeback since Gil Amelio's departure.

While MS and the PC platform are in their mature stage (or even declining stage) in terms of product life cycle, Apple is still in its infancy. Apple's products are still new...even though Apple is *the* oldest personal computer maker in history (started in the mid-70s and still ticking today)...and a lot of people are just now discovering Macs (even though they may have seen them in schools or had a quick glance at one at one time in their lives).

Apple has all the chance in the world to grow. A part of me, however, hopes Apple will never try to grab more than 20% of the market.

More market share means more developers. More developers means there will undoubtedly be a lot of crappy developers. More users means there will undoubtedly be people encourage the crappy developers by buying their products. Adware will surely be around the corner, etc.

Apple will have to walk the fine line...enough market share to entice the good developers to develop for Mac but not enough to make the adware makers to switch.
post #6 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobius

An increase in Mac market share is to be welcomed. But a 5.5% increase over 10 years seems disappointing to me.

Looks positive to me if you base it on the what I've said in my previous post.
post #7 of 102
The assumption that a giant monolithic corporation is here for ever just isn't a safe bet.

People confuse MS with PCs. PCs can run other OS such as Linux and I suspect they will more and more at corporate and government levels in the years to come.

I have two names for MS to think about and there are many others.... TWA and PANAM.

A Poor OS and Office ... that's about it. Easily replaced. That current 95% could be 0% by 2016. I am not saying Mac will replace that but along with Linux it could well be way higher than 8-9%.

I can but hope
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #8 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider

... in the U.S. and European home markets ..."Our forecast has Apples share ...increasing dramatically -- from 9 percent in 2006 to over 40 percent in 2016,"

now THAT is a headline-grabber. but i also think it's rubbish: anyone who thinks they can anticipate the changes in the computer market 10 years out is deluding himself.
post #9 of 102
I would not put too much faith in a long term projection about market share. Who knows Linux might have 60% of the OS usage by 2016. For all we know VIA will control the CPU market and Nvidia will be gone by 2016! I consider this article garbage.

Based on Apple's rejection to embrace new tech I don't see them growing fast until they redo their hardware restrictions. Let's not forget the Mac's are PC's therefore Apple needs to use the best hardware on the market and stop telling us what is good enough.
post #10 of 102
It is so obvious that Apple will capture an 8.4% marketshare by 2016. Some of us "Apple fanbois" actually predict that we will get has high as 8.415%!!!

Seriously, anyone who thinks they can predict what Apple's market share will be in 9 years with an accuracy better than, say, +/- 5% is so pretentious as to be unbelievable.

Nine years ago, Apple was "beleaguered" under the jackboot of the Gil Amelio junta. Who can say where Apple will be nine years from now!?
post #11 of 102
Make a few tweaks in the product line and I could see Apple at 10% my the end of 2007.
post #12 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol

Based on the fact that MS and the PC platform have over ~95% of the market and that Apple has ~5% of the market, it can only go downhill for MS and the PC platform and uphill for Apple (well...it could go downhill for Apple but Apple has certainly made a comeback since Gil Amelio's departure.

While MS and the PC platform are in their mature stage (or even declining stage) in terms of product life cycle, Apple is still in its infancy. Apple's products are still new...even though Apple is *the* oldest personal computer maker in history (started in the mid-70s and still ticking today)...and a lot of people are just now discovering Macs (even though they may have seen them in schools or had a quick glance at one at one time in their lives).

Apple has all the chance in the world to grow. A part of me, however, hopes Apple will never try to grab more than 20% of the market.

More market share means more developers. More developers means there will undoubtedly be a lot of crappy developers. More users means there will undoubtedly be people encourage the crappy developers by buying their products. Adware will surely be around the corner, etc.

