Fair point, but I was talking about unit sales, not market share. If the Mac grows market share by 1%, that 1% has to come out of the Windows market share. That much we know. The point I was making is that PC unit sales have been increasing at low single digit rates for several years now, while Mac unit sales have been increasing at double-digit rates. The difference is quite dramatic.
That is true, but remember that it?s easier to increase dramatically when you are coming from the bottom. Acer and Toshiba?s growth isn?t sustainable. I am more impressed with HP?s continued growth (at what seems at the expense of Dell) of 3.2% when they already have one quarter of all sales.
Again TeckDud, fyi ... sales growth absolutely does not automatically equate to success ... does acer make as much profit as Apple? If I sell 1 computer and make 500.00 profit and you sell 4 computers and make 100.00 on each are you a more profitable company than me? HINT 4x100.00=400.00, 500.00 is bigger than 400.00 ... I can't dumb it down any further for you ....Sorry.
Acer maybe gaining units sold but profit and revenue are falling...
That is true, but remember that it?s easier to increase dramatically when you are coming from the bottom. Acer and Toshiba?s growth isn?t sustainable. I am more impressed with HP?s continued growth (at what seems at the expense of Dell) of 3.2% when they already have one quarter of all sales.
HP does seem to be growing mainly at the expense of Dell. This has been going on for a few quarters at least, so it has the look of a trend. But I don't buy the idea that Apple is growing "from the bottom." Their YoY unit growth has been at double-digit rates for several years now, which is impressive no matter where they started. Any company, especially in the PC industry, would be delighted by those results.
But I don't buy the idea that Apple is growing "from the bottom.?
You misundertand. Apple toward the bottom, HP on top. For example, Apple increase YoY sales by 170k units while HP increased YoY unit sales by 140k. That isn?t much of a difference but Apple?s percentage of growth is much higher. It?s percentages and the lower you are the less units you have to sell increase your percentage of growth.
So really Apple's growth was really just the whole market bouncing back from recession this time last year, I love how Apple Insider paint this to be some kind of triumph ! Acer managed a rise of 24%
Really these are not great numbers for Apple, not bad certainly but not the never-ending growth in market share people were expecting, the real truth is without the iPod or the iPhone Apple's computer line would not be making them very much profit.
The entire PC's industrie's sales are still down, not up. What's happening is that the various PC manufacturers are exchanging sales numbers. Dell, a bigger manufacturer than ACER is down almost 14% in sales this same quarter. ACERs sales growth is almost all due to netbook sales below $400, and is accompanied by lower profits and even sales, in dollars.
Meanwhile, Apple is still increasing their sales, after having one quarter near the beginning of the recession where it fell. Apple's marketshare is higher.
Well it kind of is... really. Toshiba have doubled their share in a little over a year. Forty percent growth in a relatively flat PC market must have it's reasons.
Let's just say it's part of the massive swing away from the expandable, upgradeable, consumer tower .... and leave it at that.
Where did Toshiba achieve a 40% growth? I haven't seen that.
What do I care, as a consumer, if there's little profit for a company or the other? I want the best possible product for the least possible price.
You should care. Wht happens when there are little to no profits is that companies firt shut down their R&D. Then you don't get improvements, just recycled features. Quality goes down further, and eventually, they company goes out of business.
The ones that survive are the ones that are stronger, i.e. the ones who have made a profit, and haven't competed as strongly in the race to the bottom.
Then there are fewer choices, and even less competition.
You had an exampleOn the first page for Marvin regarding 30%, not 40%, that is the figure I used for my example. What if Apple had a 30% markershare on Macs? The Teckstudian mind would whine, "Apple sux, Windows has 70%!", but an intelligent person would see that Apple would be the largest PC retailer in the world, would be selling 8-10x more product than they do now and that this achievement would come mostly at the hands of the other big box vendors. One would also see that Apple's current 33 cents per dollar of PC sales in the US would increase even farther. Despite the fact that this mythical achievement can't be done under the current business model, if it were to be, then Apple would be getting about 70 cents per dollar of every PC sold. Why even mention the OS? Especially now in 2009 when the OS is mostly now a preference in the consumer market, not a requirement? Why look at any HW sales just flip it on it's head to measure what is inconsequential to the HW sale. MS will sell a lit of Win7. There is nothig wrong with that, but it doesn't make an HP or Mac sale any more or less valid. It's a pointless metric when looking at the HW.
