Desktop sales are a shrinking/flat market across the whole industry. What makes you think Apple can buck that trend?
Apple doesn't have to buck that trend in order for its share of the market to increase. In a shrinking market, an individual company's market share can increase three ways: their unit shipments increase, their unit shipments stay flat, or their unit shipments fall by a smaller % amount than the % shrinking of the overall market.
The point is that people are still buying desktops. The market may be shrinking, but it is still significant and I wish Apple would stop sticking their fingers in their ears going "la la la" trying to pretend it isn't there.
Apple doesn't have to buck that trend in order for its share of the market to increase. In a shrinking market, an individual company's market share can increase three ways: their unit shipments increase, their unit shipments stay flat, or their unit shipments fall by a smaller % amount than the % shrinking of the overall market.
The point is that people are still buying desktops. The market may be shrinking, but it is still significant and I wish Apple would stop sticking their fingers in their ears going "la la la" trying to pretend it isn't there.
Yes, I agree - if they had a winning line-up of desktops, they should still be able to gain market share in a declining market.
- and the fact that eventually notebook sales will overtake desktops shouldn't mean that desktops are ignored.
- I saw an nVidia presentation somewhere that showed that desktop sales (for PCs overall) are twice the size of notebooks
- with notebooks due to overtake desktops in volume in about 5 years time
- so, if Apple follows the general market, then it should be able to sell twice as many desktops as notebooks
- and the fact that it sells more notebooks than desktops, to me, indicates that its desktop line-up is relatively weak.
Actually, the nVidia slide showed that desktop sales were still growing, but just not growing as fast as notebook sales.
Apple doesn't have to buck that trend in order for its share of the market to increase. In a shrinking market, an individual company's market share can increase three ways: their unit shipments increase, their unit shipments stay flat, or their unit shipments fall by a smaller % amount than the % shrinking of the overall market.
The point is that people are still buying desktops. The market may be shrinking, but it is still significant and I wish Apple would stop sticking their fingers in their ears going "la la la" trying to pretend it isn't there.
I think your logic is flawed though. 'Real Desktops'* as you put them are in decline so your argument is that Apple should make 'Real Desktops' that are in decline, to increase it's market share.
That's leaving aside the argument that Apple is after market share above profit.
Apple isn't putting it's fingers in it's ears, you are.
* as opposed to 'Unreal Desktops' like the iMac, Mini and Mac Pro which obviously don't exist.
I think your logic is flawed though. 'Real Desktops'* as you put them are in decline so your argument is that Apple should make 'Real Desktops' that are in decline, to increase it's market share.
The logic is not flawed. So what if the market is shrinking? That doesn't stop it being huge. In fact, it may not even be shrinking, it's just that laptop sales are growing even faster (according to Nvidia).
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign
That's leaving aside the argument that Apple is after market share above profit.
I didn't say anything about market share above profit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign
* as opposed to 'Unreal Desktops' like the iMac, Mini and Mac Pro which obviously don't exist.
The iMac and Mac Mini are laptops without batteries. The Mac Pro is a workstation.
This number could be higher if they had any machines to sell. Oregon stores have been out of the 2.2Ghz 15.4" MBP units for a week now, and the salespeople are starting to sound really annoyed when I call them up each day and ask if they got any in. If they really didn't want me (and others) to bother them, they could just create a waiting list (but apparently that is against store policy or something).
A shop near me is flat out of 2.2ghz and 2.4ghz fifteen inchers. The store staff don't sound that annoyed when people ask. ...Just had several MacBookPro 17 inchers in direct from about 200 miles south of here by truck. 15 inchers are going fast! Everybody is asking about the new screens. And the new screens are naiicee.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeny
Why not just order direct from apple?
Hardmac.com is reporting a global(?) shortage of 15 inchers.
The iMac and Mac Mini are laptops without batteries. The Mac Pro is a workstation.
Translation:
I can't afford a Mac Pro and the other desktops don't make my penis look big. Waaaaaaah!
Come on, don't be such a knob end all the time. An iMac is a desktop. The Mac Mini is a desktop. Just because they don't fit your narrow view of the world doesn't mean that isn't true.
...The iMac and Mac Mini are laptops without batteries. The Mac Pro is a workstation.
I don't mind the Mac Mini being deprecated and *no* MidTower, and iMacs going 20" and 24" only. But a 15" MacBook to sit between the BlackMacBook and EntryMacBookPro is a possibly good niche, people need it godsdamnit!
