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.
I get the arithmetic. Where I don't necessarily agree is that it's inherently easier to grow from a smaller base. If it was, Apple would not have spent so much time with their sales at such a low level. In fact in the case of Apple, I'd argue that it's inherently more difficult to grow their sales, since in addition to everything else, they have to overcome consumer inertia, which is all on the Windows PC side of the ledger. As it is, Apple had to end-run around inertia with the iPod and the iPhone to get buyers to even consider a Mac.
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 think a lot of Toshiba's growth is due to them being showcased in places like Best Buy, and that they do seem to have followed HP somewhat - decent styling, good performance/price ratio. For about about $500-600 US, you can get a C2D laptop, 4 GB of RAM, 200-320 GB HD, some sort of IGP, likely Intel, and Vista (soon to be Win7) 64-bit, and probably a 13.3" upto a 17" screen.
For the majority of people, that amount of performance will be just fine, a C2D is still plenty of most, especially given the price, and considering most people probably just do web, e-mail, some photos, etc. it will fit the bill,
Toshiba's US support is good too; I had issues with my laptop (when it was still under warranty), took it to their local licensed service center in Metro Detroit, where I lived at the time, and they swapped the motherboard out in like 2 days. It's been a rock solid laptop since, and they even sent me a free travel mouse for filling out my registration when I first got my laptop.
I do have an Acer netbook, I like it quite a bit, but it is what is, which is like a secondary/tertiary computer. I couldn't use it to replace my other PCs or Mac, but I sometimes prefer to travel with it over my laptop.
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.
Mel - I know you love apple. I also love apple. But, we need to count the sales by company not by which one comes with Windows, Linux or OSX. OSX rocks, I love it. But, as a share trader I want to know the break up of the market by manufacturer so I know who has the better business model hence who should I buy, who should i sell and who should i hold. did what i say make sense or have i missed your point?
Yes brucep Acer will have to raise prices eventually if it wants to fall to 4th place.
Acer have risen very quickly by combining quality and low price, the proof is in their numbers and not your wishful thinking.
Netbooks may be going to poison your enviroment but here in europe all electronic equipment has to be recycled to we really don't have anything to worry about, If I were you I'd be worried about all those plastic macbooks soon to arrive at a landfill near you.
no my dear apple buddy
in europe tons of toxic materials are used in creation of cheap throw away machines and your cradle to grave program is right now a joke with zero oversight
yes europe will teach us all the best way
and we will all one day cradle to crave every product
i just feel sad seeing plastic bottles filled with fiji wayer being used 9000 miles away in nyc where we have the best tap water in the world
when will we ever learn
at least we all could attack the low hanging fruit for a greener world
I truly don't understand why whoever puts out these marketshare figures - or at least the hopefully intrepid journalists at AI - stated in terms of units - don't also always simultaneously put up the computer revenue figures.
It stands to reason that with Apple's commanding share of the $1,000-and-up market for PC's - and companies like Acer being primarily in the sub-$400 market - that Apple would bump at least one place, maybe two when ranked by computer sales. And as a publicly held company, one of Apple's mission is to make $$$. And as an innovation-driven (and dependent) company, said $$$ also generate the R&D that have made their success possible.
Further, revenue and mindshare are not totally mutually exclusive.
In any case, revenue is another metric that would make for interesting comparisons. And adding profit figures on computer sales would make these reports a round robin.
Anyway, aren't these figures pretty publicly available?
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
It's so obvious that Apple should have had an answer to Acer netbooks like 2 years ago. They have infiltrated the consciousness of the youth today - they all have them.
Not so obvious. Apple often observes immature technologies begin to penetrate the public consciousness, evaluates their strengths and weaknesses, and then jumps in with a new tack which takes the public by storm.
Apple did not release the 1st or the 20th mp3 player and have a 70% marketshare when they went in and "did it right."
Apple didn't release the first smart phone but have turned the SP market upside down and inside out.
