In hindsight this is not surprising. The iPod provided the consumer Halo effect that brought about growth in the consumer Mac market. With iPad dominating the tablet market in the workplace it's natural that there would be a Halo effect for enterprise with iPad for the Mac in enterprise.
There is also another effect that is possibly not accounted for. I was in a meeting in my company the other day. Our "corporate standard" is a Lenovo thinkpad yet in the meeting 60% of the people were using their own personally paid for Macs. There's a lot of Lenovos sitting in the bottom of drawers where I work and so the "user base" in enterprises might be much higher than the market share indicates. Of course Lenovo and MS are still picking up sales on these dormant laptops, so I guess everyone wins, at least until IT wakes up to the reality of it.
The chart also details the number of units sold. Almost 900K were sold to businesses in the last quarter. That's 25% of all Mac sales in the last 3 months.
Whilst in market share terms it seems small, an additional 900K units really helps Apple's margin and economic of scale.
Naturally Apple's Macs grew more than PCs. They have less market share.
Your logic is faulty. This is percentage change. All being equal, Macs should have had roughly the same growth as other systems. Instead, growth far exceeded that of other systems which indicates that their market share is increasing.
You are correct to say that doubling a very small share is not that significant overall, but it is still a doubling of share nonetheless. If that goes on, they will indeed wind up with a very significant share. What if they eventually wind up with a 20% share of the business market? That would be enormous!
To me, the big news is growth in government. The share there must be minuscule - less than 1% ?? - This is the kind of growth that can escalate over time. A great area for long term expansion.
Thanks! I copied my definitions directly from my Mac's dictionary.
Incidentally, I'm a bit surprised by "torrider" and "torridest". I--and I assume many grammar nazis like me--would have reflexively corrected someone who used those words in the wild. <smug>Ahem. It's "more torrid" or "most torrid"!</smug>
Incidentally, I'm a bit surprised by "torrider" and "torridest". I--and I assume many grammar nazis like me--would have reflexively corrected someone who used those words in the wild. <smug>Ahem. It's "more torrid" or "most torrid"!</smug>
I find that most ?grammar nazis? are more concerned with how a sentence sounds or feels based on familiar usage than its correctitudiness.
You can be a "Microsoft shop" and still have Macs.
I know a lot of people that run iMacs and MacBook Pros in businesses. None of them run OSX though.
The article is about Mac growth not OS, so what is your point? Curious though as to why people or corporations would buy Macs and not run OS X on them at least some of the time.
I find that most ?grammar nazis? are more concerned with how a sentence sounds or feels based on familiar usage than its correctitudiness.
Dang nab it! That's the third time in this thread that I blew my coffee all over my keyboard!
Knock it off Soli... and quit with the "Humor Steroids" with out at least a warning, such as,
"I just got back from the Comedy Factory Seminar fully loaded. Further postings may contain material unsuited for adults drinking Apple-Flavored Java."... or something to that effect.
At my company, we develop with ASP.Net... most people have Macbook Pro's who aren't developers, and the developers are slowly moving over to using Macbook Pro's
- Windows 7 via bootcamp works great
- Battery life is awesome
- well made, light, powerful
Awesome.
Running Windows on the Mac is completely pointless. Yeah, the hardware is great and really nice. But what makes your development experience nice is a project with the right infrastructure and built around UNIX development principles that are frankly really rare these days. It is extremely hard to find a company that does things right, the UNIX way but those that do are a joy to work at.
Instead you will end up with the brain dead project infrastructure/organization, no consistent way to build and deploy stuff, paths hard coded, complete lack of understanding of the power and usefulness of the command line etc. Typical cowboy style Microsoft development that most corporations are doing these days.
So yeah, you can dream using Windows on your Mac in those shops but you will never experience why is it that UNIX is superior tool for development, because you don't have critical mass where you work and outright opposition to doing things right.
I particularly like the way the striping on the bars appears to be a mask that doesn't really line up, producing random checkerboard effects.
