Mac sales on pace to slide 5% in Apple's September quarter

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
As the larger PC market continues to struggle, Apple, too, has seen its Mac sales decline year over year ? a trend that is on pace to continue in the current September quarter.

Products


The latest data on domestic Mac sales from the NPD Group, detailed on Monday by analyst Gene Munster of Piper Jaffray, suggests that Apple saw flat growth in the month of July, which is the first month of the company's September quarter.

Munster characterized the data as "neutral to slight positive" news for Apple. He has forecast that total worldwide Mac sales for the quarter will be down 5 percent year over year.

Apple sold 3.8 million Macs last quarter, a total that was 200,000 off from the 4 million the company sold in the same period of 2012.

As for the September quarter of 2012, Apple sold 4.9 million Macs during the three-month frame last year, which was then a year over year increase of 9 percent. If Munster's prediction for 2013 proves accurate, Mac sales in the current September quarter would be around 4.65 million.

Mac sales ??and the PC market as a whole ? are being cannibalized by tablets, and in particular by Apple's market leading iPad lineup.

iPad cannibalization and an oversupply of MacBooks caught Apple executives by surprise earlier this year, AppleInsider revealed earlier this month. That situation is said to have caused the company to adopt a more conservative approach with channel inventory, keeping stock low to avoid another oversupply.

The Mac also plays a relatively minor role in Apple's total business, with the lion's share of revenue now coming from the iPhone and iPad.

Even more diminished is the iPod, as NPD's latest data shows domestic sales of Apple's portable media players down 41 percent year over year in the month of July. Munster has forecast that iPod sales will be down 20 percent year over year in the September quarter.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 68
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Not if they get their updates out, it won't.

  • Reply 2 of 68
    pazuzupazuzu Posts: 1,728member


    All Macs need retina fast.


    Where's the next big thing?


    Everything is getting stale.

  • Reply 3 of 68
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Originally Posted by pazuzu View Post


    All Macs need retina fast.


    Where's the next big thing?


    Everything is getting stale.



     


    lol.

  • Reply 4 of 68
    Where are the updates Apple? One does not live on MacBook Airs alone.
  • Reply 5 of 68
    dugbugdugbug Posts: 283member
    I'd be glad to help apple out with that slide if they release the update to the minis ;)
  • Reply 6 of 68
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,334member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pazuzu View Post


    All Macs need retina fast.


    Where's the next big thing?


    Everything is getting stale.





    Yeah right.. so "stale" they are still making more revenue on "PC" sales than the next competitor.



    wutever.

  • Reply 7 of 68

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pazuzu View Post


    All Macs need retina fast.


    Where's the next big thing?


    Everything is getting stale.



     


    I had to check your name because for a moment I thought you were this site's resident dark cloud of doom.  image

  • Reply 8 of 68
    monstrositymonstrosity Posts: 2,182member


    I think the problem is that the old Macbooks just aren't breaking down! 


     


    I normally replace mine when it dies or becomes obsolete. My last macbook just keeps working though, I'm tempted to throw it at a wall just so I have an excuse to buy a new one. It has travelled twice round the world, 13 countries and 40,000 miles by land. Not bad really.

  • Reply 9 of 68
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 30,398member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post


    The iMacs need a higher resolution screen.  Especially the 27 inch which has almost the same pixel count as an iPad. 


     


    They have put too much money in the form factor.  The super thin form factor is expensive to manufactuer.  Most people would rather have a thicker back panel (the thinner panel looks cool but does not offer any space savings at all) UHD screen, and slighter cheaper price.


     


    I'm thinking of buying a 27 iMac but the screen resolution and price is bothering me. 



     


    Why does it need a higher resolution screen? I have one and it's a great computer. Whatever Apple has, that's what you'll buy. If you just need "any computer", feel free to buy a Dell... I hear they are practically giving those things away.

  • Reply 10 of 68
    dreyfus2dreyfus2 Posts: 1,067member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post


    The iMacs need a higher resolution screen.  Especially the 27 inch which has almost the same pixel count as an iPad. 


     


    They have put too much money in the form factor.  The super thin form factor is expensive to manufactuer.  Most people would rather have a thicker back panel (the thinner panel looks cool but does not offer any space savings at all) UHD screen, and slighter cheaper price.


     


    I'm thinking of buying a 27 iMac but the screen resolution and price is bothering me. 



     


    I am not having an iMac, but two Thunderbolt Displays, which are, for most purposes identical. No idea what the problem with the resolution should be. Text looks perfectly smooth, even when zooming in to insane levels. I also have the 15" Retina MBP, and the improvements on the TB-Display are existent, but certainly not earth-shattering (at "normal" viewing distances for each device).


     


    I can understand people asking for higher resolutions on the MacBook Air models or the iPad Mini, but the iMac? Also do not see what the form factor has to do with it. The rMBP's panel is not thicker than the one on the "classic" MBP despite being Retina.


     


    The next resolution improvement to the 27" iMac and displays will either be a quadrupling of pixels (for which there is not even a GPU yet), or plain 4K, which currently would require a GPU that is not suitable for either iMacs or Laptops, if you require somewhat acceptable performance.

  • Reply 11 of 68
    kpluckkpluck Posts: 500member

    Quote:


    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     


    They have put too much money in the form factor.



     


    I disagree. I think the idea of making the edges thinner while losing a useful feature, the optical drive, was a great idea. Add to that, putting all the ports and the card reader on the back of the machine was inspired. It will take years for Apple's competition to adopt these ideas.