Apple will have to walk the fine line...enough market share to entice the good developers to develop for Mac but not enough to make the adware makers to switch.

good post, but I do think 8.4% is too low for 10 years. Specially if Apple keeps introducing more breakthrough products. I would say at least 12 to 15% in 10 years. But I do agree with you. too much market share might not be the best thing for us consumers. I rather have Apple stay in this level so we can enjoy a better quality control for software and hardware and third part vendors as well.
MacPro 12 core
30" & 23" Apple Cinema HD Displays
PowerBook G4 550, MacBook Pro 2.2
Ipod 1G and 5G, Shuffle 2G, iPhone 3G
Reply
MacPro 12 core
30" & 23" Apple Cinema HD Displays
PowerBook G4 550, MacBook Pro 2.2
Ipod 1G and 5G, Shuffle 2G, iPhone 3G
Reply
post #13 of 102
Apple has a 33% share in my home. Soon it will climb to 66% with a purchase of an iMac.

I think the estimate is conservative. I know a lot of Windows folks having been in Windows-based development for 10 years, and more than a few are considering jumping ship, mainly due to my reasons why I like OS X more than Windows. I guess I've become a bit of an OS X evangelist in my group of friends.
post #14 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booga

Buried in the article is the assertion that by 2016, Apple will have 40% of the US and European home markets. That's pretty huge, and means good things for software availability.

That's the real prediction right there, and perfectly reasonable IMHO.
post #15 of 102
In the new year macs will have 75% share in my home and probably a year or two after that 100%. Bootcamp has helped immensly and well as opera's mask as internet explorer believe it or not.

Macs having 8.3% pc share by 2016 isn't so bad because less populated cities most likely don't have homes with multiple home computers anyways, it's the big urban centers that you already see macs in that you'll the numbers multiply. Apple would probably have to do something more to capture that market. But then again that's not a high profit market anyways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Three personal attacks in one post. Congratulations.
Date the ban will be lifted:...
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleinsider vBulletin Message

You have been banned for the following reason:
Three personal attacks in one post. Congratulations.
Date the ban will be lifted:...
Reply
post #16 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobius

An increase in Mac market share is to be welcomed. But a 5.5% increase over 10 years seems disappointing to me. I thought there was supposed to be a tipping point, where total Mac sales would accelerate exponentially as potential developers and buyers realised it was gaining popularity, and joined the party. Does this not come into the estimate at all?

Isn't that a figure for the worldwide market though? Apple has had less than 2% of the worldwide market for a long time, 8% would be a quadrupling.
post #17 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig

Make a few tweaks in the product line and I could see Apple at 10% my the end of 2007.

They can barely keep up with demand now. Apple can't ramp-up production that quickly.
post #18 of 102
The article: some schmuck just learned how to use a spreadsheet! For starters, claiming there were no switchers before boot camp and Intel is just stupid. I, and every Mac user I know in this neck of the woods, used Windows in the 90's and switched for OS X. Not one of us has bought non Apple machines since.

And the comments: don't worry about Apple getting overwhelming market share folks. Apple make the mistake of not selling crap! To really dominate, you've got to go low low low. Bendy case, creaky key caps, last generation's processor dressed as lamb kind of low. The Mac, the Mac OS and all of us won't be dumped into Windows' current position because we're just not the same thing and Apple will always be like this.

Apple just don't sell eWaste and don't duke it out at the low end. Never ever have done, even in the years while Jobs was away, and I frankly can't see them ever doing it.

Adware and all of that crud you have to wade through with a hazmat suit when using Windows is a symptom of the key to Windows and the generic platform's success. Cheap people buy it and cheap people are willing to waste their hour trying to save the next cent. Even a top of the range hardware buyer who goes Windows has to put up with the consequences of this. There's a cultural difference to Apple's stuff and Apple's users. Anyone fancying a flame is first directed here to a nice post by John Gruber on the same point two years ago:

http://daringfireball.net/2004/06/broken_windows
post #19 of 102
So in the same article the guy explains that he could not make an accurate prediction in a 6 months timeframe, and then makes a 10 year prediction. Whaaaa?
post #20 of 102
This guy is WAY off. It will be 10% by 2010.
post #21 of 102
Apple will have 16.7% marketshare by 2016. Now I am an analyst too.

