NPD: iPad cannibalization of PC market has slowed

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 41
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 19,223member
    This whole PC-iPad thing is overblown. PC sales went down during the recession (especially since the average PC buyer is less well-heeled than the average Mac buyer), a period in which the iPad was introduced.



    Now, with the recession over, PC sales are back on trend.



    This is association, not causation.
  • Reply 22 of 41
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,309member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    This whole PC-iPad thing is overblown. PC sales went down during the recession (especially since the average PC buyer is less well-heeled than the average Mac buyer), a period in which the iPad was introduced.



    Now, with the recession over, PC sales are back on trend.



    This is association, not causation.



    Only anecdotally I admit, but I personally know literally dozens of folks that bought iPads and will not be replacing their PC or having them 'fixed' in many cases. These are people with no previous Apple product in many cases or at best an iPod.



    When faced with the annual ritual of paying a fortune to get a PC working at full speed again or the usual option of buying a new one, many are saying 'to hell with it' and going iPad.



    The observation I have in these cases (casual users) is the immediate 'love' they have for the iPad, a far cry from the absolute frustration they had for their PC, and the instant conversion to becoming an Apple evangelist.
  • Reply 23 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    When faced with the annual ritual of paying a fortune to get a PC working at full speed again or the usual option of buying a new one, many are saying 'to hell with it' and going iPad.



    Annual ritual? Paying a fortune? What on earth are you on about?
  • Reply 24 of 41
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,764member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    I know you were jesting ... but to have fun, I challenge the term 'just as well'. Price isn't everything, a pad of paper, pen and a calculator would be even cheaper!



    However, include the enjoyment, simplicity, power, speed, cost of apps, intuitive futuristic interface the iPad is so superior to a NookColor (and as you infer) Usefulness, the decision has to be a no brainer.



    For the stated needs, it really would serve the same purpose. It includes an easy to set-up email client, basic office suite, PDF reader, web-browser, same IPS screen as an iPad, same general hardware specs as the iPad from just three months ago. And it's extremely easy to use. My computer-phobic wife has no issues with figuring out her Mother's Day present. Very intuitive.



    And yes, I was pretty surprised at how useful a $250 tablet is.



    For those that don't plan to use it for hours a day a a gaming machine or photo-editor, IMHO it's a good option. I know a lot of folks who seldom if ever do more than check email, do a bit of web browsing, catch up on news articles, and read on their computers or laptops. A $250 Nook will do all that just as well (if they can do without a keyboard). A $500 iPad wouldn't fill their needs any better in my view.
  • Reply 25 of 41
    island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    1. For those that don't plan to use it for hours a day a a gaming machine or photo-editor, IMHO it's a good option. I know a lot of folks who seldom if ever do more than 2. check email, do a bit of web browsing, catch up on news articles, and read on their computers or laptops. A $250 Nook will do all that just as well (if they can do without a keyboard). A $500 iPad wouldn't fill their needs any better in my view.



    My Wife fit scenario 2 to a T but I still bought her an iPad so that she would have the ability to grow with the machine if needed... and I'm glad I did because she does do a bit of scenario 1 and a lot more.



    In other words... if you want to stay limited... buy the Nook.
  • Reply 26 of 41
    island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Superbass View Post


    The iPad is aimed squarely at upper-middle class and above. I'd say most iPad owners also own Macs and iPods, and probably also iPhones. That's a segment that has done relatively okay in the economic downturn, while the kind of people who buy netbooks have been hit the worst. Hence, you might see a reduction in overall PC sales, while the iPad bucks the trend due to its newness, trendiness and target audience.



    Again, I'd say 99.999% of iPad owners also own PCs, so saying that iPad sales are "cannibalizing" PCs is like saying the iPhone and iPod touch is doing the same...



    WTF??!! "aimed squarely at upper-middle class and above"



    That's just too stupid a statement to bother with a more detailed answer.



    ... unless you're starting your income baseline at the world's homeless and most destitute geographic regions.
  • Reply 27 of 41
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,764member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    My Wife fit scenario 2 to a T but I still bought her an iPad so that she would have the ability to grow with the machine if needed... and I'm glad I did because she does do a bit of scenario 1 and a lot more.



