Apple's AirPort grabs 10.6% share of 802.11N WiFi market

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
While Apple's share of the entire US PC market hovers between 6% and 8% depending on the source, its share of the 802.11n WiFi base station market is even higher.



Stephen Baker, an analyst for market research firm NPD Group, told AppleInsider that Apple took 10.6% of the market in unit volume last month. He added that the company's revenue and profit share on sales of the routers are even higher.



Last year, Apple noted on its website that the AirPort Extreme was ranked by NPD as the top selling 802.11n router. While Apple no longer advertises that, Baker said that the AirPort Extreme has been the top selling 802.11n router for five of the last nine months.



Last week, the analyst told Macworld that the AirPort Extreme lead US retail sales as the top selling router in April, while the new Time Capsule topped sales as the most popular Network Attached Storage device. Despite their overlapping functionality, it was reported that strong sales of Time Capsule were augmenting sales of the AirPort Extreme base station rather than cannibalizing them.



Combined with sales of the compact AirPort Express, which was upgraded to support the faster 802.11n standard in March, Apple took fourth place in overall 802.11n base station sales, behind Cisco's Linksys brand, D-Link, and Netgear.



Apple markets its AirPort base station line to users of both Macs and Windows, which allows it to sell the product beyond its own user base, following the same cross platform strategy of the iPod, iTunes, QuickTime, and the iPhone. Linksys, D-Link, and Netgear also advertise Mac compatibility, but their products do not always deliver flawless support for Safari on the Mac. That helps give Apple a home field advantage in selling to Mac users.



Additionally, Apple's retail and online stores are selling AirPort base stations to new Mac users without any competition. "This stuff is just flying off the shelf in the Apple stores," Baker told Macworld. "They don?t get nearly enough credit for the value proposition that the stores bring."



On the Windows PC side, Apple still faces formidable competition. Baker told AppleInsider that Linksys "has recently delivered a number of new SKUs in the 802.11n segment that have done very well driving their volume." Several years ago, Linksys began using Linux-based software in its wireless routers, a move that compelled it to publicly release its source code under the GPL. That availability enabled Linux users to add previously restricted, high end router software features to low cost Linksys base stations, as well allowing Linksys' competitors to use its router software to compete against it with their own hardware. Linksys has since moved to using the proprietary VxWorks kernel in its flagship router products.



Apple's AirPort line also uses proprietary software, in addition to custom Mac and Windows client software for configuration rather than using a webpage interface as most base stations do. That may limit the appeal of its AirPort line among some Windows users, but it also allows Apple to install support for unique features that differentiate the AirPort line, including Bonjour automatic printer sharing and AirPort shared disk discovery as well as AirTunes audio streaming support from iTunes to an AirPort Express or Apple TV.



Brisk base station sales suggest that Apple's "fourth leg" behind its Mac, iPod and iTunes business, and the iPhone is not the emerging Apple TV but rather AirPort, a business segment that has performed well, albeit almost invisibly, since its introduction back in 1999, two years before the iPod.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 44
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,718member
    I must say my AE has proved to be very reliable. Now also running TM wirelessly and a USB printer for a network of 7 computers including a PC.
  • Reply 2 of 44
    frohikefrohike Posts: 2member
    I think the high value is more about previous Intel Mac buyers with 802.11n hardware upgrading their networks rather than it particularly penetrating into Windows networks.



    For instance, I have both an 802.11n capable Mac Pro and MacBook Pro that were bought some time ago and I have since upgraded two Airport base stations (Extreme and Express) to the new 11n models to complement my Gigabit network. Having to use 11g against a high-speed wired network is painful and 11n is not so much. Plus, selling, or reusing, the older Airport 11g hardware is easy given the huge installed base of 11g capable hardware.
  • Reply 3 of 44
    The fourth leg would be stronger if they merged AppleTV+Airport+TimeCapsule into a single product.