Nor the first notebook, nor first all in ones, but again have enviable market share in the premium segment.
Apple DID release the first cube form, fanless PC though - and it was a bust.
Takeaway: it's far from too late for Apple to release an well-thought out answer to the netbook phenomenon and do well with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Even Michael Dell just said in a speech that netbooks were ruining the industry.
There's almost no profit in them, and PC manufacturers are frantic about what to do about it.
One of them has a decent shot at figuring it out. And it very likely won't be running Win 7.
Quote:
Originally Posted by doyourownthing
absolutely agree...who buys a pc these days when you can do everything with an iphone / ipod touch? i'd like to see those numbers, and how they relate to the pc ones...
The figures and their categories have needed a greater degree and granularity/segmentation for over a year now. The iPT is almost a category of its own, being a miniature media player non-smart-phone that computes. And which should see an explosion of peripherals - e.g., keyboards, printer interface, etc., now that Apple's made the API's to do this available. I'd certainly rather surf on an iPT than most netbooks I've handled, and that is IS the biggest use most people make of "computers" these days - far more than the number creating ginormous Excel SSheets which one poster said was the criterion for being a real computing device.
It's so obvious that Apple should have had an answer to Acer netbooks like 2 years ago. They have infiltrated the consciousness of the youth today - they all have them.
Ask yourself WHY they have them. In a recession, cheap and disposable sells. And also note that these crapbooks haven't so mauch as even made a dent in Apple's share or their Premium-segment strategy. The answer to the netbook's "convenience" is the iPod Touch/iPhone. The answer to their cheap pricetag and poor build quality is . . . nothing. Apple doesn't do low end. Apple needs not have anything at all to do with that segment.
Comments
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.
I get the arithmetic. Where I don't necessarily agree is that it's inherently easier to grow from a smaller base. If it was, Apple would not have spent so much time with their sales at such a low level. In fact in the case of Apple, I'd argue that it's inherently more difficult to grow their sales, since in addition to everything else, they have to overcome consumer inertia, which is all on the Windows PC side of the ledger. As it is, Apple had to end-run around inertia with the iPod and the iPhone to get buyers to even consider a Mac.
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 think a lot of Toshiba's growth is due to them being showcased in places like Best Buy, and that they do seem to have followed HP somewhat - decent styling, good performance/price ratio. For about about $500-600 US, you can get a C2D laptop, 4 GB of RAM, 200-320 GB HD, some sort of IGP, likely Intel, and Vista (soon to be Win7) 64-bit, and probably a 13.3" upto a 17" screen.
For the majority of people, that amount of performance will be just fine, a C2D is still plenty of most, especially given the price, and considering most people probably just do web, e-mail, some photos, etc. it will fit the bill,
Toshiba's US support is good too; I had issues with my laptop (when it was still under warranty), took it to their local licensed service center in Metro Detroit, where I lived at the time, and they swapped the motherboard out in like 2 days. It's been a rock solid laptop since, and they even sent me a free travel mouse for filling out my registration when I first got my laptop.
I do have an Acer netbook, I like it quite a bit, but it is what is, which is like a secondary/tertiary computer. I couldn't use it to replace my other PCs or Mac, but I sometimes prefer to travel with it over my laptop.
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 $1,000 sales wouldn't be 91% either, maybe 50%, possibly lower.
Ok, the number you are now stating wasn't a real sales figure, but a point to ponder in the discussion. You were saying at first, that I said that Apple had a 40% marketshare, which I never did.
Mel - I know you love apple. I also love apple. But, we need to count the sales by company not by which one comes with Windows, Linux or OSX. OSX rocks, I love it. But, as a share trader I want to know the break up of the market by manufacturer so I know who has the better business model hence who should I buy, who should i sell and who should i hold. did what i say make sense or have i missed your point?
Yes brucep Acer will have to raise prices eventually if it wants to fall to 4th place.
