Apple Computer Market Share
Was just curious if anyone had any knowledge or opinions on why or if Apple has become content with its current market share as compared to "PC" or if they plan on trying to build on the success of iPods and try and convert more users.. seems like its been years since I have seen any kind of advertising campaign for anything Apple computer related.. With the new Mac Mini and other technology improvements why not launch a marketing campaign designed to tempt users of Windows to sample other Mac products besides the iPod and get them to switch?
Comments
Originally posted by webavatar
Was just curious if anyone had any knowledge or opinions on why or if Apple has become content with its current market share as compared to "PC" or if they plan on trying to build on the success of iPods and try and convert more users.. seems like its been years since I have seen any kind of advertising campaign for anything Apple computer related.. With the new Mac Mini and other technology improvements why not launch a marketing campaign designed to tempt users of Windows to sample other Mac products besides the iPod and get them to switch?
They may do that once Tiger hits. Apple was kidding themselves when they tried the first switch campaign with Jaguar. The OS just wasn't up to par to have PC users switch. I think Tiger is the app that can switch consumers and Tiger Server switching IT guys.
The campaign is coming...trust.
Now they have a headless product in the consumer lineup. This time it will have a better chance.
Let's keep this focused on current hardware regarding switchers.
Originally posted by hmurchison
They may do that once Tiger hits. Apple was kidding themselves when they tried the first switch campaign with Jaguar. The OS just wasn't up to par to have PC users switch. I think Tiger is the app that can switch consumers and Tiger Server switching IT guys.
The campaign is coming...trust.
I don't think Tiger is the key. Apple never markets their OS like other products. I think the keys are the mini and iLife. The mini offers the price and iLife offers the ease of use that many have already been introducted to with iTunes.
You and I may understand that Tiger will make things all around better, but the real interaction with a computer should be focused on the apps, not the OS. I think Apple knows this and that is why they don't market the OS (except for developers) but rather market the apps.
Originally posted by webavatar
Was just curious if anyone had any knowledge or opinions on why or if Apple has become content with its current market share as compared to "PC" or if they plan on trying to build on the success of iPods and try and convert more users.. seems like its been years since I have seen any kind of advertising campaign for anything Apple computer related.. With the new Mac Mini and other technology improvements why not launch a marketing campaign designed to tempt users of Windows to sample other Mac products besides the iPod and get them to switch?
um apple has obviously been hard at work at this since spring 2003. the ipod halo effect IS happening (i dont feel like looking up the proof, but it's there). all advertising does is increase mindshare, and i think we can agree that apple's mindshare is about as good as it gets right now. you cant buy or talk about an ipod without hearing something about their computers too. patience.
Average Joe PC user doesn't buy a PC because it was made by Dell or HP or whoever, they buy any PC because they believe it will satisfy their computing needs, it comes with Windows loaded, then he buys software that works with that.
Many PC users are fed BS about how Apple is not compatible with Windows, ie. their Word docs and Excel spreadsheets won't work etc.
Apple needs a campaign that dispells the incompatability myth (more so than the CPU myth) and gets the message across that the apps that ship with the computers offer incredible value.
The resident Apple journo at The Age (a Melbourne newspaper) made a great argument that if you work out the individual cost of the apps that Apple ship with their computers, the actual computer itself is thrown in free of charge
The fact that the computers look great, perform flawlessly, are easy to use and can now be bought for nix are just bonuses.
Originally posted by Bart Smastard
Apple needs a campaign that dispells the incompatability myth (more so than the CPU myth) and gets the message across that the apps that ship with the computers offer incredible value.
The resident Apple journo at The Age (a Melbourne newspaper) made a great argument that if you work out the individual cost of the apps that Apple ship with their computers, the actual computer itself is thrown in free of charge
The fact that the computers look great, perform flawlessly, are easy to use and can now be bought for nix are just bonuses.
Hahaha!
Also, when we're fed reports that Apple controls about 3.6% of the market, you have to ask yourself, what market are they talking about. If we're talking about professional video, sound and cinema editing, it's somewhere around 90%. Ever heard of a little company by the name of Pixar? In some non-editing markets it can be anywhere from 10 - 60% - public schools, small business, etc. Where Microsoft - and the rest of the PC world get their 3.6% number from is the fat that when you go into a large, multi-national business with billions of dollars in retail a year, you'll find that they use PC boxes almost exclusively. Why? Simple - legacy. Businesses hate to spend money to upgrade anything. They will run their computers into the ground, trash them and buy new, cheaper ones.