My suspicion is that in certain business quarters years of PC use has led to the impression that "ugly" equals "true." A nice Mac generated graph would probably be regarded as possibly the work of gay elitists with an agenda.
Quote:
Originally Posted by One Fine Line
Edward Tufte would have a coronary. lol
I thought it was a Vasarely -- presented upside down
Yeah, yeah. But will this growth make Apple come out with a mid sized Mac? I don't see too many businesses willing to take a chance on all in ones for its most important computers. It's easy to go grab any monitor to keep running. Having to do without a business computer when it has to be sent out to fix the built in monitor is not something I would want to do. The Mac Pro is overkill for lots of normal business use but the mini has certain limitations that restrict its use.
Curious though as to why people or corporations would buy Macs and not run OS X on them at least some of the time.
Mac user: Can I get a Mac? Can I get a Mac? Can I get a Mac? Can I get a Mac?
IT department: Fine. You can have a Mac, as long as it only runs Windows.
If IT departments can't shut out Apple hardware, they can at least shut out the operating system. As an added benefit, the IT department also looks good for providing the illusion of supporting "Macs".
Are you claiming that a large percentage increase over an insignificant base really means that much? Even if they doubled their market share from 1.5 to 3 percent over 2 years, that means oh so very little. Quoting large percentages like 66% growth over a menial 2% base as major headway into enterprise services is misleading to poor people who don't seem to understand the statistics. Unfortunately Macs kill any chance they have of major success in enterprise services with arbitrary development restrictions, high prices and lack of compatibility with most industry standards.
Comments
It is a fair comment. After all, the Apple fanbois constantly use that same argument when discussing other tablet sales.
Except other tablet sales are starting literally from zero.
Apple is making headway in a mature, saturated market.
There is also another effect that is possibly not accounted for. I was in a meeting in my company the other day. Our "corporate standard" is a Lenovo thinkpad yet in the meeting 60% of the people were using their own personally paid for Macs. There's a lot of Lenovos sitting in the bottom of drawers where I work and so the "user base" in enterprises might be much higher than the market share indicates. Of course Lenovo and MS are still picking up sales on these dormant laptops, so I guess everyone wins, at least until IT wakes up to the reality of it.
Naturally Apple's Macs grew more than PCs. They have less market share.
So RIM must be increasing its market share by the same logic? Oh, wait a minute ...
Whilst in market share terms it seems small, an additional 900K units really helps Apple's margin and economic of scale.
Naturally Apple's Macs grew more than PCs. They have less market share.
Your logic is faulty. This is percentage change. All being equal, Macs should have had roughly the same growth as other systems. Instead, growth far exceeded that of other systems which indicates that their market share is increasing.
You are correct to say that doubling a very small share is not that significant overall, but it is still a doubling of share nonetheless. If that goes on, they will indeed wind up with a very significant share. What if they eventually wind up with a 20% share of the business market? That would be enormous!
To me, the big news is growth in government. The share there must be minuscule - less than 1% ?? - This is the kind of growth that can escalate over time. A great area for long term expansion.
Edward Tufte would have a coronary. lol
Edward Tufte reference FTW!!!
tor·rid (tôrd, tr-)
adj. tor·rid·er, tor·rid·est
1. Parched with the heat of the sun; intensely hot.
2. Scorching; burning: the torrid noonday sun.
3. Passionate; ardent: a torrid love scene.
4. Hurried; rapid: set a torrid pace; torrid economic growth.
I believe #4 works
Thanks! I copied my definitions directly from my Mac's dictionary.
Incidentally, I'm a bit surprised by "torrider" and "torridest". I--and I assume many grammar nazis like me--would have reflexively corrected someone who used those words in the wild. <smug>Ahem. It's "more torrid" or "most torrid"!</smug>
Incidentally, I'm a bit surprised by "torrider" and "torridest". I--and I assume many grammar nazis like me--would have reflexively corrected someone who used those words in the wild. <smug>Ahem. It's "more torrid" or "most torrid"!</smug>
I find that most ?grammar nazis? are more concerned with how a sentence sounds or feels based on familiar usage than its correctitudiness.
