Apple market share is down, again

1246

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 107
    Quote:

    I just did a quote in the UK applestore for a dual 1.8 with 2mb of ram and 2 250gig drives. I did the same in the US store and the difference was around $1700



    This is why I don't have a G5. I'd love to have one though.



    No kidding. Apple's UK Mac prices suck. Many people I've talked to about computers just view Macs as 'too expensive' over here.



    Lemon Bon Bon
  • Reply 62 of 107
    Quote:

    1) Compatibility issues.

    2) Apple marketshare doesn't grow even if OS X's does...in the near term. How successful will they be at keeping the clones out of their existing markets?

    3) Can Apple survive #2 to reap the eventual benefits? Maybe they would be better off as a software and CE company...see Microsoft.



    1. Not if Apple makes them for HP in a nice blue box. Yeesh, Apple couldn't grow marketshare now even if they had demand? They couldn't meet iPod demand! A partner like HP might allow Apple to up their capacity and cover Apple's extra exposure. (I guess upping production and reducing prices is a risk if sales don't meet expectation. But hey, that would be HP's distribution arm stepping up to bat...)



    As for Apple's traditional markets. Well, at the same price. What you gonna buy? HP or Apple? An incentive for HP to sell into non-Mac markets. I'm assuming HP Pod and iPod will be priced fixed. So it will be up to HP to use their distribution channels to sell in places where the iPod isn't. And I assure you, there are loads of places the iPod isn't. I'm disappointed but not surprised it didn't sell a million. It's not 'everywhere' over here.



    2. Doesn't matter if 'X' is growing. If Apple makes machines for HP and HP sells more machines than Apple can per quarter using HP's fabled distribution arm then I'm sure HP would be delighted to take half of Apple's infamous profit margins. Apple gets a cut of evey HP machine HP sells.



    3. See 2. Would it really matter if there were 'no' Macs? 'X' IS the 'Mac'. If a company like HP allowed Apple to go 'software' only and detonate the 'doomsday scenario' on Redmond then it would be a sad day and a joyous day for me. Intel freed from Redmond. Loads of people get to try iLife and 'X' without spending a fortune on a computer (when the computer/PC they've got works just 'fine'.)



    Part of me wonders if the alliance with IBM is Apple's last roll of the PPC dice.



    Software and non Mac cpu sales are now at 37%. Mac sales are relatively static. Mac share is falling. Again. If those figures keep rising and falling respectively?



    Say non Mac cpu business at sustained 70% and the Mac cpu business continues to lose money (take away the iPod sales/profits and look at Apple's recent quarter again...)



    iTunes/iPod on PC has shown Apple to be an adept Wintel player.



    And they've taken on M$, Dell, Sony, HP...and all the cheapo flash players...



    AND they've shown a willingness to a. Put the boot in M$ b Clone and make strategic partnerships with PC players like HP and retail partnerships to increase mindshare and distribution.



    It will be interesting to see where we are at the end of the '5 year' IBM/Apple pact.



    Lemon Bon Bon
  • Reply 63 of 107
    I'm not sure if the above takes into account the Apple stores strategy.



    Along with the iPods, Apple's great hope of growing mindshare and marketshare...?



    Lemon Bon Bon
  • Reply 64 of 107
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by eVo

    You'd think that with all these Apple Stores in the US, their marketshare would be increasing.



    Agreed. It seems that the only people buying from Apple retail stores are Mac people (iPod users excluded).



    While the Apple retail stores are bringing in revenue, they are not bringing Wintel converts like we all thought they would.
  • Reply 65 of 107
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by The General

    I think in the consumer market, more macs are being sold, the top pc companies, especially dell, sell tons more pcs to corporations, thousands at a pop, all those add up, if you took that away the numbers would be lower.

    \




    This is why Apple needs to license Mac OS X to companies like IBM (and now HP) for business sales.



    If worker joe, works on Windows all day long, what platform do you think he will look at when its time to buy a new home computer?



    I really hope someday Apple realizes this.
  • Reply 66 of 107
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JLL

    Jesus, comparing a G5 to a Celeron? How about looking at the price of the 3.2GHz P4?