The home-based user market is really where attention should be focused. In this case, I do believe the iPod has had a small halo effect. The mac Mini and Tiger should win a few more people over. Most of the PC users I talk to flat out refuse to use Macs because they're either too expensive, too incompatible with their files, or too hard to use. But you know ... maybe we don't want Apple to have a huge percentage of the market. I'd love to see it around 10% with the demand to keep them innovating and releasing better products even quicker, but go too much beyond that, ego sinks in, and we become like Micro$oft - releasing the same buggy programs to our customers, constantly under attack from viruses and spyware, and the reputation of an average consumer product. Apple is an industry leader when it comes to innovation, and I would prefer they stay there...
Please stop talking like you know something. Gamers don't push the PC market at all business does. I'm working on a quote for 36 desktops and 10 laptops. Nobody is trying to get rich selling to gamers. LOL..get real man.
The Mac mini has a 4 week wait. Powerbooks sell as fast as we can get stock. For the love of God would some of you posers please stop trying to sound like you know "what's hot and what's not"
No offense but unless you're selling computers everyday for a large reseller you probably don't have a clue what's really going on.
Originally posted by Aurora
The years of everything Powermac vs your stuck with it all in one's had killed off their market in my view. Sticking to the all in one nonsense and trying to forcefeed crap video on consumers has hurt apple and is today. Consumers are gamers and with no machine that can game drove away most gamers in droves. Gamers push the PC world and tech, In Macs world it a whole different thing. For example they have a Almost $2000 imac that has a video system that cant run well in native resolution???wtf? FX5200 cant push 1024 x 768 let alone a 20"native resolution while playing UT2K4.........stuff like this. FX5200 is about 20 bucks per chip why is it in a $2000 iMac??? So they sell a nice display and glue on a video system with performance from years gone by. Some consumers are savy so faced with a poor imac or very expensive powermac off they went to the PC world. Marketshare is a fraction of what apple had 20 years ago and apple is the reason. The so called Consumer line performance is bad and the top Powermac is so so. Look at Doom3 and its very clear Macs performance is very poor in the one place consumers need and want it.
20 years ago Apple had the only GUI computer available on the market. It revolutionized the way people looked at and worked with their computers. As other companies began ripping off their ideas and designs (I think we all remember the GUI fiasco with Micro$soft) they made shoddy computers for half the price.
Also, you're expecting the iMac to be a gaming computer and it really isn't. If you want a gamers computer, you're going to have to buy a PowerMac or a PC, but either way, you're going to have to load it up with RAM and drop $250 - $400 for a top of the line graphics card. You're also ignoring the REAL reason the FX5200 Ultra is in the iMac - the engineering behind the system. You can't throw a 6800 Ultra DDL or 9800 Pro into the iMac - you don't have enough space for heat to dissipate and you WILL melt down your system and fry the card. My iMac G4 has a GeForce 4MX - runs Halo and UT2K4 just fine. The 5200FX is a nice little card and will suit the *average* user just fine. Apple really isn't after the gamer market. They lose the hardcores ... so what. The Macintosh product line will satisfy the casual gamer.
As for your comment that the top of the line PowerMac is so-so. What are you comparing it to, a Cray? The Dual 2.5 G5 is hands-down the best personal computer available on the planet. With 64-bit architecture, room for 8GB of DDR RAM, PCI and PCI-X expandability ... not to mention the sheer beastly power of dual G5 processors - it absolutley destroys any kind PC box. Why do you think Hollywood uses Mac almost exclusively to do editing on? Because you can't get the same performance out of a PC.
I don't see the iMac going anywhere, design-wise. It was an unusually strong seller for Apple during the Christmas quarter, and it's still an obvious choice for anyone comfortable with buying an Apple system.
The mini is so successful because it hugely lowers the perceived risk of trying out a Mac. You're not replacing your whole system, you're just adding this cute, cheap, nonthreatening little box... The iMac remains the best all-around consumer desktop, its flaws notwithstanding (they're pretty easy to fix, anyway).