    The AppleTV already has WiFi and a hard disk.
  • Reply 4 of 44
    frohikefrohike Posts: 2member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post


    The fourth leg would be stronger if they merged AppleTV+Airport+TimeCapsule into a single product.

    The AppleTV already has WiFi and a hard disk.



    While that's true, the AppleTV does already have wireless functionality you have to remember that it would not function well with NAS/Time Machine included. Its small 40GB drive already has to deal with audio and video and many people's libraries surpasses that. Additionally, the AppleTV uses 2.5" drives so potential storage is still limited compared to the 3.5" drives used in Time Capsule.



    However, I do agree with you that base station functionality probably should have been added to it. If that were the case I probably would have gone with an AppleTV rather than an Airport Express unit as I need to extend my range from the position it would have been in.
  • Reply 5 of 44
    solsunsolsun Posts: 763member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Frohike View Post


    While that's true, the AppleTV does already have wireless functionality you have to remember that it would not function well with NAS/Time Machine included. Its small 40GB drive already has to deal with audio and video and many people's libraries surpasses that. Additionally, the AppleTV uses 2.5" drives so potential storage is still limited compared to the 3.5" drives used in Time Capsule.



    However, I do agree with you that base station functionality probably should have been added to it. If that were the case I probably would have gone with an AppleTV rather than an Airport Express unit as I need to extend my range from the position it would have been in.





    Not to mention that location could be a problem for many users... Apple TV needs to be in the living room next to your TV and that's not the ideal place to keep your router.. Particularly if you have a printer attached via USB for the network.
  • Reply 6 of 44
    ajmasajmas Posts: 597member
    It should also be noted that one thing going for Airport Extreme is that it is the only Broadband router, generally destined for the home market, that supports IPv6 out of the box.
  • Reply 7 of 44
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    I've long said that Apple should get into networking more aggressively, and to publicize it much better.



    These are serious areas. People didn't use to network, but with many families having more than one computer, and network enabled printers, it's become mainstream.



    Macs were the first consumer computers to be networked, with Localtalk, way back when. MS only began that move in the 1991 timeframe. Apple failed to use that advantage, even as they added Ethernet to their machines, by stubbornly remaining dependent on the hub/switch/router manufacturers. I was often frustrated by that.



    I would like to see models with more ports built-in at a GHz speed. I know of a number of Mac workgroups within companies who might very well switch to the Apple product if given the chance.



    I would also like to see Apple come out with both high speed DSL and cable modem models. Right now, we must accept what those companies offer us, as adding another router to the router that's part of the "internet gateway" package is impossible for most, and difficult for the rest. I believe that if Apple offered these models, companies would supply them to their customers. That's a market of tens of millions here in the US alone. Apple could pick up a fair part of that.
  • Reply 8 of 44
    carniphagecarniphage Posts: 1,984member
    I am quite surprised about this because Apple's wireless networking stuff has been a "Charlie Foxtrot" of late.



    The 10.5.2 Leopard update, broke wide-channel support for a lot of Macs. The forums are full of users who endured spontaneous connection drops, until we discovered that wide-channel was the problem.



    The Airport Extreme's latest firmware update 7.3.1 breaks the most popular VPN software.



    And certainly in Europe, Apple's Airport Extreme is really badly suited to the market. All other 802.11n products come with integrated ADSL modems. Which means no one sells suitable stand-alone ADSL modems. I found only one, and it was 60UKP ($120 )!



    C.
  • Reply 9 of 44
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post


    The fourth leg would be stronger if they merged AppleTV+Airport+TimeCapsule into a single product.

    The AppleTV already has WiFi and a hard disk.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Frohike View Post


    However, I do agree with you that base station functionality probably should have been added to it. If that were the case I probably would have gone with an AppleTV rather than an Airport Express unit as I need to extend my range from the position it would have been in.