    Um, no, I'm comparing a Celeron to an equivalent of a bargain bin Mac for the developing countries in Asia, South America and elsewhere. You know a $400-500 PC that will be plenty fast enough for Friendster, web browsing and e-mail. A 2.4 GHz Celeron is a speedy chip.



    And yes, I've seen the price of a 3.2 GHz P4, and of a 2.2 GHz Athlon 64. Are you sure you want to see the price of a 3.2 GHz P4?



    Right now I can get a Dell Dimension 8300 with:

    3.2 GHz P4

    1 GB RAM

    120 GB S-ATA HDD

    8x DVD+RW drive

    128 MB Radeon 9800 Pro

    SoundBlaster Audigy 2

    3-port FireWire PCI card

    Gigabit ethernet

    etc.



    for guess what? $2000. That's a Dell mind you. A whitebox PC would be even cheaper. An equally configured Athlon 64 2.2 GHz from HP is $1800...Yep, as cheap as a 1.6 GHz G5 tower with less RAM, HDD space, a slower DVD burner, a much slower GeForce FX 5200...



    I could build the above 3.2 GHz P4 for $1600 and an Athlon 64 2.2 GHz for even less ordering parts through a reputable online PC shop like NewEgg.com.



    It's me who should be rolling the eyes.
  • Reply 67 of 107
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Eugene,



    Do you recognize that until recently Apple was artificially crippled by the lack of a G5? And that their product lines were crippled because of it? Are you ignoring this, or just unwilling to admit it?



    You can recognize the fact that the next year and a half are more important than the last five, right?
  • Reply 68 of 107
    aslan^aslan^ Posts: 599member
    I'm the only person I know who bought a mac, everyone else thinks they look cool and well, they really want one, but they got such a great deal from such and such or "they dont do graphics and stuff".



    Even my good buddy, a computer nerd, bought a PC laptop over an ibook because of the price $700 as opposed to $1000, he only later figured out he should of gone with the ibook.



    Even when I preach to the computer illiterate, about "maintenance free" and "doesnt crash" or "user friendly" the bottom line is still price.



    But that is how things are these days. People dont understand quality and are complacent with mediocrity.



    There are some of us that understand quality. I say apple continues to make rock solid computers for us, secure and based on open standards. Even if Apple and OSX disappeared we could all still compile open source apps without a problem. Thats what I want, and I will pay for it. Some people dont know what they want. Apple should market to people who understand quality, or at least think they do.



    As for marketshare in Asia, maybe japan (japanese people will pay for quality), korea is doubtful (korean government hamstrings imports mercilessly with taxes) and china... really I dont think so. China is busy developing their own os and applications to be freed from the imperialist west (I read it somewhere), I can see it now... ConfuciOS, you must answer a zen riddle to log in. But really, china has no interest in Apple computers, they have a huge component industy to include semi-conductors, hard drives, ram and I think they will be making their own processors too, to go with their OS.



    Apple should concentrate on where people know and like them, the industrialized west. And too compete here, they just need to get a little cheaper and completely shed all the disinformation that has built up over the years (cant do that when an entry level imac is what $1299 or something). I thought very poorly of macs until I worked in IT for a year, after that I wanted something that "just worked" (I liked that campaign) and was happy with my purchase. I look forward to buying another apple laptop in the future, and if I ever had the need for workstation performance I wouldnt hesitate on the G5, right now I dont need that, all I need is a reliable laptop.



    And as for AAPL, Im looking for a good entry point to get back in, Im thinking just under 20.
  • Reply 69 of 107
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member
    Apple was going into a marketshare dive, and that has a lot of momentum. The G5 is slowly ocunteracting that momentum, mark my words.



    PS, there are still all those Rev. B holdouts...
  • Reply 70 of 107
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,341member
    I'm sorry but Eugene is telling the truth.



    The problem with Apple has always been far too much conservatism. On the iMac and eMac for instance Apple will choose to give 32MB versus 64MB video. This on a machine that cannot be upgrade. I haven't bought a new Mac in 6 years.