I write dictionaries…have for the last 27 years; torrid is OK
It's possible "jbruni" had their mind in the gutter, and mistakenly was thinking, "turgid".
You can be a "Microsoft shop" and still have Macs.
I know a lot of people that run iMacs and MacBook Pros in businesses. None of them run OSX though.
The article is about Mac growth not OS, so what is your point? Curious though as to why people or corporations would buy Macs and not run OS X on them at least some of the time.
I find that most ?grammar nazis? are more concerned with how a sentence sounds or feels based on familiar usage than its correctitudiness.
Dang nab it! That's the third time in this thread that I blew my coffee all over my keyboard!
Knock it off Soli... and quit with the "Humor Steroids" with out at least a warning, such as,
"I just got back from the Comedy Factory Seminar fully loaded. Further postings may contain material unsuited for adults drinking Apple-Flavored Java."... or something to that effect.
Geez!
The article is about Mac growth not OS, so what is your point?
Well... exactly. That's what I said. The article is about Mac growth, not Windows/OSX market share.
This article is more of a Apple vs Dell/HP thing... at least until we get some stats for OS's.
Curious though as to why people or corporations would buy Macs and not run OS X on them at least some of the time
From what i gather Windows fits their needs better than OSX and Apple pull together some great hardware. It's a nice match.
At my company, we develop with ASP.Net... most people have Macbook Pro's who aren't developers, and the developers are slowly moving over to using Macbook Pro's
- Windows 7 via bootcamp works great
- Battery life is awesome
- well made, light, powerful
Awesome.
Running Windows on the Mac is completely pointless. Yeah, the hardware is great and really nice. But what makes your development experience nice is a project with the right infrastructure and built around UNIX development principles that are frankly really rare these days. It is extremely hard to find a company that does things right, the UNIX way but those that do are a joy to work at.
Instead you will end up with the brain dead project infrastructure/organization, no consistent way to build and deploy stuff, paths hard coded, complete lack of understanding of the power and usefulness of the command line etc. Typical cowboy style Microsoft development that most corporations are doing these days.
So yeah, you can dream using Windows on your Mac in those shops but you will never experience why is it that UNIX is superior tool for development, because you don't have critical mass where you work and outright opposition to doing things right.
Torrid:
1) very hot and dry
2) full of passionate or highly charged emotions arising from sexual love
3) full of difficulty or tribulation
Um. Which of these applies to Apple's growth in the enterprise market?
Wrong in usage as i have known it for 4o yrs .
Torrid means fast paced.
burning up the road.
most americans see this .
Some don't .
It also can mean a hot love affair .
I particularly like the way the striping on the bars appears to be a mask that doesn't really line up, producing random checkerboard effects.
My suspicion is that in certain business quarters years of PC use has led to the impression that "ugly" equals "true." A nice Mac generated graph would probably be regarded as possibly the work of gay elitists with an agenda.
Edward Tufte would have a coronary. lol
I thought it was a Vasarely -- presented upside down
I find that most ?grammar nazis? are more concerned with how a sentence sounds or feels based on familiar usage than its correctitudiness.
I think a more accurate term is correctitudnicity.
Curious though as to why people or corporations would buy Macs and not run OS X on them at least some of the time.
Mac user: Can I get a Mac? Can I get a Mac? Can I get a Mac? Can I get a Mac?
IT department: Fine. You can have a Mac, as long as it only runs Windows.
If IT departments can't shut out Apple hardware, they can at least shut out the operating system. As an added benefit, the IT department also looks good for providing the illusion of supporting "Macs".
Torrid:
1) very hot and dry
2) full of passionate or highly charged emotions arising from sexual love
3) full of difficulty or tribulation
Um. Which of these applies to Apple's growth in the enterprise market?
I'd guess number 3, given how entrenched the enterprise is with Windows.