I do see a future in Apple headless systems now, though, and the reason is HDTV. The mini was engineered with HDTVs in mind, and I think we'll see it evolve in that direction. Not as a "media center," whatever that is, but as a Mac that uses a TV for a monitor, that's also small and quiet enough to disappear into a living room, and that is also priced in the general ballpark of a TV or stereo component. This accomplishes the same basic goal that the iMac does—making the computer vanish behind the interface—without requiring Apple to manufacture HDTVs with Macs built into them. It also frees computers from being chained to the desk so that they can fit into the living room. I expect the mini to be the first of a new family of machines built for this.
In the meantime, I expect Apple to price aggressively. I don't see $999 iMacs as at all unlikely, and sooner rather than later. They might even go lower over time, just like the original iMac did.
Originally posted by Amorph
Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer seems to think that it's time to pull the stops out. Apple has, accordingly, revived the Switch campaign.
Yeah, if there was ever a time for the Switch campaign, it's now.
It's a delicate issue of course, but I'd also expect to see more overt references to escaping the virus and spyware infestations on Windows.
Gamers don't push the PC market at all business does.
Not really. Business computer life cycle is too long because of the costs of the upgrade. A typical business (even IT oriented one) will upgrade every other version of NT OS, for example. (over a period of 3-4 years) It's not even the cost of hardware, but the cost of support and setup.
Gamers on the other hand, are willing to pay and constantly upgrade to the latest hardware - the are where the profit margings are the highest! ATI makes a LOT less money on X300 than they do on X800.
Apple will never have the market share close to PCs until they allow generics and separate software from hardware. Competition is what does it in every industry and unless Apple allows others to compete with itself in an OSX PC market, its market share will stay in single digits.
Originally posted by skatman
.....Apple will never have the market share close to PCs...
..and they don't really need it.
Apple is thriving despite the overall market share.
If Apple has to start supporting tons of parts that make up a machine that they sell - that will be hell!
Apple packages the whole widget. OS and hardware.
And that's why "it just works".
Besides, market share is overrated.
Where I work (Film/DVD/TV Production) Apple has 90% market share.
However, to say they don't care about market share is crap. Market share dicatates how many developers you have working on your platform. Yes, this number can vary within specific markets (such as film vs big business). this has a big effect on how people choose to purchase. If the apps aren't there, it is not even a choice. Right or wrong, if Apple is percieved to have a presence then people will think about them when it comes time to buy. In film, I'm sure Apple is considered. In big companies, not really - until perhaps recently. Read the article linked above, they are saying the even the market penetration of the iPod is making people think about Apple's other products. All you gamers who think that gaming drives sales, must also realize that the dearth of games on the Mac is because of low market share.
The fear of not having quality apps on the Mac platform I'm sure was one reason why Apple went ahead with all the iLife apps. They stepped on some toes in doing so, but if those weren't there, do you think such quality stuff would have been written by someone else for an OS with 3% market share?
I don't think Apple needs big market share, but they need to be percieved as growing not shrinking. If they doubled to 6% they would be happy in the black, with lots of great financial press and still be a small player on a global scale. However, in the near term that would be enough to keep the doom sayers away and keep developer interest up.
Originally posted by Cake
Apple is thriving despite the overall market share.
For now. But as I've said before if someone like Adobe were to abandon the platform, that could change in a heartbeat. Business that remain stagnate usually do not survive.
Where I work (Film/DVD/TV Production) Apple has 90% market share.
May I ask exactly where do you get this figure of 90% from?
Originally posted by skatman
May I ask exactly where do you get this figure of 90% from?
From walking into my mixing stage every morning, booting up my G5 and opening FibreJet to pick the hard drives that my project(s) has been loaded on the three Xraids and an Xserve that I access everyday.
This pic is a bit old as we now have two more Xserve RAIDs along with the xServe.
The G4 towards the bottom is used for backing up all the audio we work on via Retrospect (OS9 then, now it's all X). You can almost see another G4 at the top that is "The Pusher" which delivers files to another building for encoding.
What's not pictured is three Quicksilvers and two G5's which are for our Pro Tools rigs and upstairs we have five more G5's, 11 iBooks, and another Xserve.
That's only the area I work in.
Within the building (which is the Sound Department) there are probably 30 more G4's/G5's - easily.
Go to any professional studio/post production facility and it's mostly Mac.
From walking into my mixing stage every morning...
No more questions.