Apple cracks top-10 server brands during first quarter
Apple Inc. during the first quarter of 2007 broke into the top-10 server brands with its Xserve line, stepping over China-based Langchao, which fell from the rankings, according to the latest data from market research firm IDC.
The IDC report, cited by DigiTimes, indicates that Acer, Hitachi and Apple took eighth, ninth and tenth position with shipments of 14,900, 9,000 and 8,700 units, and on-quarter shipments growth of 5 percent, 26 percent and 73 percent, respectively.
Hitachi replaced China-based Lenovo, which joined Langchao in falling out of the top 10, according to the report.
Overall, worldwide server shipments in first quarter declined 11 percent on a quarterly basis as shipments from Dell and IBM -- ranked second and third -- fell 3 percent and 17 percent, respectively.
Seasonal effects, Intel's schedule to cut CPU prices in July, and AMD's plans to launch its native quad-core processor (Barcelona) in the second half of 2007 are all reported to have contributed to the drop in shipments.
Apple's launching of its fifth generation Xserve with Intel Dual Core Xeon processors is said to have boosted its growth in the server sector, as several enterprises began adopting the Mac-based enterprise machines.
Although Lenovo and Langchao did not list in the top-10 brands in first quarter 2007, their shipments still held level compared to the previous quarter, according to DigiTimes' sources. Those sources added that the reason Hitachi and Apple surpassed the China-based makers was due to their large on-quarter shipment growth.
The IDC report, cited by DigiTimes, indicates that Acer, Hitachi and Apple took eighth, ninth and tenth position with shipments of 14,900, 9,000 and 8,700 units, and on-quarter shipments growth of 5 percent, 26 percent and 73 percent, respectively.
Hitachi replaced China-based Lenovo, which joined Langchao in falling out of the top 10, according to the report.
Overall, worldwide server shipments in first quarter declined 11 percent on a quarterly basis as shipments from Dell and IBM -- ranked second and third -- fell 3 percent and 17 percent, respectively.
Seasonal effects, Intel's schedule to cut CPU prices in July, and AMD's plans to launch its native quad-core processor (Barcelona) in the second half of 2007 are all reported to have contributed to the drop in shipments.
Apple's launching of its fifth generation Xserve with Intel Dual Core Xeon processors is said to have boosted its growth in the server sector, as several enterprises began adopting the Mac-based enterprise machines.
Although Lenovo and Langchao did not list in the top-10 brands in first quarter 2007, their shipments still held level compared to the previous quarter, according to DigiTimes' sources. Those sources added that the reason Hitachi and Apple surpassed the China-based makers was due to their large on-quarter shipment growth.
Comments
Oh yeah, my stock will be arising.
It is good to see Apple is still in the game at all. Apple doesn't disclose the number of Xserves sold per quarter so it has been difficult to gauge their acceptance in this market segment. If they're growing as IDC states then that'll just spur further growth. I'm more interested now, by this news, to purchase Xserves than previously.
It's also good to see posters on this thread who get the importance of the story.
Apple clearly gets it, as they've stuck with this market for years, regularly dedicating enough resources to keep redesigning and refreshing their servers despite shipments which sound minuscule next the rest of the product line.
10's of millions of iPods, millions of Macs and... ...thousands of Xserves. I'm too lazy to do the math, but Apple probably sells more iPods in say, an hour, than Xserves in a year.
But a small shop that decides to go all Apple may buy 3-4 Xserves -- and a hundred or more Macs they probably would not have otherwise. And who knows in the future, may add maybe several hundred iPhones. And the same thing may happen in larger shops which decide to experiment with Apple in a division or a location, or say, for their graphics, video and sound guys as opposed to their Excel addicted bean counters and Word-bound marketing mavens (who could end up running Mac Office at a later date once the Xserve has a foothold in their companies).
Further, if future (or current?) Xserves can virtualize Windows Vista Server and Leopard Server in interesting ways, businesses that have avoided Macs altogether to simplify their IT operations may take a new look, allowing Macs to actually enter those businesses in small but growing numbers.
So there are reasons -- and reasons strategic to the overall "Apple icology" why even during the leaner years this initiative remained alive and mostly well in Cupertino.
And why even game-addicted fan boys should pay at least a modicum of attention to this oft-overlooked part of the skunk works at Infinite Loop.
Leopard's new server tools will help push Apple even farther ahead in this market.
Oh yeah, my stock will be arising.
Are you basing this on something you know but we don't?
Are you basing this on something you know but we don't?
Peruse the Apple's Leopard Sneek Peek site for some info.
Are you basing this on something you know but we don't?
Probably based on something that most are not aware of, i.e., Leopard Server, at http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/leopard/ and many are looking forward to.
Looking at www.top500.org, I am a bit surprised that other supercomputer facilities did not follow Virginia Tech's and COLSA's lead in using xserve, since their facility was so much cheaper than other installations with similar performance (and that was with the G4 xserve).
Is that correct? Apple is in 10th place, with 8700 units shipped for the quarter? That sure doesn't sound like something to be bragging about.
As bigpics points out, when you compare to the number Apple's other hardware sales it doesn't look impressive at all. And, without perspective, I'd day that >8,000 servers seems very small for a quarter, especially considering that it's a 73% gain over the previous quarter.
The real story here is that Apple is gaining marketshare while others are losing it, and that Apple is finally on the radar as the 10th largest server distributor. Unless Hitachi is on an equally impressive growth spurt then it looks like Apple is destined to rank #9 next quarter. If they happen to continue this 73% growth rate it will edge out the current #8 manufacturer. Will Apple do it? I know no clue, but I do know that this news is good for Apple's server solutions.
