Apple iPad drives 124% growth in global tablet shipments, study says

Posted:
in iPad edited January 2014
In its Quarterly Mobile PC Shipment and Forecast Report released on Tuesday, NPD DisplaySearch found that the tablet market continues to exhibit strong growth mainly being fueled by Apple's hot-selling iPad.

The first quarter of the 2012 calendar year saw Apple's mobile PC business, which includes tablet and laptops, grow 118 percent year-to-year with a large majority of those shipments coming from the iPad. The tablet accounted for nearly four out of every five of the company's mobile PC shipments and reached 13.6 million units to grow 162 percent from the year ago quarter.

Apple's own numbers, announced during the company's second fiscal quarter earnings call, were slightly more conservative and pegged iPad shipments at 11.8 million units representing a 151 percent growth from the same time in 2011.

Apple managed to take 62.8 percent of the global tablet sector while Amazon's Kindle Fire was knocked out of the number two spot by Samsung, which shipped 1.6 million units for a 7.5 percent share of the market. The Kindle managed 900,000 units to account for only a 4 percent share. Rounding out the top five were RIM and ASUS, each taking a 2.3 percent slice of the market on identical shipments of 500,000 units. Barnes and Noble's Nook fell out of the top five in quarter one, though the company may regain some standing with the help of Microsoft's $300 million shot in the arm.

NPD 1Q12
Global tablet shipments for the first quarter of the 2012 calendar year. | Source: NPD DisplaySearch


The iPad's monster numbers helped Apple maintain its mobile PC market lead that saw tablet and laptop shipments take a 22.5 percent share, almost double that of runner-up HP's 11.6 percent. Combined iPad and MacBook shipments topped out at 17.2 million while HP managed 8.9 million units. Acer, Lenovo and Dell relied on notebook shipments to take the remaining three spots and captured 9 percent, 7.7 percent and 7.3 percent, respectively.

Apple once again didn't place in the top five notebook and mini-notebook rankings, which was lead by HP's 8.9 million shipments that accounted for 16.2 percent of the sector. Acer took second place with 6.5 million units, followed by Lenovo, Dell and ASUS.

Although slightly more conservative than results from IDC, the DisplaySearch findings are in consensus with the broad strokes and illustrate how important the iPad is to Apple's mobile strategy.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 21
    cmvsmcmvsm Posts: 204member


    Which of course means that the stock will take another 7% dive.

  • Reply 2 of 21
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,756member


    You mean . . . "global iPad shipments." There is no real tablet market. There *is* an iPad market. 

  • Reply 3 of 21
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cmvsm View Post


    Which of course means that the stock will take another 7% dive.



     


    AAPL did have a pretty nice day on monday. 


     


    There are other external events which are also affecting the overall market. I am tired of hearing and reading about Greece and Europe already. The EU should just get it over with, kick that country to the curb and boot the gyro eating slackers from the EU. 

  • Reply 4 of 21
    tunetune Posts: 91member


    Tablets are not PC's. Stop lumping them into the same category.

     

  • Reply 5 of 21

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    You mean . . . "global iPad shipments." There is no real tablet market. There *is* an iPad market. 



     


    With nearly two thirds of tablet sales going to Apple, you are right.


     


    But watch the Fandroids crow that Android has a bigger market share  in smartphones.  Pathetic.

  • Reply 6 of 21
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    tune wrote: »
    Tablets are not PC's. Stop lumping them into the same category.

     

    I love how tablets were considered PCs every decade they existed up until Apple launched a hugely successful tablet. i wonder were you and your soapbox were before the iPad was announced. I'm wagering you were claiming that Macs aren't PCs.
  • Reply 7 of 21
    tunetune Posts: 91member


    The iPad runs on a little rinky dink smartphone processor. SLATES are real PCs with Intel processors, USB ports and solid slate drives. Ipads are for poor people who cannot afford them.

     

  • Reply 8 of 21
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

    I'm wagering you were claiming that Macs aren't PCs.


     


    And now he'll try to use the "I'm a Mac" campaign as his argument.


     



    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tune View Post

    The iPad runs on a little rinky dink smartphone processor. SLATES are real PCs with Intel processors, USB ports and solid slate drives. Ipads are for poor people who cannot afford them.



     


    "AND IT'S A CURVEBALL! Tallest Skil gets nicks it and gets a foul!"

  • Reply 9 of 21
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    tune wrote: »
    Ipads are for poor people who cannot afford them.

    You just said that Apple's iPad is better priced than other tablets. You might want to proofread your trolling next time so you don't accidentally say something complimentary about Apple again.
  • Reply 10 of 21
    cvaldes1831cvaldes1831 Posts: 1,832member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tune View Post


    The iPad runs on a little rinky dink smartphone processor. SLATES are real PCs with Intel processors, USB ports and solid slate drives. Ipads are for poor people who cannot afford them.

     



     


    Oddly enough, the iPad destroyed the netbook market: real PCs with Intel processors, USB ports and some sort of hard drive. Netbooks were for poor people who couldn't afford larger PCs or tablets.

  • Reply 11 of 21
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post


     


    Netbooks were for poor people who couldn't afford larger PCs or tablets.



     


    That is true. Owning a netbook is practically the ultimate sign of poverty, as netbooks do nothing well, besides functioning as a doorstop. There's a good reason why iPads are eating up the entire market.


     


    And the iPad 3, with it's impressive CPU/GPU combo is no slouch. It's smooth as hell, smoother than any other tablet out there, and it plays games great and handles many advanced apps smoothly. 