You have to mention the OS. Why are people buying Macs? Without the answer to that question, the rest makes no sense.
Are people solely buying Macs because of the hardware? Are they buying them solely because they can run Windows? Are they buying them solely because they want to run the Mac OS?
Yes to all of that, partly. But which is the main reason?
I think the main reason is the OS, tempered by the desire for the hardware, ameliorated by the fact that those coming from Windows can easily wean themselves off it. And a lot of new computer buyers are going straight to the Mac.
If Apple were selling the exact same machines, but had Windows instead of OS X, what would have happened? I don't think sales would be nearly as good. They would be forced to compete in the cheaper markets as well. Likely their percentage of over $1,000 sales wouldn't be 91% either, maybe 50%, possibly lower.
Ok, the number you are now stating wasn't a real sales figure, but a point to ponder in the discussion. You were saying at first, that I said that Apple had a 40% marketshare, which I never did.
My point is that I want to keep seeing these company's broken down ad they are in the chart. I was responded to in. This forum that these individual companies success and failures in the PC HW sales are pointless. That they he lumped into a big group of Windows vs. OS X based on their OS business the non-Mac PC companies can easily swap customers around that are using the same OS. This I find disengenuous and it does nothing to assist me in seeing which of these companies are growing and which are shrinking.
But you're talking about something completely different (as Monty Python used to say).
We're interested in how Apple is doing compared to the Windows PC market, to see whether Apple is making progress in selling OS X machines to that market.
You are talking about being interested in how individual companies are doing.
Back in 1997 Windows had a similar market share to today. 95-96% plus.
For the next six or seven years continued to go... up.
It never went up by more than another couple of points before beginning to fall.
So the time you mention wasn't the peak at all.
Of course, the only reason why it got to that level was because Apple had a very bad decision made in late 1995 that caused their 10% US marketshare to fall dramatically to 2.5% over the next five or six years. That is, while the rest of the industry was growing at a good rate because of the millennium date problem as companies and governments around the world bought new machines at great rates, Apple's sales fell a bit, and didn't rise appreciably for years, until about six years ago.
Back then, the US also had at least a 50% world marketshare. Today, that's about 25% or so.
But you're talking about something completely different (as Monty Python used to say).
We're interested in how Apple is doing compared to the Windows PC market, to see whether Apple is making progress in selling OS X machines to that market.
You are talking about being interested in how individual companies are doing.
Two different points of focus.
If you want to focus on that point, go ahead, but this article is about PC HW sales and each company should be counted individually as they are in the article and the charts, not as a lump some of "Mac PC vs. non-Mac PCs”. In another article they can address how Macs are stealing Windows users, which is true. But we also need to understand that Apple only sells their OS to go with their PCs and note the very different business models between MS and Apple, thus we can’t expect to see Apple with a 30% or 50% or 95% of the OS marketshare without also having those numbers in the PC marketshare so long as they maintain their current business model. Each has their place and each is not without it’s pros and cons.
Where did Toshiba achieve a 40% growth? I haven't seen that.
IDC Toshiba US growth : 37.4%
Gartner Toshiba US growth : 45.8%
Yes I realise that Toshiba were starting at the low end of the sales spectrum, but that's over 10 times better than the industry's growth. They must be performing better for a reason.
I figured that was interesting and thought that some of the US based posters, here, might be able to shed some light. I was mistaken.
Also, a little surprised that you, Mel, are going to quibble about figures that are part of the original story.
It never went up by more than another couple of points before beginning to fall.
It still went up! And it continued that rise for a number of years. In relation the "the old adage" the reasons for that downturn is irrelevant.
Quote:
So the time you mention wasn't the peak at all.
I didn't say that the Windows share was at the top. I said it was "it had a similar market share to today"
In this time scale that we are discussing, Windows share mostly rose because of Apple's mistakes. Then that share fell, mostly due to Apple correcting their mistakes.
Whatever date and % figure you want to put on Windows' "peak" can only be made retrospectively. If Apple hadn't got their act together then that peak would have been even higher.
So perhaps we should change the old adage from "'when you are at the top there is only one way to go--down" to.... 'when you are nearly at the top there is only one easy way to go--down'
Yes I realise that Toshiba were starting at the low end of the sales spectrum, but that's over 10 times better than the industry's growth. They must be performing better for a reason.
I figured that was interesting and thought that some of the US based posters, here, might be able to shed some light. I was mistaken.
Also, a little surprised that you, Mel, are going to quibble about figures that are part of the original story.