I wonder how many Xserves are in use today, including Apple's? I wonder they compare to other rack servers in terms of useful life-cycle.
Further, if future (or current?) Xserves can virtualize Windows Vista Server and Leopard Server in interesting ways, businesses that have avoided Macs altogether to simplify their IT operations may take a new look, allowing Macs to actually enter those businesses in small but growing numbers.
Well there is no Vista server to my knowledge and Longhorn isn't out yet, but Parallels is able to virtualize Windows servers, we do it here.
Well there is no Vista server to my knowledge and Longhorn isn't out yet, but Parallels is able to virtualize Windows servers, we do it here.
There will likely never be a "Vista" server as Windows Server 2008 is the name of the beta OS being readied for release. As for longhorn, that was just a code name for Vista prior to release.
Talk about hitting on all cylinders.
If Apple could solve those problems, they would find their servers selling much better in mixed environments.
There are other shortcomings as well. Apple doesn't give a roadmap of what it will be doing as all other players in these markets do. That's a problem for many medium and large firms.
Apple is very focused on small shops. that won't do if they want to triple their sales numbers here, or move into the fifth spot as someone just said they would like to see Apple do.
Apple Inc. during the first quarter of 2007 broke into the top-10 server brands with its Xserve line. The IDC report, cited by DigiTimes, indicates that Apple took tenth position with shipments of 8,700 units, and on-quarter shipments growth of 73 percent.
The best thing in the article is the 73% growth rate for xserve, they are bound to move up the list quickly.
I don't think they will move up the list quickly. Not that it matters much because Apple has a long-term approach and the Xserve (and Raid) is a "must have" offering for Apple in this segment for research, video, etc, whatever the sales figures.
As a comparison, Apple sold 6,000 Xserves in Oct-Dec 2002. (Apple conference call)
5,000 to 6,000 units throughout each quarter of 2003. Sales slumped to a low of 4,412 in Q1 2004 and doubled after a price drop. (Gartner)
13,000 Xserves sold in April-June 2004. (Apple conference call)
In the third quarter of 2004 Apple was already in the Top 10 according to Gartner, growing 119 percent from the year-ago quarter [from about 6,000 to 13,000 units?]. "Analysts [expected] triple digit growth for the Xserve could continue into 2006 before it levels off." The top ten list was as follows: HP, Dell, IBM, Sun, Fujitsu, NEC, Acer, Apple [8th], Legend and LangChao.
In the first quarter of 2005 Xserve shipments were 7,700 according to Gartner.
~5,000 Xserves sold in Q4 2006, since?
8,700 units in Q1 2007 (IDC) with quarter-on-quarter shipments growth of 73 percent.
The best thing in the article is the 73% growth rate for xserve, they are bound to move up the list quickly.
Looking at www.top500.org, I am a bit surprised that other supercomputer facilities did not follow Virginia Tech's and COLSA's lead in using xserve, since their facility was so much cheaper than other installations with similar performance (and that was with the G4 xserve).
VT used G5s XServe machines after they used G5 PowerMacs for a while.
I don't think they will move up the list quickly. Not that it matters much because Apple has a long-term approach and the Xserve (and Raid) is a "must have" offering for Apple in this segment for research, video, etc, whatever the sales figures.
As a comparison, Apple sold 6,000 Xserves in Oct-Dec 2002. (Apple conference call)
5,000 to 6,000 units throughout each quarter of 2003. Sales slumped to a low of 4,412 in Q1 2004 and doubled after a price drop. (Gartner)
13,000 Xserves sold in April-June 2004. (Apple conference call)
In the third quarter of 2004 Apple was already in the Top 10 according to Gartner, growing 119 percent from the year-ago quarter [from about 6,000 to 13,000 units?]. "Analysts [expected] triple digit growth for the Xserve could continue into 2006 before it levels off." The top ten list was as follows: HP, Dell, IBM, Sun, Fujitsu, NEC, Acer, Apple [8th], Legend and LangChao.
In the first quarter of 2005 Xserve shipments were 7,700 according to Gartner.
~5,000 Xserves sold in Q4 2006, since?
8,700 units in Q1 2007 (IDC) with quarter-on-quarter shipments growth of 73 percent.
Right. Until Apple fixes the problems I mentioned, their sales will never penetrate high up in the listings.
It's also good to see posters on this thread who get the importance of the story.
Apple clearly gets it, as they've stuck with this market for years, regularly dedicating enough resources to keep redesigning and refreshing their servers despite shipments which sound minuscule next the rest of the product line.
10's of millions of iPods, millions of Macs and... ...thousands of Xserves. I'm too lazy to do the math, but Apple probably sells more iPods in say, an hour, than Xserves in a year.
You could also buy many, many iPods for the cost of 1 XServe.
I'm trying to get funding for an XServe and XServe RAID with Final Cut Server for our campus TV station...
.
.
.
.
.
uhh,
..... ya. That about sums it up.
(Sorry that was off Topic).
Cracking top ten is pretty cool, though!
In complicated environments where there is a tremendous amount of burearacy surrounding interdepartmental data flow, Apple GUIs in and of themselves offer little to no compelling reason to buy OS X Server since they can't really be used, for the most part, unless the workflow matches what Apple designed.
While you can quit Aqua, there is little compelling reason to run OS X sans Aqua when there are several other CLI focused Unix OSes that offer a richer CLI environment with OSS package management, a variety of file systems, a kernel that can be optimized and still supported, a more transparent roadmap, rich community support that will take you beyond the comfortable Apple bubble, better OSS support/ease of software compilation/installation, more hardware support, etc.
I've heard arguments that XServe hardware and OS X Server make an inexpensive combo... This may or may not be true, but the question is: how big is the small business market, and will Apple succeeding in this market make a big difference?