    Not a good idea. They have specific functions for a reason. Neither device is powerful enough to do both of it's core functions at once. First of all, You are expecting that the internet connection to be where the TV is and the TV is the best place to set up the wireless router and centrally accessed printer for the entire location. Secondly, having a single device that would have to beefed up to allow the simultaneous downloading of HD AppleTV media, the viewing of said media, the TM backup from other devices, the constant internet connection and packet transfer to multiple computers and potential file and print access would make any such device cost prohibitive. Having separate devices makes sense.
  • Reply 10 of 44
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post


    I am quite surprised about this because Apple's wireless networking stuff has been a "Charlie Foxtrot" of late.



    The 10.5.2 Leopard update, broke wide-channel support for a lot of Macs. The forums are full of users who endured spontaneous connection drops, until we discovered that wide-channel was the problem.



    The Airport Extreme's latest firmware update 7.3.1 breaks the most popular VPN software.



    And certainly in Europe, Apple's Airport Extreme is really badly suited to the market. All other 802.11n products come with integrated ADSL modems. Which means no one sells suitable stand-alone ADSL modems. I found only one, and it was 60UKP ($120 )!



    C.



    I haven't had any problems, but the lack of a modem in some models is something I advocated in my post. Apple is very resistant to some concepts. They just don't want to expand into some businesses, even when it would be cheap and easy for them to do so.
  • Reply 11 of 44
    boogabooga Posts: 1,082member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post


    The fourth leg would be stronger if they merged AppleTV+Airport+TimeCapsule into a single product.

    The AppleTV already has WiFi and a hard disk.



    Actually, I think the AppleTV and/or Airport Express's ability to stream/buy/view media should just be integrated into the iPod itself as a software upgrade. Who needs ANOTHER device with a hard disk, wireless, and video/audio out? Just attach a dock to your sound/video system and stream it through your iPod Touch/iPhone when plugged in.



    I'd really like to stream stuff through my iTouch and hook it up to an audio system. Perhaps the SDK will allow someone to write that...
  • Reply 12 of 44
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Apple failed to use that advantage, even as they added Ethernet to their machines



    Speaking of, Bob Metcalfe had a breakthrough idea 35 years ago today.
    Quote:

    I would also like to see Apple come out with both high speed DSL and cable modem models. Right now, we must accept what those companies offer us, as adding another router to the router that's part of the "internet gateway" package is impossible for most, and difficult for the rest. I believe that if Apple offered these models, companies would supply them to their customers. That's a market of tens of millions here in the US alone. Apple could pick up a fair part of that.



    Removing a device does make trouble shooting easier but the the current broadband modems are pretty simple and usually free. This seems like it would add cost to the device (though minimal) and force people to use one method over another because they purchased a certain type modem. Would it be easy to have a single device to function on both cable and ADSL networks? Are there any performance benefits of having an all-in-one device?
  • Reply 13 of 44
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Frohike View Post


    While that's true, the AppleTV does already have wireless functionality you have to remember that it would not function well with NAS/Time Machine included. Its small 40GB drive already has to deal with audio and video and many people's libraries surpasses that. Additionally, the AppleTV uses 2.5" drives so potential storage is still limited compared to the 3.5" drives used in Time Capsule.



    However, I do agree with you that base station functionality probably should have been added to it. If that were the case I probably would have gone with an AppleTV rather than an Airport Express unit as I need to extend my range from the position it would have been in.



    AppleTV really should have been designed with a 3.5" drive. Maybe in the next revision? I won't hold my breath.



    If AppleTV came in 500GB and 1TB sizes and could be used as Time Capsules, they would be flying off the shelf. Time Machine could suspend backups while the AppleTV is in heavy use and then resume when you are finished using it.
  • Reply 14 of 44
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post




    Removing a device does make trouble shooting easier but the the current broadband modems are pretty simple and usually free. This seems like it would add cost to the device (though minimal) and force people to use one method over another because they purchased a certain type modem. Would it be easy to have a single device to function on both cable and ADSL networks? Are there any performance benefits of having an all-in-one device?