I don't always agree with the numbers, if i see different ones somewhere else. I haven't seen these high numbers for Toshiba.
For example, I wonder how much of ACER's numbers are from the purchase of Gateway, and how much are from actual growth.
As far as Toshiba's numbers go, well I just don't know now.
It still went up! And it continued that rise for a number of years. In relation the "the old adage" the reasons for that downturn is irrelevant.
I just said it did. As Apple's numbers went down, Ms's went up.
Quote:
I didn't say that the Windows share was at the top. I said it was "it had a similar market share to today"
In this time scale that we are discussing, Windows share mostly rose because of Apple's mistakes. Then that share fell, mostly due to Apple correcting their mistakes.
Whatever date and % figure you want to put on Windows' "peak" can only be made retrospectively. If Apple hadn't got their act together then that peak would have been even higher.
So perhaps we should change the old adage from "'when you are at the top there is only one way to go--down" to.... 'when you are nearly at the top there is only one easy way to go--down'
Well, we can only look at what did happen. No point in speculation on what might have happened if Apple didn't make a comeback, or didn't make a couple of major mistakes back then.
But as I mentioned, back then, half the computers in the world were sold in the US. That means that Apple's 10% share had more importance worldwide than it does now, because Apple is weaker outside of its home market, though that's expected to narrow.
So we have to look at that shift as well.
One interesting article, which I MAY have bookmarked, says that 25% of Windows is unlicensed sales, and that therefor, MS's worldwide marketshare of paid OS sales, one way or the other, is really less than 75%, possibly as low as 70%.
Comments
Fair point, but I was talking about unit sales, not market share. If the Mac grows market share by 1%, that 1% has to come out of the Windows market share. That much we know. The point I was making is that PC unit sales have been increasing at low single digit rates for several years now, while Mac unit sales have been increasing at double-digit rates. The difference is quite dramatic.
That is true, but remember that it?s easier to increase dramatically when you are coming from the bottom. Acer and Toshiba?s growth isn?t sustainable. I am more impressed with HP?s continued growth (at what seems at the expense of Dell) of 3.2% when they already have one quarter of all sales.
Again TeckDud, fyi ... sales growth absolutely does not automatically equate to success ... does acer make as much profit as Apple? If I sell 1 computer and make 500.00 profit and you sell 4 computers and make 100.00 on each are you a more profitable company than me? HINT 4x100.00=400.00, 500.00 is bigger than 400.00 ... I can't dumb it down any further for you ....Sorry.
Acer maybe gaining units sold but profit and revenue are falling...
http://www.acer-group.com/public/News/2009/20090827.htm
That is true, but remember that it?s easier to increase dramatically when you are coming from the bottom. Acer and Toshiba?s growth isn?t sustainable. I am more impressed with HP?s continued growth (at what seems at the expense of Dell) of 3.2% when they already have one quarter of all sales.
HP does seem to be growing mainly at the expense of Dell. This has been going on for a few quarters at least, so it has the look of a trend. But I don't buy the idea that Apple is growing "from the bottom." Their YoY unit growth has been at double-digit rates for several years now, which is impressive no matter where they started. Any company, especially in the PC industry, would be delighted by those results.
But I don't buy the idea that Apple is growing "from the bottom.?
You misundertand. Apple toward the bottom, HP on top. For example, Apple increase YoY sales by 170k units while HP increased YoY unit sales by 140k. That isn?t much of a difference but Apple?s percentage of growth is much higher. It?s percentages and the lower you are the less units you have to sell increase your percentage of growth.
To be fair to the Windows market the old adage 'when you are at the top there is only one way to go--down' certainly applies.
it doesn't always apply!
Back in 1997 Windows had a similar market share to today. 95-96% plus.
For the next six or seven years continued to go... up.
acer is a very good company
they will raise prices soon or fail
maybe they should copy what COBY does ?
COBY, wow! What junk.
Maybe in a few years their products will rise in quality.
It's a company that's partly owned by the Chinese government.
So really Apple's growth was really just the whole market bouncing back from recession this time last year, I love how Apple Insider paint this to be some kind of triumph ! Acer managed a rise of 24%
Really these are not great numbers for Apple, not bad certainly but not the never-ending growth in market share people were expecting, the real truth is without the iPod or the iPhone Apple's computer line would not be making them very much profit.