     


    "But what about the Mac Mini" you say? Simple, make it even smaller and reduce its performance where possible. Oh, and don't neglect the awful keyboard and mouse, I am sure there are many other ways to make them even cooler looking while reducing their functionality.


     


    I see a bright future ahead for Apple's computer offering if they just put in the work to accomplish some of these suggestions.


     


    -kpluck

  • Reply 12 of 68
    wardcwardc Posts: 150member


    The resolution on the 27" iMac is just fine. 2560x1440 is awesome and images and video look great. Retina is not that big a thing for me, as I am happy with having more screen real-estate as-is. The default resolution on a Retina 15" MacBook Pro only gives you as much screen real estate as a 1440x900 display, which sucks.


     


    I do wish Apple would bring back the 17" MacBook Pro.


     


    And yes, when these new Mac Pros are selling like hotcakes there will be no room to complain about Mac sales. The movie theaters already brainwashing the masses with loads of hype and teaser sensation. Every 12 year old kid going back to school is gonna want one....and won't stop till they get one!

  • Reply 13 of 68
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post


    They have put too much money in the form factor.



     


    Do you have any clue WHY they've made it the shape it is? 






    The super thin form factor is expensive to manufactuer.




     


    Obviously not enough to matter. Why would you even say that?






    Most people would rather have a thicker back panel (the thinner panel looks cool but does not offer any space savings at all) UHD screen, and slighter cheaper price.




     


    A larger case wouldn't make it cheaper. Stop trying to speak for "most people" when the claim is the opposite of reality.

  • Reply 14 of 68
    dreyfus2dreyfus2 Posts: 1,067member


    5% does not say much without knowing the figure for the overall PC market. Looking at our large clients, we have seen little besides replacements and some servers for the last three months. Servers seem to be picking up in Europe though, as quite a few companies are cancelling cloud plans thanks to the NSA hubbub.

  • Reply 15 of 68
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    sog35 wrote: »
    The iMacs need a higher resolution screen.  Especially the 27 inch which has almost the same pixel count as an iPad. 

    They have put too much money in the form factor.  The super thin form factor is expensive to manufactuer.  Most people would rather have a thicker back panel (the thinner panel looks cool but does not offer any space savings at all) UHD screen, and slighter cheaper price.

    I'm thinking of buying a 27 iMac but the screen resolution and price is bothering me. 

    Wait a minute....you think the form factor is expensive to manufacture but making the displays retina wouldn't be? You want a 27" retina iMac for cheaper than the current iMac. :lol:
  • Reply 16 of 68
    cash907cash907 Posts: 893member


    Which is why they need to stop screwing around, and release the Haswell updates already. This is just beyond ridiculous at this point. Mavericks is perfectly stable, stop stalling and release them. Not every product needs fanfare and a huge event for Pete's sake.

  • Reply 17 of 68
    davendaven Posts: 476member
    I a
    I think the problem is that the old Macbooks just aren't breaking down! 

    I normally replace mine when it dies or becomes obsolete. My last macbook just keeps working though, I'm tempted to throw it at a wall just so I have an excuse to buy a new one. It has travelled twice round the world, 13 countries and 40,000 miles by land. Not bad really.

    I agree. My MacBook is over seven years old now and is finally getting to the point where I wlill likely replace it. The typical upgrade period used to be about three years but since even an old pc is fast enough for most tasks, why upgrade?
  • Reply 18 of 68
    andysolandysol Posts: 2,506member
    kpluck wrote: »
    I disagree. I think the idea of making the edges thinner while losing a useful feature, the optical drive, was a great idea. Add to that, putting all the ports and the card reader on the back of the machine was inspired. It will take years for Apple's competition to adopt these ideas.

    All the ports on the back of the iMac? Hello? They've had that since day one of the G4. They only moved the card reader- which isn't a big deal at all.
    What do you use more- the card reader now, or the USB port back when you had to plug in your iPhone to sync? It didn't seem to bother anyone then.

    I'm a Blu-ray fan. Huge one. But I realize in the minority- and I'm all for the optical going bye bye. Get a $20 Samsung external from amazon and put it in a drawer for the once every 3 yrs you'll use it.

    Go complain elsewhere- it's annoying here.
  • Reply 19 of 68

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post


    The iMacs need a higher resolution screen.  Especially the 27 inch which has almost the same pixel count as an iPad. 


     


    They have put too much money in the form factor.  The super thin form factor is expensive to manufactuer.  Most people would rather have a thicker back panel (the thinner panel looks cool but does not offer any space savings at all) UHD screen, and slighter cheaper price.


     


    I'm thinking of buying a 27 iMac but the screen resolution and price is bothering me. 



     


    I never understood Apple's anorexic obsession! As for me, I look at the front of my iMac and never, ever, see how thin it is. If they can continue this without sacrificing features, then I don't care, but there comes a point where it does not make sense. 

  • Reply 20 of 68
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post


    Which is why they need to stop screwing around, and release the Haswell updates already.


     


    Why should Apple react to what idiots tell them to do?






    Mavericks is perfectly stable…



     


    Er… 






    …stop stalling and release them.



     


    They're not waiting for Mavericks. When has Apple ever waited for software to release hardware?






     Not every product needs fanfare and a huge event for Pete's sake.



     


    Nor do they intend to give them one. They're waiting for Thunderbolt 2.

Sign In or Register to comment.