This news + iTS moving into 3rd for music sales = jump in stock price on Monday.
Whoa... 3rd? They targeted Target and that tastily tangible target is now no longer a trepidatious tumultous Target*. Wow, they did that in 6 months or so. Soon.... (well, maybe within a few years??) One MUSIC STORE TO RULE THEM ALL !! muah ah ahah ah ha haha ha ha ha aha
*Spare me some creative license, I am high on DawnOfWararkCrusade. Finally again an RTS that is complex and deep but easy and fun, with delicious nVidia8series graphics!!!
Well, not really. I agree with you that there is a "tipping point", but whilst these figures make it seem like that tipping point is nearly upon us, Apple's actual share of the U.S. market is still only around 5%.
The tipping point has come and passed for Apple. The iPod's success was the tipping point of making the brand a "Gee, they used to be a great company" has-been with little industry influence to the massive mindshare they have today.
The increased Mac share is simply one more indicator that the tipping point was reached given the typical cost/performance ratio of mac hardware. While that measure was fairly good when the MB and MBP were first released, I think today you can find equivalent Dell/HP offerings for less.
Quote:
That is flawed logic. The shrinking of the market as a whole should have no effect on whether or not Apple is able to increase its share of that market. The laptop numbers make it clear that if Apple builds laptops that people want, people will buy them, leading to double-digit growth in laptop market share. So why doesn't Apple start making real desktops and see the same thing happen to their desktop market share?
Given, as you say, they can increase share by having flat sales (which by the article they have) then their desktop line up is a) outperforming the market given the downward trend and b) their desktop share is increasing if only by some small miniscule amount.
Given that they have had several opportunities to increase desktop share with their current line up simply through price reductions and have stated at least twice in quarterlies when asked that they would not pursue share at the expense of profits I doubt you'll see a significant change in stance on the desktop front. It appears that Apple is happy with their 600Kish desktop volumes except for perhaps their Mac Pro sales if they don't pick up now that more pro universal apps are here.
Effectively Apple has no desktops. Just laptops in various configurations and a workstation. That's seems to be a very effective strategy moving forward.
Congrats to Apple on the double-digit laptop sales figures. I'm waiting till Leopard is released in October, then I'm going to buy an iMac desktop computer.
This is good to hear. Even if Apple gets 15 percent, that's good exposure and support from software companies. Good to see them all around. Our entire family have Apple laptops. My wife and stepson are new to Macs, and now they have them, although my stepson generally runs XP on his MacBook.
It's good to remember the installed base vs share. Lots of companies buy new computers every few years, but buy no name boxes. Which works for them just fine.
For consumers, they probably hold onto a computer longer and Macs may last or be held onto longer.
I'd like to know what the HOME CONSUMER installed base is for Mac versus PC. Maybe it's 10 or 15 percent?
A lot of people just buy a PC because it is cheaper. They don't care or don't appreciate the software or the quality of the build. My daughter's friend's family was considering a Mac after their PC crapped out. They went to the Apple store and quizzed my daughter about viruses and so on. In the end they got the crapped out PC fixed, then got a new no-name box that crapped out right after they bought it. They got that one fixed, too. For them, they don't care about the quality. They just want a cheap box. This works for them.
The tipping point has come and passed for Apple. The iPod's success was the tipping point of making the brand a "Gee, they used to be a great company" has-been with little industry influence to the massive mindshare they have today.
The increased Mac share is simply one more indicator that the tipping point was reached given the typical cost/performance ratio of mac hardware. While that measure was fairly good when the MB and MBP were first released, I think today you can find equivalent Dell/HP offerings for less.
The tipping point has come and passed for Apple? I'm sorry but you are funny. The iPhone will make a much bigger impact. It will make the iPod's success pale in comparison. "The tipping point has come and passed for Apple"...
It may only include retail sales, but its still a very good indicator isn't it?
Considering Dell and HP do at least half of their business online and through consultants and corporate account reps, I think that not including those bastardizes the numbers.
The iMac and Mac Mini are laptops without batteries. The Mac Pro is a workstation.
Would you explain this line of thinking to me? I honestly don't worry much about the interior components of the laptops vs. the iMacs but it doesn't make sense that Apple would use laptop-grade components in a desktop machine of any type. I'll accept your position concerning the Mini because it seems reasonable to me that a lot of trade-offs needed to be made to get those components down into that tiny little box, but are you sure the same applies to the iMac? If so, how?