The entire PC's industrie's sales are still down, not up. What's happening is that the various PC manufacturers are exchanging sales numbers. Dell, a bigger manufacturer than ACER is down almost 14% in sales this same quarter. ACERs sales growth is almost all due to netbook sales below $400, and is accompanied by lower profits and even sales, in dollars.
Meanwhile, Apple is still increasing their sales, after having one quarter near the beginning of the recession where it fell. Apple's marketshare is higher.
Well it kind of is... really. Toshiba have doubled their share in a little over a year. Forty percent growth in a relatively flat PC market must have it's reasons.
Let's just say it's part of the massive swing away from the expandable, upgradeable, consumer tower
Where did Toshiba achieve a 40% growth? I haven't seen that.
Where did Toshiba achieve a 40% growth? I haven't seen that.
It's 37% YoY growth from selling just under 300k more units YoY, according to the chart in the article.
What do I care, as a consumer, if there's little profit for a company or the other? I want the best possible product for the least possible price.
You should care. Wht happens when there are little to no profits is that companies firt shut down their R&D. Then you don't get improvements, just recycled features. Quality goes down further, and eventually, they company goes out of business.
The ones that survive are the ones that are stronger, i.e. the ones who have made a profit, and haven't competed as strongly in the race to the bottom.
Then there are fewer choices, and even less competition.
So, in the end you pay more anyway.
Can't get something for nothing.
Do these #'s count Netbooks??
What is the breakdown by pc revenue??
Nice to see apple gaining units at any rate.
All the PC numbers count netbooks.
If netbooks eren't counted, the PC industrie's numbers would be much lower.
You had an exampleOn the first page for Marvin regarding 30%, not 40%, that is the figure I used for my example. What if Apple had a 30% markershare on Macs? The Teckstudian mind would whine, "Apple sux, Windows has 70%!", but an intelligent person would see that Apple would be the largest PC retailer in the world, would be selling 8-10x more product than they do now and that this achievement would come mostly at the hands of the other big box vendors. One would also see that Apple's current 33 cents per dollar of PC sales in the US would increase even farther. Despite the fact that this mythical achievement can't be done under the current business model, if it were to be, then Apple would be getting about 70 cents per dollar of every PC sold. Why even mention the OS? Especially now in 2009 when the OS is mostly now a preference in the consumer market, not a requirement? Why look at any HW sales just flip it on it's head to measure what is inconsequential to the HW sale. MS will sell a lit of Win7. There is nothig wrong with that, but it doesn't make an HP or Mac sale any more or less valid. It's a pointless metric when looking at the HW.
You have to mention the OS. Why are people buying Macs? Without the answer to that question, the rest makes no sense.
Are people solely buying Macs because of the hardware? Are they buying them solely because they can run Windows? Are they buying them solely because they want to run the Mac OS?
Yes to all of that, partly. But which is the main reason?
I think the main reason is the OS, tempered by the desire for the hardware, ameliorated by the fact that those coming from Windows can easily wean themselves off it. And a lot of new computer buyers are going straight to the Mac.
If Apple were selling the exact same machines, but had Windows instead of OS X, what would have happened? I don't think sales would be nearly as good. They would be forced to compete in the cheaper markets as well. Likely their percentage of over $1,000 sales wouldn't be 91% either, maybe 50%, possibly lower.
Ok, the number you are now stating wasn't a real sales figure, but a point to ponder in the discussion. You were saying at first, that I said that Apple had a 40% marketshare, which I never did.
My point is that I want to keep seeing these company's broken down ad they are in the chart. I was responded to in. This forum that these individual companies success and failures in the PC HW sales are pointless. That they he lumped into a big group of Windows vs. OS X based on their OS business the non-Mac PC companies can easily swap customers around that are using the same OS. This I find disengenuous and it does nothing to assist me in seeing which of these companies are growing and which are shrinking.
But you're talking about something completely different (as Monty Python used to say).
We're interested in how Apple is doing compared to the Windows PC market, to see whether Apple is making progress in selling OS X machines to that market.
You are talking about being interested in how individual companies are doing.
Two different points of focus.
it doesn't always apply!
Back in 1997 Windows had a similar market share to today. 95-96% plus.
For the next six or seven years continued to go... up.
It never went up by more than another couple of points before beginning to fall.
So the time you mention wasn't the peak at all.
Of course, the only reason why it got to that level was because Apple had a very bad decision made in late 1995 that caused their 10% US marketshare to fall dramatically to 2.5% over the next five or six years. That is, while the rest of the industry was growing at a good rate because of the millennium date problem as companies and governments around the world bought new machines at great rates, Apple's sales fell a bit, and didn't rise appreciably for years, until about six years ago.