     


    Anybody even mentioning a slate/usb/"real pc" is totally clueless and living in the past, as those have already been out for many years, long before the iPad was introduced, and they all sucked. Every single one was a miserable failure. They sold nothing. The lackluster troll and technological dinosaur person probably wishes that they could hook up a mouse to their tablet/slate too.

  • Reply 12 of 21
    gs turngs turn Posts: 30member
    tune wrote: »
    The iPad runs on a little rinky dink smartphone processor. SLATES are real PCs with Intel processors, USB ports and solid slate drives. Ipads are for poor people who cannot afford them.

    iPads are 1000 times mor powerful than the original IBM PC, was it a PC. The iPad has 1 GB RAM and 16 GB storage and a dual core processor running at 1 Gb.

    My first PC was a TRS80 with 4k RAM and a cassette tape player for storage and it was considered a PC back then.

    The first IBM PC had 16K RAM.
  • Reply 13 of 21

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GS Turn View Post





    iPads are 1000 times mor powerful than the original IBM PC, was it a PC. The iPad has 1 GB RAM and 16 GB storage and a dual core processor running at 1 Gb.

    My first PC was a TRS80 with 4k RAM and a cassette tape player for storage and it was considered a PC back then.

    The first IBM PC had 16K RAM.


     


     


    My first computer was and Apple II with 128k RAM.   For my next one, I  went all out and got 4 Megs.

  • Reply 14 of 21
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    gs turn wrote: »
    My first PC was a TRS80 with 4k RAM and a cassette tape player for storage....

    Ooooh, luxury, I had to hand type lines of code from a magazine for 20 minutes or so before playing a game of pong, then when the power went off it was all gone and I had to start all over again.
  • Reply 15 of 21

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GS Turn View Post





    iPads are 1000 times mor powerful than the original IBM PC, was it a PC. The iPad has 1 GB RAM and 16 GB storage and a dual core processor running at 1 Gb.

    My first PC was a TRS80 with 4k RAM and a cassette tape player for storage and it was considered a PC back then.

    The first IBM PC had 16K RAM.


     


    "The first IBM PC had 16K RAM."... and also used a cassette tape player for storage. The IBM PC didn't get a HD drive for about a year later.


     


    My first PC was a 128K Mac... that also didn't have a HD drive. The first generation iPad had better specs than a netbook and Ballmer never found anything to laugh about when the iPad was announced shortly after he sweat his butt off in a red sweater while holding a barely functional HP tablet that never made it to market.

  • Reply 16 of 21
    galeforcegaleforce Posts: 67member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tune View Post


    Tablets are not PC's. Stop lumping them into the same category.

     



     


    People are buying iPads instead of Laptops or Netbooks so as far as the PC manufacturers are concerned, they are PCs.


     


    Including Samsung's Note in here is another matter altogether. People buy them instead of phones

  • Reply 17 of 21
    sockrolidsockrolid Posts: 2,789member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post





    NPD 1Q12

    Global tablet shipments for the first quarter of the 2012 calendar year. | Source: NPD DisplaySearch



     


    Something's very fishy here.  NPD is either fudging the numbers to make the wannabes look good or they're leaving some important information out of the picture.


     


    Let's do the math: the top five "global tablet sector" vendors' total market share adds up to 78.9%.  That leaves 21.1% of the market unaccounted for.


    Are there really 21 other vendors each with barely more than 1% average market share?


     


    Maybe NPD should lump the ~1% no-hopers into an "other" group with 21.2% share and put them in 2nd place above Samsung.


    That would put things in a whole different perspective, wouldn't it?  Samsung would be a distant third behind the no-hoper group.

  • Reply 18 of 21
    gustavgustav Posts: 826member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post


     


    Are there really 21 other vendors each with barely more than 1% average market share?


     



    That's probably just a top five list. The rest have less than 2.3%

  • Reply 19 of 21
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    I love how tablets were considered PCs every decade they existed up until Apple launched a hugely successful tablet. i wonder were you and your soapbox were before the iPad was announced. I'm wagering you were claiming that Macs aren't PCs.


    I think that is something that's hard to pin down, it's kind of a gray area. One major difference is most tablets were x86-based before then, and ran PC operating systems. After iPad, they're mostly ARM units running a more embedded style OS, plus whatever odd Windows Tablet that are bought for niche uses or someone mistakenly orders. The usage model is a radical departure as well.

    tune wrote: »
    The iPad runs on a little rinky dink smartphone processor. SLATES are real PCs with Intel processors, USB ports and solid slate drives. Ipads are for poor people who cannot afford them.


    Yep, and you're gone. Try to make a comment that can be taken seriously next time. Also, if you sign up again, give me the sales of Windows Tablet-based units and maybe that would give you a hint as to why no one talks about them anymore. Best Buy has almost as many SKUs for Apple iPad as they do for the entire Windows Tablet category.
  • Reply 20 of 21
    djmikeodjmikeo Posts: 179member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post


     


    Something's very fishy here.  NPD is either fudging the numbers to make the wannabes look good or they're leaving some important information out of the picture.


     


    Let's do the math: the top five "global tablet sector" vendors' total market share adds up to 78.9%.  That leaves 21.1% of the market unaccounted for.


    Are there really 21 other vendors each with barely more than 1% average market share?


     


    Maybe NPD should lump the ~1% no-hopers into an "other" group with 21.2% share and put them in 2nd place above Samsung.


    That would put things in a whole different perspective, wouldn't it?  Samsung would be a distant third behind the no-hoper group.



     


    Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. By my calculations, 100% would equal 21.673 million total units sold. That means the rest of the vendors sold 4.573 million units. That is an awfully high unit amount. I just can not see the remaining vendors selling that amount of tablets. I'd like to see the complete list.

Sign In or Register to comment.