[Edit: Also it seems a little anachronistic to worry about the difference in laptop vs. desktop components when the two have gradually moved very close to each other in terms of power and speed. Can you explain also how that figures into your thinking? BTW, I'm not trying to challenge your point of view, but I hear so many people make this statement about the iMacs just being laptops, and from what I've seen and understand of the two, that doesn't hold up. But maybe I'm wrong.]
Would you explain this line of thinking to me? I honestly don't worry much about the interior components of the laptops vs. the iMacs but it doesn't make sense that Apple would use laptop-grade components in a desktop machine of any type. I'll accept your position concerning the Mini because it seems reasonable to me that a lot of trade-offs needed to be made to get those components down into that tiny little box, but are you sure the same applies to the iMac? If so, how?
I think people exaggerate that point. Really, the iMac uses a mixture of desktop and more laptop oriented parts.
The tipping point has come and passed for Apple? I'm sorry but you are funny. The iPhone will make a much bigger impact. It will make the iPod's success pale in comparison. "The tipping point has come and passed for Apple"...
Without the success of the iPod there would be no iPhone. Apple has already successfully transitioned from comeback to dominance. Hence they have already made it past their tipping point in terms of branding and mindshare. The current success builds upon that key success.
[Edit: Also it seems a little anachronistic to worry about the difference in laptop vs. desktop components when the two have gradually moved very close to each other in terms of power and speed. Can you explain also how that figures into your thinking? ]
You are correct for all components except the hard disk: for the same cost as a ~100 gig 5400 RPM laptop drive, you could have a 350 or with a nice volume discount, a 500 gig 7200RPM desktop drive: as a user of a 4200 RPM mac mini, I can tell you, 3000 RPM makes a nice performance boost those apps that thrash the disk like iTunes and it also makes swapping easier and apps launch faster and just an all around "snappier" experience
You are correct for all components except the hard disk: for the same cost as a ~100 gig 5400 RPM laptop drive, you could have a 350 or with a nice volume discount, a 500 gig 7200RPM desktop drive: as a user of a 4200 RPM mac mini, I can tell you, 3000 RPM makes a nice performance boost those apps that thrash the disk like iTunes and it also makes swapping easier and apps launch faster and just an all around "snappier" experience
Whoa... 3rd? They targeted Target and that tastily tangible target is now no longer a trepidatious tumultous Target*. Wow, they did that in 6 months or so. Soon.... (well, maybe within a few years??) One MUSIC STORE TO RULE THEM ALL !! muah ah ahah ah ha haha ha ha ha aha
*Spare me some creative license, I am high on DawnOfWararkCrusade. Finally again an RTS that is complex and deep but easy and fun, with delicious nVidia8series graphics!!!
Comments
Huh?
Desktop sales are a shrinking/flat market across the whole industry. What makes you think Apple can buck that trend?
Apple doesn't have to buck that trend in order for its share of the market to increase. In a shrinking market, an individual company's market share can increase three ways: their unit shipments increase, their unit shipments stay flat, or their unit shipments fall by a smaller % amount than the % shrinking of the overall market.
The point is that people are still buying desktops. The market may be shrinking, but it is still significant and I wish Apple would stop sticking their fingers in their ears going "la la la" trying to pretend it isn't there.
Apple doesn't have to buck that trend in order for its share of the market to increase. In a shrinking market, an individual company's market share can increase three ways: their unit shipments increase, their unit shipments stay flat, or their unit shipments fall by a smaller % amount than the % shrinking of the overall market.
The point is that people are still buying desktops. The market may be shrinking, but it is still significant and I wish Apple would stop sticking their fingers in their ears going "la la la" trying to pretend it isn't there.
Yes, I agree - if they had a winning line-up of desktops, they should still be able to gain market share in a declining market.
- and the fact that eventually notebook sales will overtake desktops shouldn't mean that desktops are ignored.
- I saw an nVidia presentation somewhere that showed that desktop sales (for PCs overall) are twice the size of notebooks
- with notebooks due to overtake desktops in volume in about 5 years time
- so, if Apple follows the general market, then it should be able to sell twice as many desktops as notebooks
- and the fact that it sells more notebooks than desktops, to me, indicates that its desktop line-up is relatively weak.