Back then, the US also had at least a 50% world marketshare. Today, that's about 25% or so.
Then MS's marketshare began to drop again.
It's 37% YoY growth from selling just under 300k more units YoY, according to the chart in the article.
I haven't seen numbers like that for them anywhere else. More like half that. Odd.
But you're talking about something completely different (as Monty Python used to say).
We're interested in how Apple is doing compared to the Windows PC market, to see whether Apple is making progress in selling OS X machines to that market.
You are talking about being interested in how individual companies are doing.
Two different points of focus.
If you want to focus on that point, go ahead, but this article is about PC HW sales and each company should be counted individually as they are in the article and the charts, not as a lump some of "Mac PC vs. non-Mac PCs”. In another article they can address how Macs are stealing Windows users, which is true. But we also need to understand that Apple only sells their OS to go with their PCs and note the very different business models between MS and Apple, thus we can’t expect to see Apple with a 30% or 50% or 95% of the OS marketshare without also having those numbers in the PC marketshare so long as they maintain their current business model. Each has their place and each is not without it’s pros and cons.
Where did Toshiba achieve a 40% growth? I haven't seen that.
IDC Toshiba US growth : 37.4%
Gartner Toshiba US growth : 45.8%
Yes I realise that Toshiba were starting at the low end of the sales spectrum, but that's over 10 times better than the industry's growth. They must be performing better for a reason.
I figured that was interesting and thought that some of the US based posters, here, might be able to shed some light. I was mistaken.
Also, a little surprised that you, Mel, are going to quibble about figures that are part of the original story.
It never went up by more than another couple of points before beginning to fall.
It still went up! And it continued that rise for a number of years. In relation the "the old adage" the reasons for that downturn is irrelevant.
So the time you mention wasn't the peak at all.
I didn't say that the Windows share was at the top. I said it was "it had a similar market share to today"
In this time scale that we are discussing, Windows share mostly rose because of Apple's mistakes. Then that share fell, mostly due to Apple correcting their mistakes.
Whatever date and % figure you want to put on Windows' "peak" can only be made retrospectively. If Apple hadn't got their act together then that peak would have been even higher.
So perhaps we should change the old adage from "'when you are at the top there is only one way to go--down" to.... 'when you are nearly at the top there is only one easy way to go--down'
IDC Toshiba US growth : 37.4%
Gartner Toshiba US growth : 45.8%
Yes I realise that Toshiba were starting at the low end of the sales spectrum, but that's over 10 times better than the industry's growth. They must be performing better for a reason.
I figured that was interesting and thought that some of the US based posters, here, might be able to shed some light. I was mistaken.
Also, a little surprised that you, Mel, are going to quibble about figures that are part of the original story.
I don't always agree with the numbers, if i see different ones somewhere else. I haven't seen these high numbers for Toshiba.
For example, I wonder how much of ACER's numbers are from the purchase of Gateway, and how much are from actual growth.
As far as Toshiba's numbers go, well I just don't know now.
It still went up! And it continued that rise for a number of years. In relation the "the old adage" the reasons for that downturn is irrelevant.
I just said it did. As Apple's numbers went down, Ms's went up.
I didn't say that the Windows share was at the top. I said it was "it had a similar market share to today"
In this time scale that we are discussing, Windows share mostly rose because of Apple's mistakes. Then that share fell, mostly due to Apple correcting their mistakes.
Whatever date and % figure you want to put on Windows' "peak" can only be made retrospectively. If Apple hadn't got their act together then that peak would have been even higher.
So perhaps we should change the old adage from "'when you are at the top there is only one way to go--down" to.... 'when you are nearly at the top there is only one easy way to go--down'
Well, we can only look at what did happen. No point in speculation on what might have happened if Apple didn't make a comeback, or didn't make a couple of major mistakes back then.
But as I mentioned, back then, half the computers in the world were sold in the US. That means that Apple's 10% share had more importance worldwide than it does now, because Apple is weaker outside of its home market, though that's expected to narrow.
So we have to look at that shift as well.
One interesting article, which I MAY have bookmarked, says that 25% of Windows is unlicensed sales, and that therefor, MS's worldwide marketshare of paid OS sales, one way or the other, is really less than 75%, possibly as low as 70%.
That's an interesting way of looking at it.