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply
post #22 of 102
Not even close, you guys. Apple will have 0.016% marketshare by 2016.

Edit: Dammit, has John Dvorak been hacking my account here again?
post #23 of 102
I'm not a big fan of sweeping & irrelevant figures. I'd like to see consumer market share figures from the segment of the market that applies to me.

Global market share figures are corrupted by 'safe' decisions of self-serving IT departments in large corps/government departments rollinging out new XP/Vista-capable (rather than business-capable) systems so they can build bloated IT support departments. I even heard that Macs were excluded from an entire public sector market area (can't recall if US or Canada) because they couldn't run a windows anti-virus product! With nonsense like that skewing figures I'm with Fuyutsuki. Maybe 8% marketshare isn't so bad as it's the majority of the relevant market sector (the upper 10%)

McD (commence firing!)
Android proves (as Windows & VHS did before it) that if you want to control people, give us choices and the belief we're capable of making them. We're all 'living' the American dream.
Reply
Android proves (as Windows & VHS did before it) that if you want to control people, give us choices and the belief we're capable of making them. We're all 'living' the American dream.
Reply
post #24 of 102
Nutty prediction. A lot can happen in 10 years. Look at the last 10. Look at the 10 before it. Apple could be out of the computer hardware business (probably not) or dominating the market (probably not) in ten years.
What's the frequency, Kenneth?
Reply
What's the frequency, Kenneth?
Reply
post #25 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobius

An increase in Mac market share is to be welcomed. But a 5.5% increase over 10 years seems disappointing to me. I thought there was supposed to be a tipping point, where total Mac sales would accelerate exponentially as potential developers and buyers realised it was gaining popularity, and joined the party. Does this not come into the estimate at all?

Apple now has less than 3% world share. to go to 8.3% is a huge increase. While all of us would like to see it even higher, there is no reason to think that an exponential increase will ever be realistic. Why would that happen? There is no reason for it.
post #26 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by macFanDave

It is so obvious that Apple will capture an 8.4% marketshare by 2016. Some of us "Apple fanbois" actually predict that we will get has high as 8.415%!!!

Seriously, anyone who thinks they can predict what Apple's market share will be in 9 years with an accuracy better than, say, +/- 5% is so pretentious as to be unbelievable.

Nine years ago, Apple was "beleaguered" under the jackboot of the Gil Amelio junta. Who can say where Apple will be nine years from now!?

Don't blame Amelio. That is an easy statement to make without knowing what really happened. Without what Amelio did, Apple wouldn't be here today. Don;t forget that under Jobs, for years, Apple's sales and profits went down, and its marketshare dwindled. Only three years ago did it teverse, and I often wonder if Jobs and company didn't just stumble into it.

Remember, Next was a failing company. If Amelio didn't choose to buy it, Jobs would have been out of a, er, job.
post #27 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig

Make a few tweaks in the product line and I could see Apple at 10% my the end of 2007.

That would be 10% US marketshare. Maybe sometime in 2008.
post #28 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

Apple now has less than 3% world share. to go to 8.3% is a huge increase. While all of us would like to see it even higher, there is no reason to think that an exponential increase will ever be realistic. Why would that happen? There is no reason for it.

QFT

Changing the ratio of marketshare at this point is sort of like trying to change the salinity of the ocean. You can dump a lot of salt in there before you start to make a dent.

OTOH, salt vendors can do quite well for themselves even if the salinity is very slow to change, because the ocean can absorb a lot of salt.

OK, this is a barely serviceable metaphor, I admit it.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #29 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobius

An increase in Mac market share is to be welcomed. But a 5.5% increase over 10 years seems disappointing to me. I thought there was supposed to be a tipping point, where total Mac sales would accelerate exponentially as potential developers and buyers realised it was gaining popularity, and joined the party. Does this not come into the estimate at all?

I guess not, as the quote text below reveals that they never considered "switchers" using the beta version of BootCamp despite the reason for BootCamp's early release was due to a hack job (with hefty reward) because a guy convinced his boss that Windows would run on an Intel Mac.