Acer have risen very quickly by combining quality and low price, the proof is in their numbers and not your wishful thinking.
Netbooks may be going to poison your enviroment but here in europe all electronic equipment has to be recycled to we really don't have anything to worry about, If I were you I'd be worried about all those plastic macbooks soon to arrive at a landfill near you.
no my dear apple buddy
in europe tons of toxic materials are used in creation of cheap throw away machines and your cradle to grave program is right now a joke with zero oversight
yes europe will teach us all the best way
and we will all one day cradle to crave every product
i just feel sad seeing plastic bottles filled with fiji wayer being used 9000 miles away in nyc where we have the best tap water in the world
when will we ever learn
at least we all could attack the low hanging fruit for a greener world
way way off topic here sorry mel
peace 9
COBY, wow! What junk.
Maybe in a few years their products will rise in quality.
It's a company that's partly owned by the Chinese government.
coby makes a dvd player
i bought for 38 dollars on sale 4 yrs ago <<99$ reg >>
i bought 2 dozen at CVS and sold at cost or donated them all to local schools in staten island
18 of them are still woking as good or better than the high end ones
six was stolen
maybe coby makes junk in other product lines ??
or have changed recently
i dunno
peace
9
It stands to reason that with Apple's commanding share of the $1,000-and-up market for PC's - and companies like Acer being primarily in the sub-$400 market - that Apple would bump at least one place, maybe two when ranked by computer sales. And as a publicly held company, one of Apple's mission is to make $$$. And as an innovation-driven (and dependent) company, said $$$ also generate the R&D that have made their success possible.
Further, revenue and mindshare are not totally mutually exclusive.
In any case, revenue is another metric that would make for interesting comparisons. And adding profit figures on computer sales would make these reports a round robin.
Anyway, aren't these figures pretty publicly available?
It's so obvious that Apple should have had an answer to Acer netbooks like 2 years ago. They have infiltrated the consciousness of the youth today - they all have them.
Not so obvious. Apple often observes immature technologies begin to penetrate the public consciousness, evaluates their strengths and weaknesses, and then jumps in with a new tack which takes the public by storm.
Apple did not release the 1st or the 20th mp3 player and have a 70% marketshare when they went in and "did it right."
Apple didn't release the first smart phone but have turned the SP market upside down and inside out.
Nor the first notebook, nor first all in ones, but again have enviable market share in the premium segment.
Apple DID release the first cube form, fanless PC though - and it was a bust.
Takeaway: it's far from too late for Apple to release an well-thought out answer to the netbook phenomenon and do well with it.
Even Michael Dell just said in a speech that netbooks were ruining the industry.
There's almost no profit in them, and PC manufacturers are frantic about what to do about it.
One of them has a decent shot at figuring it out. And it very likely won't be running Win 7.
absolutely agree...who buys a pc these days when you can do everything with an iphone / ipod touch? i'd like to see those numbers, and how they relate to the pc ones...
The figures and their categories have needed a greater degree and granularity/segmentation for over a year now. The iPT is almost a category of its own, being a miniature media player non-smart-phone that computes. And which should see an explosion of peripherals - e.g., keyboards, printer interface, etc., now that Apple's made the API's to do this available. I'd certainly rather surf on an iPT than most netbooks I've handled, and that is IS the biggest use most people make of "computers" these days - far more than the number creating ginormous Excel SSheets which one poster said was the criterion for being a real computing device.
It's so obvious that Apple should have had an answer to Acer netbooks like 2 years ago. They have infiltrated the consciousness of the youth today - they all have them.
Ask yourself WHY they have them. In a recession, cheap and disposable sells. And also note that these crapbooks haven't so mauch as even made a dent in Apple's share or their Premium-segment strategy. The answer to the netbook's "convenience" is the iPod Touch/iPhone. The answer to their cheap pricetag and poor build quality is . . . nothing. Apple doesn't do low end. Apple needs not have anything at all to do with that segment.