    In other words... if you want to stay limited... buy the Nook.



    Yes, it's certainly conceivable that using her Nook for awhile will give my wife enough confidence to branch out a bit. And if so, there might be an iPad in her future too.
  • Reply 28 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kresh View Post


    How did you incorrectly infer that I did not understand what a byte is vs. the proper name of a publication, or what the acronym "BASIC" means? I am sorry that went so far over your head. I was simply referring to a joyous time in my youth in the late 70's of my pouring over the pages of "Byte" magazine and spending hours faithfully typing in the lines of code on my TRS 80 model III, typing "run" followed by hours looking for my syntax errors where I had incorrectly typed the code.



    My example perfectly illustrates how a word has been appropriated and has had the definition expanded.







    Your own answer provides the proof:



    The word "process" or "execute" would have been a much better choice of a command name as they closely match the common use definition.





    After 40 plus years of being used this way the word "run" might seem to you to make perfect sense, but still the dictionary's definition of "run" does not prove your point.



    "run" has not been appropriately incorrectly. If you revisit your definition stack above you will see in:



    Quote:

    3 pass or cause to pass quickly or smoothly in a particular direction



    Since "run" in the command sense is in fact being used as an imperative (as in directing the OS to sequence the steps of the program), its falls nicely into proper usage. But thanks for giving me a new poster child for errant pedantry!



    Cannibalization as used in the article (and widely and erroneously by commentators and blogists) is not correct in very fundamental ways, unless and only unless you are referring to the entire category of computational devices as a whole. Since it has specific references within marketing usage that reflects self-inflicted damage by a manufacturer, the use is very appropriate in that case but not across manufacturers. But then to expect bloggers or pundits to be accurate is begging the question.
  • Reply 29 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Urinal Mint View Post


    Annual ritual? Paying a fortune? What on earth are you on about?



    I have a neighbor who, when her laptop gets sluggish or stops working, simply goes out and buys another one. This has been on average every 18 months or so, at $2000 (she buys Sony lappies) each time. I suggested that a little bit of work on her existing lappy would clean up her issues, but she demurred - she'd rather just have the newest fastest laptop anyway.



    To my mind while not a yearly ritual for her - it comes bloody close, especially paying out $2000 each time.



    As PCs become commoditized this is not usual behavior. A result of the "race to the bottom".
  • Reply 30 of 41
    djmikeodjmikeo Posts: 178member
    There is a good chance that many iPad buyers are no longer interested in netbooks, which truly was a "fad" for the last few years. Since "NPD found that 75 percent of consumers who purchased an iPad "had no intentions of buying anything else...."" I would suspect that buyers no longer even have netbooks on their possible consideration, while a year ago, iPad buyers had once considered buyer a netbook, but elected to go with the iPad instead. It just means that buyers have their minds made up, and didn't need to even consider a laptop, netbook or desktop, and are comfortable in purchasing the iPad. If the iPad had not been invented a year ago, those buyers would likely be looking at netbooks today. It is difficult to cannibalize something when there are only a few meatless bones left lying around that nobody wants.
  • Reply 31 of 41
    rhyderhyde Posts: 294member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aussie John View Post


    Control click the word. Cannibalize means to eat own own kind. Its not sloppy writing - just wrong.

    .



    You mean, like consumer-oriented computing devices being cannibalized by a consumer electronics company?

    People need to get off the grammar police horse around here. We all know what "cannibalize" means in this context. Get over it.
  • Reply 32 of 41
    superbasssuperbass Posts: 688member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    WTF??!! "aimed squarely at upper-middle class and above"



    That's just too stupid a statement to bother with a more detailed answer.



    ... unless you're starting your income baseline at the world's homeless and most destitute geographic regions.



    Right, you know a lot of minimum wagers with iPads, I take it? Also a lot of people who have been foreclosed on who waited in line for one? Blue-collar workers?
  • Reply 33 of 41
    rhyderhyde Posts: 294member
    Wasn't NPD the outfit in the previous reports telling us that iPads didn't affect netbook sales at all? Now they're telling us that they're affecting netbooks less than they were. Is there a disconnect here?
  • Reply 34 of 41
    plokoonpmaplokoonpma Posts: 262member
    Cannibalization slowed cause Apple can't build enough iPads. SImple as that.