"A key reason for the upside was stronger than anticipated Mac sales," he wrote. "Evidence that Windows switchers played an important role in the growth of Mac sales even before the introduction of Boot Camp indicated that our previous assumption -- that no Windows users would switch to a Mac in the absence of its ability to run Windows -- was unrealistic."

It wasn't unrealistic, the ability was there since last February!
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 #30 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

Apple now has less than 3% world share. to go to 8.3% is a huge increase. While all of us would like to see it even higher, there is no reason to think that an exponential increase will ever be realistic. Why would that happen? There is no reason for it.

Words like 'exponential' and 'obsolete' often bother me as I don't think anyone expects Apple sales to litterly start doubling like processor speeds did in the past, but I do think that there will be a steamrolling effect with Apple computer sales as more and more people start to know more people with Macs and, subsequrntly, start to really notice the benefit of OS X, the Mac's bundled software and knowing they can still run Windows if they desire.

The "I've heard Macs a re better but I don't understood why/how" will no longer linger.
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 #31 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM

Isn't that a figure for the worldwide market though? Apple has had less than 2% of the worldwide market for a long time, 8% would be a quadrupling.

Yes, exactly.

I'm not quite sure what people here are thinking. An 8.3 % world marketshare would put Apple up at the yop of the heap. It would bring them equal with where Dell and Hp are now. It would also take a percent or two away from them. That would be a great achievement. What has to be considered is that the computer market rises about 10% every year. It isn't static. Apple's marketshare has to rise several times as fast every year.

To reach 8.3% in 2016 would mean that Apple would be selling 30 million machines a year, or more! That would be up from 5.3 million this past year. That's going by the worldwide sales number this year of over 210 million computers, with yearly increases from that.
post #32 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox

QFT

Changing the ratio of marketshare at this point is sort of like trying to change the salinity of the ocean. You can dump a lot of salt in there before you start to make a dent.

OTOH, salt vendors can do quite well for themselves even if the salinity is very slow to change, because the ocean can absorb a lot of salt.

OK, this is a barely serviceable metaphor, I admit it.

Not really. It's almost a perfect metaphor.

When you are just a pinch of salt, another pinch will double the salinity. When you are near saturation, another pinch will make almost no difference.

For MS, they are near saturation, as are the collective PC makers. The ocean is increasing slightly each year, say, because the glaciers are melting (how's that?). But Apple is just that pinch.

But, as Apple raises their portion, it takes much more than a pinch to make more of a difference.

Once one gets to 50%, the equation changes again. It now becomes easier to increase percentages, because it takes less each time to cover the remaining portion.

This means that MS and the PC companies have to do far less to stay where they are, and Apple has to to far more to increase what they have.

Apple has to increase their sales at least 10% a year just to stay at the marketshare they are currently at.

With their tiny marketshare, less than 3% worldwide, their sales have to go up drastically to have much of an effect.
post #33 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism

Words like 'exponential' and 'obsolete' often bother me as I don't think anyone expects Apple sales to litterly start doubling like processor speeds did in the past, but I do think that there will be a steamrolling effect with Apple computer sales as more and more people start to know more people with Macs and, subsequrntly, start to really notice the benefit of OS X, the Mac's bundled software and knowing they can still run Windows if they desire.

The "I've heard Macs a re better but I don't understood why/how" will no longer linger.

Some people here do. It's totally unrealistic.

One problem is that Apple is one company. They are competing against an ecology of PC makers, and MS.

Many companies, and governments, simply won't buy, big time, into Apple, because they are a single source.

I know that he is speaking of the home markets (and possibly schools), but without the business and governmental markets as well, there is only so far that Apple can go.

I really do believe that at some point in time, Apple will again license their OS, but will maintain far greater control over how it is done, perhaps only having one or two companies make machines for it, and only under specified conditions. Restricting machines to catagories that Apple doesn't sell into would be effective now.