    WindowsXP is much closer to Apple than Win98 ever was to MacOS. Apple needs to go into fast break mode. Heres what I would do.



    eMac- Drop the entry down to $699 Top unit $999

    iMac- 17" $1299 20" $1999

    Powermac Express- Tower single G5 $1299. Plastic Case

    Powermac - All Duals $1699 and up

    bMac- $499 small headless G5 3+ must purchased. ARD included



    Then Apple needs to maximize their return on software. Serialize OSX and all other apps. No more "I don't like Apple's software prices I'll just get it off of carracho" rants. Despite the antics of Adobe and others I believe Apple has to reduce their dependence on hardware sales. Software is the key. Developers are far more affected by lack of opportunity(marketshare) than they are about Apple competing.



    The bMac is important because it's the perfect small machine for using in a business evironmments or home environments where small clients are all on the network.



    In the cases of bMac and Powermac Express Apple needs to back off of design and move towards a nice utilitarian look that doesn't cost a bunch. Don't worry about cannibalization ship boxes and try to attach $oftware. Developer Consolidation is happening in the industry whether Apple would compete or not. The goal now is to get people over. Sell Macs and for God's Sake lowerer the prices over in EU and Asia!
  • Reply 71 of 107
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Apple needs to go into fast break mode.



    But Apple couldn't do this until very recently. If after another year or so, when all of the products have been revised, Apple hasn't made a major move THEN we can complain. Until then we don't know if Apple is going to do the right thing or not.
  • Reply 72 of 107
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    eMac- Drop the entry down to $699 Top unit $999

    iMac- 17" $1299 20" $1999

    Powermac Express- Tower single G5 $1299. Plastic Case

    Powermac - All Duals $1699 and up

    bMac- $499 small headless G5 3+ must purchased. ARD included





    Good idea. I was thinking of something a little more aggressive.



    Redesign the all-in-one eMac, and called it the eMac 2. The eMac 2 would have a G4 and 17" CRT monitor. The eMac 2 monitor is a separate Apple branded CRT but is built into the eMac 2 base in such a way that looks like an all-in-one (but isn't, so the monitor could be replaced or upgraded). The eMac 2 base station is your bMac G4. Since the eMac2 would have a G4, price them at cost + 5%.



    Redesign the iMac like the eMac 2 call it the iMac 3. But use a G5 and a LCD screen. The iMac 3 would be semi-upgradable, that is the harddrive and optical drive could be replaced or upgraded. Sell the iMac 3 with and without the LCD. The iMac 3 base is your bMac G5. Price the iMac 3 competitively.



    Add a Powermac Consumer tower (same as previous Mirror-Drive towers) with a single G4 at 1.4 GHz and a superdrive starting at $999.



    I like your idea regarding Powermac Express and the Dual-G5 Powermacs.



    Thanks



    Dave
  • Reply 73 of 107
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Then Apple needs to maximize their return on software. Serialize OSX and all other apps. No more "I don't like Apple's software prices I'll just get it off of carracho" rants. Despite the antics of Adobe and others I believe Apple has to reduce their dependence on hardware sales. Software is the key.



    And when Jobs next gives his "you can't protect digital files / stop treating paying customers like criminals" pep-talk to the Music Moguls he'll get (quite rightly) laughed out the room.



    Product activation does nothing but annoy your paying customers.



    Apple is already ahead of this game by making money off hardware (iPod and iMac) and services (.Mac and iTMS) and pricing software at levels where you'd have to be a bored teenager to make it worth your while (time=money) to steal it.



    Also note that most of the iLife suite is a pain in the arse to pirate as it's so big, something that I don't think is totally accidental.
  • Reply 74 of 107
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,341member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bunge

    But Apple couldn't do this until very recently. If after another year or so, when all of the products have been revised, Apple hasn't made a major move THEN we can complain. Until then we don't know if Apple is going to do the right thing or not.





    Bunge I think you're totally correct. That's why I,and probably many others, are waiting with baited breath for the next PMG5 and iMacs. They will determine how agressive Apple can become. I know that I personally will be adding to Apple coffers I'm going to be in the market for Final Cut Pro, DVDSP, Logic 7 and other small ancillary apps. Please Please Apple give me the hardware to run these apps.