    The current broadband modems are usually not modems alone, but modems with a router. That's why they are called Internet Gateways. They are the whole thing together. It's also why it's difficult to add Apple's product to the mix. You shouldn't add another router. You would have to disable the Apple products router function, and only use it as a switch, or wireless add-on.



    If Apple offered an Internet Gateway for the DSL and cable markets, those companies could offer them to their customers. I'm not talking about SELLING them to their customers, but offering them for free as they do now with the various products available. It's the companies that buy them.



    Cable modems and DSL modems are different beasts.



    That's a big market, and a steady one.
  • Reply 15 of 44
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post


    AppleTV really should have been designed with a 3.5" drive. Maybe in the next revision? I won't hold my breath.



    If AppleTV came in 500GB and 1TB sizes and could be used as Time Capsules, they would be flying off the shelf. Time Machine could suspend backups while the AppleTV is in heavy use and then resume when you are finished using it.



    There is one 500 GB 2.5" drive available, and there will be more. I'm sure that larger drives will become available before too long. You can upgrade your drive yourself,if you have some technical ability. There are ways to use the USB port as well, though I don't remember if it is Fast, or just 1.1.
  • Reply 16 of 44
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    The current broadband modems are usually not modems alone, but modems with a router. That's why they are called Internet Gateways. They are the whole thing together. It's also why it's difficult to add Apple's product to the mix. You shouldn't add another router. You would have to disable the Apple products router function, and only use it as a switch, or wireless add-on.



    If Apple offered an Internet Gateway for the DSL and cable markets, those companies could offer them to their customers. I'm not talking about SELLING them to their customers, but offering them for free as they do now with the various products available. It's the companies that buy them.



    Cable modems and DSL modems are different beasts.



    That's a big market, and a steady one.



    Correct and they are typically 4 port 10/100 BaseT.



    Example: http://www.zoom.com/products/adsl_overview.html#5590



    Solid Product, works flawlessly with Linux and OS X. It's still hosed by being a 4 port 10/100 BaseT router even if it's got the lastest ADSL2+ offering.
  • Reply 17 of 44
    reidcontireidconti Posts: 21member
    Quite frankly, this blows my mind. I don't know anyone who owns one. Everyone I know uses cheapo Linksys and Netgear routers for their Macs, including myself. I once had an Airport Base Station (snow, not graphite, so the second model they made) and it worked okay, but wasn't worth the price premium. Some of the cheapo ones have occasionally had problems where they need to be restarted on a regular basis, so you toss it in the trash and buy a different $50 model that'll actually work well.
  • Reply 18 of 44
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,718member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by reidconti View Post


    Quite frankly, this blows my mind. I don't know anyone who owns one. Everyone I know uses cheapo Linksys and Netgear routers for their Macs, including myself. I once had an Airport Base Station (snow, not graphite, so the second model they made) and it worked okay, but wasn't worth the price premium. Some of the cheapo ones have occasionally had problems where they need to be restarted on a regular basis, so you toss it in the trash and buy a different $50 model that'll actually work well.



    The extra is worth it to me for .11n with USB for printer and the ability to attach a wireless hard drive for remote back ups. I have several Linksys and Netgear models lying around but they are collecting dust since I got an AE. Plus it is seamless with Apple TV, I am not sure if anything else would work, not that I have tried that to be honest.
  • Reply 19 of 44
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    The extra is worth it to me for .11n with USB for printer and the ability to attach a wireless hard drive for remote back ups. I have several Linksys and Netgear models lying around but they are collecting dust since I got an AE. Plus it is seamless with Apple TV, I am not sure if anything else would work, not that I have tried that to be honest.



    When it came out it was a good price for an 802.11n router. The 802.11g was definitely pricey. But as you state, having a built in network print server and the ability to add external storage is huge benefit.



    The Time Capsule is also competitively priced for what you get.
  • Reply 20 of 44
    ajmasajmas Posts: 597member
    While the Airport Extreme might appear to be expensive, the price is not that out of whack when compared to other routers that support Gigabit ethernet.
Sign In or Register to comment.