This is made possible if Apple continues a successful iPod and software business, and also has a sucessful one in phones, and other areas. This would decrease the cpu portion of the business, even though it would be growing at a good rate. That would allow them to do licensing, and significantly increase the OS and software sales to more than offset the loss of some hardware business.

It's possible that Apple could sell several copies of the OS to those cpu makers for every one loss in sales they have, as well as more of their software. As software has profits up to 80%, this would result in more profit at little loss in total sales. Eventually, it could result in increased sales as well.
post #34 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

Remember, Next was a failing company. If Amelio didn't choose to buy it, Jobs would have been out of a, er, job.

Meh, Jobs was already swimming in cash from Pixar by then. I think he would have kept writing checks to keep it alive.
post #35 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacCentric

Meh, Jobs was already swimming in cash from Pixar by then. I think he would have kept writing checks to keep it alive.

No, he wasn't. Pixar was a very small company for years. It was only about the time that NEXT was bought by Amelio, that Pixar began to do well with Toy Story.
post #36 of 102
Quote:
I'm not quite sure what people here are thinking. An 8.3 % world marketshare would put Apple up at the yop of the heap.

In these market share charts Microsofts share is included with Dell, HP, and Gateways share.

If you took Windows out, Dell's market share in the US would be around 15.5%, HP would be around 9.5% and Gateway around 3%.

Those companies only make the hardware, while Apple is the only company that can account for both OS and hardware.
post #37 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

Don't blame Amelio. That is an easy statement to make without knowing what really happened. Without what Amelio did, Apple wouldn't be here today. Don;t forget that under Jobs, for years, Apple's sales and profits went down, and its marketshare dwindled. Only three years ago did it teverse, and I often wonder if Jobs and company didn't just stumble into it.

Remember, Next was a failing company. If Amelio didn't choose to buy it, Jobs would have been out of a, er, job.

Amelio took a cookie cutter aproach to solving the problem he inherited - he cut spending. He laid off a bunch of people and froze everyone's salary. He did this as he wrote off a bunch of inventory ($1 billion pre-tax loss) then made a fat bonus as he turned a slight profit the next quarter. He also paid himself well whenever he flew himself around in his private jet. Employees hated him especially since he hate how engineers dressed in t-shirt and shorts. As the top guy, he bears the responsibility for everything thus he was fired.

Jobs blamed Amelio because he sold all his shares of Apple. Ironic that he turned the company around by buying Next and bringing back Jobs.
post #38 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mkane

I would not put too much faith in a long term projection about market share. Who knows Linux might have 60% of the OS usage by 2016. For all we know VIA will control the CPU market and Nvidia will be gone by 2016! I consider this article garbage.

Based on Apple's rejection to embrace new tech I don't see them growing fast until they redo their hardware restrictions. Let's not forget the Mac's are PC's therefore Apple needs to use the best hardware on the market and stop telling us what is good enough.

On the contrary, the faster and more powerful computers get, the less it matters what's inside. For what the average person does most computers are overkill.
post #39 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell

In these market share charts Microsofts share is included with Dell, HP, and Gateways share.

If you took Windows out, Dell's market share in the US would be around 15.5%, HP would be around 9.5% and Gateway around 3%.

Those companies only make the hardware, while Apple is the only company that can account for both OS and hardware.

MS doesn't have hardware marketshare, to be sure. It's the partnership I was illustrating. I thought that was understood.
post #40 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by pt123

Amelio took a cookie cutter aproach to solving the problem he inherited - he cut spending. He laid off a bunch of people and froze everyone's salary. He did this as he wrote off a bunch of inventory ($1 billion pre-tax loss) then made a fat bonus as he turned a slight profit the next quarter. He also paid himself well whenever he flew himself around in his private jet. Employees hated him especially since he hate how engineers dressed in t-shirt and shorts. As the top guy, he bears the responsibility for everything thus he was fired.

Jobs blamed Amelio because he sold all his shares of Apple. Ironic that he turned the company around by buying Next and bringing back Jobs.

That's a very simplistic version of what went on. It seems popular here.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Neeham sees Macs capturing 8.3% PC share by 2016