    Quote:

    Redesign the all-in-one eMac, and called it the eMac 2. The eMac 2 would have a G4 and 17" CRT monitor. The eMac 2 monitor is a separate Apple branded CRT but is built into the eMac 2 base in such a way that looks like an all-in-one (but isn't, so the monitor could be replaced or upgraded). The eMac 2 base station is your bMac G4. Since the eMac2 would have a G4, price them at cost + 5%.



    Davek I'm shocked! I too was thinking alont the lines of Apple creating a headless with a monitor that could be removed. The only problem I see would be the cries for Apple to ship the units sans monitor. Apple is afraid, and rightly so, that if they go "headless" the head that eventually gets affixed to the computer will not have an Apple logo. That's a hit to revenue that they loath to give up.



    The bMac would be an attempt to satiate business that crave low cost but dependable hardware. While Apple would not make much profit on the hardware having a min purchase of 3 units allows for protection against the other in the lineup. I still could see these selling to the multi-computer family dwelling. Apple has the software strategy with the "Family Packs" for iLife and OSX to make sure this is feasible. This works out well because every $1500 for these bMacs would be 3 Mac computers to offset the "marketshare tally" and would generate more revenue with each version of iLife and OSX purchased(family Packs). Yes Apple ...give away some hardware to gain access to selling the end user hardware.



    Quote:

    Product activation does nothing but annoy your paying customers.



    Apple is already ahead of this game by making money off hardware (iPod and iMac) and services (.Mac and iTMS) and pricing software at levels where you'd have to be a bored teenager to make it worth your while (time=money) to steal it.



    Also note that most of the iLife suite is a pain in the arse to pirate as it's so big, something that I don't think is totally accidental.



    The money Apple is losing encompasses more than the Carracho Crowd. When they sell a legit copy of iLife that copy can be installed onto multiple computers. Same with the OS. This is not fair to Apple. They deserve to be compensated fairly. I always here Mac users complaining about the high price of Mac Hardware but they always seem to turn a deaf ear to the low cost of capable Mac software. You can't have it both ways. Either pay the higher HW costs and realize Apple is not forcing you to buy the Family packs or demand Apple lower the prices of the HW and pay what you owe for SW.
  • Reply 75 of 107
    A G4 in a desktop anything is a bad move. G5 across the board. Duals on pro line, single in consumer line. All should start at 2.0 GHz and go higher from there.
  • Reply 76 of 107
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Davek I'm shocked! I too was thinking alont the lines of Apple creating a headless with a monitor that could be removed. The only problem I see would be the cries for Apple to ship the units sans monitor. Apple is afraid, and rightly so, that if they go "headless" the head that eventually gets affixed to the computer will not have an Apple logo. That's a hit to revenue that they loath to give up.





    They would sell only the base unit for both the eMac 2 and iMac 3. Although, the only place you would find them is Apple's online store.
  • Reply 77 of 107
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by stupider...likeafox

    Also note that most of the iLife suite is a pain in the arse to pirate as it's so big, something that I don't think is totally accidental.



    And keep raising the minimum requirements of each iLife update, so that if someone does steal it, they need to running a relatively new Macintosh to use it.
  • Reply 78 of 107
    M$





  • Reply 79 of 107
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Blue Shift

    A G4 in a desktop anything is a bad move.



    Why is that? I have a 933 MHz QuickSilver and I'm very happy with it. A low-end G4 tower would be good for schools and people who want to upgrade a G3 or Wintel product without spending a whole lot of money but still want a tower.
  • Reply 80 of 107
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Dave K.

    Why is that? I have a 933 MHz QuickSilver and I'm very happy with it. A low-end G4 tower would be good for schools and people who want to upgrade a G3 or Wintel product without spending a whole lot of money but still want a tower.



    I have a 1.25 AlPB. But people who know not apple don't care. They see the MHz and price and that's enough. They see 1999 technology at 1999 prices, and in a way of cos they're right.
Sign In or Register to comment.