    Just wait next quarter numbers or 2011 numbers and it will prove that it didn't slowed at all.
  • Reply 35 of 41
    island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Superbass View Post


    Right, you know a lot of minimum wagers with iPads, I take it? Also a lot of people who have been foreclosed on who waited in line for one? Blue-collar workers?



    As a matter of fact, yes, I do.



    ... but your statement started at "upper-middle"... or are you changing the goal line?!



    The vast majority of people that I know that have iPads are lower middle and middle income people. I actually don't know that many upper-middle or upper income folks.



    or do you just ignore the lower-middle and middle income strata...
  • Reply 36 of 41
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 37 of 41
    island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post


    Since cannibalization is by definition a matter of percentages rather than absolute quantities, it would seem so.



    Besides, the economy was worse off when AI reported that the iPad was beginning to cannibalize netbook sales - where is your post from that period calling those numbers into question?



    In the shitter...
  • Reply 38 of 41
    superbasssuperbass Posts: 688member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    As a matter of fact, yes, I do.



    ... but your statement started at "upper-middle"... or are you changing the goal line?!



    The vast majority of people that I know that have iPads are lower middle and middle income people. I actually don't know that many upper-middle or upper income folks.



    or do you just ignore the lower-middle and middle income strata...



    "The first Yahoo! iPad users were 94% more likely to be affluent consumers with solid wealth and strong incomes than typical U.S. Yahoo! users."



    http://ymobileblog.com/blog/2010/05/...user-analysis/



    "iPad, iPhone Users Trend Younger, Wealthier"



    http://www.marketingcharts.com/direc...althier-13778/
  • Reply 39 of 41
    superbasssuperbass Posts: 688member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post


    Since cannibalization is by definition a matter of percentages rather than absolute quantities, it would seem so.



    Besides, the economy was worse off when AI reported that the iPad was beginning to cannibalize netbook sales - where is your post from that period calling those numbers into question?



    Again, my opinion is that the idea of the iPad "cannibalizing" netbook sales is bull.



    The economy was worse a couple years ago, and as always happens, people in lower income brackets had their disposable income much more severely limited than people in upper income brackets - therefore a major slowdown in Netbook sales (aimed at people with little buying power) while at the same time the iPad came out, which is geared at the people who weren't as severely affected, and was also an iconic, trendy item (more "recession-proof" than netbooks or trips to disneyland for example). This is what AI was calling "cannibalization", which was false.



    Now the economy improves, netbook sales and trips to disneyland go up as the jobless rate goes down and less people are on welfare, iPad sales remain steady. All of a sudden "cannibalization" is not as severe as previously thought....
  • Reply 40 of 41
    island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Superbass View Post


    "The first Yahoo! iPad users were 94% more likely to be affluent consumers with solid wealth and strong incomes than typical U.S. Yahoo! users."



    http://ymobileblog.com/blog/2010/05/...user-analysis/



    "iPad, iPhone Users Trend Younger, Wealthier"



    http://www.marketingcharts.com/direc...althier-13778/



    This is what happens when people use year old data... iPad just out of the gate... Yahoo users only... and then think they actually know something.



    Read the Neilsen data... 50% make $75,000 or more... hmmmmm.... now who would those other 40-45% be... could they be people who earn less than $75,000. So who is the iPad geared for... those who earn less than $75,000 or those who earn more... hmmmmm...



    The wealthy are always first out of the gate and tend to be early adopters... It's obvious to me that there wasn't one specific group targeted because now, a year later (get ready for anecdotal evidence), I see a lot of people who clearly make under $40,000 a year buying an iPad.



    Teens might buy more iPads if Flash was installed (this isn't a case for Flash) because a few of the teen and tweener specific sites are Flash based (please don't ask me to name any... I'd have to go borrow my niece's pink netbook for the names).
Sign In or Register to comment.