Actually, the nVidia slide showed that desktop sales were still growing, but just not growing as fast as notebook sales.
Edit:
Here's the link to the nVidia slide
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2984
Apple doesn't have to buck that trend in order for its share of the market to increase. In a shrinking market, an individual company's market share can increase three ways: their unit shipments increase, their unit shipments stay flat, or their unit shipments fall by a smaller % amount than the % shrinking of the overall market.
The point is that people are still buying desktops. The market may be shrinking, but it is still significant and I wish Apple would stop sticking their fingers in their ears going "la la la" trying to pretend it isn't there.
I think your logic is flawed though. 'Real Desktops'* as you put them are in decline so your argument is that Apple should make 'Real Desktops' that are in decline, to increase it's market share.
That's leaving aside the argument that Apple is after market share above profit.
Apple isn't putting it's fingers in it's ears, you are.
* as opposed to 'Unreal Desktops' like the iMac, Mini and Mac Pro which obviously don't exist.
I think your logic is flawed though. 'Real Desktops'* as you put them are in decline so your argument is that Apple should make 'Real Desktops' that are in decline, to increase it's market share.
The logic is not flawed. So what if the market is shrinking? That doesn't stop it being huge. In fact, it may not even be shrinking, it's just that laptop sales are growing even faster (according to Nvidia).
That's leaving aside the argument that Apple is after market share above profit.
I didn't say anything about market share above profit.
* as opposed to 'Unreal Desktops' like the iMac, Mini and Mac Pro which obviously don't exist.
The iMac and Mac Mini are laptops without batteries. The Mac Pro is a workstation.
This number could be higher if they had any machines to sell. Oregon stores have been out of the 2.2Ghz 15.4" MBP units for a week now, and the salespeople are starting to sound really annoyed when I call them up each day and ask if they got any in. If they really didn't want me (and others) to bother them, they could just create a waiting list (but apparently that is against store policy or something).
A shop near me is flat out of 2.2ghz and 2.4ghz fifteen inchers. The store staff don't sound that annoyed when people ask.
Why not just order direct from apple?
Hardmac.com is reporting a global(?) shortage of 15 inchers.
The iMac and Mac Mini are laptops without batteries. The Mac Pro is a workstation.
Translation:
I can't afford a Mac Pro and the other desktops don't make my penis look big. Waaaaaaah!
Come on, don't be such a knob end all the time. An iMac is a desktop. The Mac Mini is a desktop. Just because they don't fit your narrow view of the world doesn't mean that isn't true.
...The iMac and Mac Mini are laptops without batteries. The Mac Pro is a workstation.
I don't mind the Mac Mini being deprecated and *no* MidTower, and iMacs going 20" and 24" only. But a 15" MacBook to sit between the BlackMacBook and EntryMacBookPro is a possibly good niche, people need it godsdamnit!
This news + iTS moving into 3rd for music sales = jump in stock price on Monday.
Whoa... 3rd? They targeted Target and that tastily tangible target is now no longer a trepidatious tumultous Target*.
*Spare me some creative license, I am high on DawnOfWar
Well, not really. I agree with you that there is a "tipping point", but whilst these figures make it seem like that tipping point is nearly upon us, Apple's actual share of the U.S. market is still only around 5%.
The tipping point has come and passed for Apple. The iPod's success was the tipping point of making the brand a "Gee, they used to be a great company" has-been with little industry influence to the massive mindshare they have today.
The increased Mac share is simply one more indicator that the tipping point was reached given the typical cost/performance ratio of mac hardware. While that measure was fairly good when the MB and MBP were first released, I think today you can find equivalent Dell/HP offerings for less.
That is flawed logic. The shrinking of the market as a whole should have no effect on whether or not Apple is able to increase its share of that market. The laptop numbers make it clear that if Apple builds laptops that people want, people will buy them, leading to double-digit growth in laptop market share. So why doesn't Apple start making real desktops and see the same thing happen to their desktop market share?
Given, as you say, they can increase share by having flat sales (which by the article they have) then their desktop line up is a) outperforming the market given the downward trend and b) their desktop share is increasing if only by some small miniscule amount.
Given that they have had several opportunities to increase desktop share with their current line up simply through price reductions and have stated at least twice in quarterlies when asked that they would not pursue share at the expense of profits I doubt you'll see a significant change in stance on the desktop front. It appears that Apple is happy with their 600Kish desktop volumes except for perhaps their Mac Pro sales if they don't pick up now that more pro universal apps are here.
Effectively Apple has no desktops. Just laptops in various configurations and a workstation. That's seems to be a very effective strategy moving forward.
Vinea
It's good to remember the installed base vs share. Lots of companies buy new computers every few years, but buy no name boxes. Which works for them just fine.
For consumers, they probably hold onto a computer longer and Macs may last or be held onto longer.
I'd like to know what the HOME CONSUMER installed base is for Mac versus PC. Maybe it's 10 or 15 percent?
A lot of people just buy a PC because it is cheaper. They don't care or don't appreciate the software or the quality of the build. My daughter's friend's family was considering a Mac after their PC crapped out. They went to the Apple store and quizzed my daughter about viruses and so on. In the end they got the crapped out PC fixed, then got a new no-name box that crapped out right after they bought it. They got that one fixed, too. For them, they don't care about the quality. They just want a cheap box. This works for them.
The tipping point has come and passed for Apple. The iPod's success was the tipping point of making the brand a "Gee, they used to be a great company" has-been with little industry influence to the massive mindshare they have today.
The increased Mac share is simply one more indicator that the tipping point was reached given the typical cost/performance ratio of mac hardware. While that measure was fairly good when the MB and MBP were first released, I think today you can find equivalent Dell/HP offerings for less.
The tipping point has come and passed for Apple?
It may only include retail sales, but its still a very good indicator isn't it?
Considering Dell and HP do at least half of their business online and through consultants and corporate account reps, I think that not including those bastardizes the numbers.
The iMac and Mac Mini are laptops without batteries. The Mac Pro is a workstation.
Would you explain this line of thinking to me? I honestly don't worry much about the interior components of the laptops vs. the iMacs but it doesn't make sense that Apple would use laptop-grade components in a desktop machine of any type. I'll accept your position concerning the Mini because it seems reasonable to me that a lot of trade-offs needed to be made to get those components down into that tiny little box, but are you sure the same applies to the iMac? If so, how?
[Edit: Also it seems a little anachronistic to worry about the difference in laptop vs. desktop components when the two have gradually moved very close to each other in terms of power and speed. Can you explain also how that figures into your thinking? BTW, I'm not trying to challenge your point of view, but I hear so many people make this statement about the iMacs just being laptops, and from what I've seen and understand of the two, that doesn't hold up. But maybe I'm wrong.]
Would you explain this line of thinking to me? I honestly don't worry much about the interior components of the laptops vs. the iMacs but it doesn't make sense that Apple would use laptop-grade components in a desktop machine of any type. I'll accept your position concerning the Mini because it seems reasonable to me that a lot of trade-offs needed to be made to get those components down into that tiny little box, but are you sure the same applies to the iMac? If so, how?
I think people exaggerate that point. Really, the iMac uses a mixture of desktop and more laptop oriented parts.
The tipping point has come and passed for Apple?
Without the success of the iPod there would be no iPhone. Apple has already successfully transitioned from comeback to dominance. Hence they have already made it past their tipping point in terms of branding and mindshare. The current success builds upon that key success.
Which part of this do you disagree with?
Vinea
[Edit: Also it seems a little anachronistic to worry about the difference in laptop vs. desktop components when the two have gradually moved very close to each other in terms of power and speed. Can you explain also how that figures into your thinking? ]
You are correct for all components except the hard disk: for the same cost as a ~100 gig 5400 RPM laptop drive, you could have a 350 or with a nice volume discount, a 500 gig 7200RPM desktop drive: as a user of a 4200 RPM mac mini, I can tell you, 3000 RPM makes a nice performance boost those apps that thrash the disk like iTunes and it also makes swapping easier and apps launch faster and just an all around "snappier" experience
You are correct for all components except the hard disk: for the same cost as a ~100 gig 5400 RPM laptop drive, you could have a 350 or with a nice volume discount, a 500 gig 7200RPM desktop drive: as a user of a 4200 RPM mac mini, I can tell you, 3000 RPM makes a nice performance boost those apps that thrash the disk like iTunes and it also makes swapping easier and apps launch faster and just an all around "snappier" experience
Word. 7200rpm
Whoa... 3rd? They targeted Target and that tastily tangible target is now no longer a trepidatious tumultous Target*.
*Spare me some creative license, I am high on DawnOfWar
Nerd.