Note: All of these unit sales comparisons suffer from the same inherent flaw...
If you want to use the Mac or iOS operating system you have a single source with a very limited selection. Every Apple OS user will be buying from that single source even if distributed via a few retail partners. Every sale of product will be recorded by Apple. Some people will simply accept the feature or form limitations offered thru that small selection of products (relatively speaking) in order to use their preferred OS. That results in big Apple product numbers.
Obviously the same restrictions don't apply to Microsoft's OS (or Android for that matter). thousands of variations and builds and form factors with only the OS they rely on being the common thread. Product sales will be recognized by who knows how many different OEM's. Don't like the Surface keyboard or memory options or form factor or price? There's options from not-Microsoft companies that might be more pleasing, no need to accept any limitations beyond those flowing from the OS itself. Pick and choose the specific unit from whatever company you think matches best with your wants/needs.
Otherwise the typical creatively written DED article. I love his way with words, excellent stuff.
... it’s like Google’s phones. One would think that sales would be better than the low single digit millions a year they sell at.
I for one would never expect Apple-like numbers. Google sells three phones with a vanilla design, industry common hardware, and relatively high prices, and a limited distribution channel, with their only saving graces being security, special software features, and a wonderful camera. Why would you be surprised that Google isn't selling 10's of millions? Seriously.
There's so many options on the Android platform. Even Samsung is only able to compete with Apple in market share because they have so, SO many different SKU's with a massive range of prices, features and sizes.
Because every review over the years, other than perhaps the poor reviews the new Pixel 4 is getting has had goog,es devices getting rather good reviews. The fact that is pure Android is always cited as a major advantage. So it the fact that they give three years of OS updates, and that their phones, unlike almost every other android vendor, actually comes with the latest OS version on day one. Samsung, AMD’s others almost always come with an OS version months old, and require you to wait months more until you get the latest, which then becomes an o,d version just a few months later, to which you may not be able to upgrade to at all.
one reason why people buy phones these days is because of the cameras, and until this year, at least, Google’s cameras have been praised as the best, or equal to the best.
they have also had good battery life (again until this year).
and, they’re less expensive than the other flagship phones. Not by as much this year, but still by $100, or more.
it has nothing g to do with number of SKUs. Nobody is expecting Google to sell 200 million phones. But Samsung g’s Galaxy S series phone sale have been dropping every year since the S4-S5 series when they were estimated to be a bit over 50 million. Now those numbers are estimated, with the Note series included, to be about 30 million. I would think that Google should be able to sell 10 million a year, I never said, or hinted at “tens” of millions, but estimates have been closer to 3 million, with a maximum possibly being 4 million. Those numbers haven’t risen at all. With the poor reviews the new 4 is getting though, it could drop this year.
what you’re forgetting, just as you have with your comment about Surface sales, is that in a larger overall market, estimated as about 85% worldwide for both Windows and Android, that offers a far larger interface to sell a product in. If a product is selling poorly in that market, there’s something wrong. It doesn’t matter that there are a lot of vendors. If people want your product, you will sell ever increasing numbers, and will eventually become one of the large vendors. If they don’t, then you won’t.
It's unfair to make a direct comparison without taking into account all of the devices that the Surface line has inspired - particularly all the '2 in 1' tablets.
But I've used a Surface Pro 4 since January 2016, switching to a Surface Pro 5 this past spring. These have been my everything machines, for front end development and digital art. They're pretty capable but I've been disappointed by 2 things:
1) The hardware quality. I had the first SP4 replaced one year later due to an awful screen flickering issue. And I received the SP5 as a replacement from MS due to another hardware failure that was clearly a build issue (I was out of warranty & they still replaced it).
2) The Surface Pen is mediocre for drawing. I know this is due to the N-trig digitizer. I struggled with the pre-Pro iPads with art and finally gave up because even an old Wacom Bamboo was a million times better than trying to draw with pressure on the old iPads. I switched to a Toshiba Encore 2 Write, a $400 Atom-based Wintab that had a great drawing experience due to the Wacom digitizer. I went for the SP4 after that to consolidate things into one 'everything' machine.
So I can see reason why Surface's growth may have stagnated. Artists won't be satisfied and there are hardware reliability issues.
(I'm buying an iPad Pro this week so I can have a proper device for digital art.)
2 in 1 sales aren’t as good as you might think. After a quick rise, they’ve been stuck at an estimated 10-16% of notebook sales and between 6-9% of all laptop sales. That’s not a major category, though it’s not tiny. If you include iPad sales, that number drops to about 3-5%. Not much to talk about. Even with its small sales, Microsoft’s Surface sales are the biggest in the general category, which doesn’t say much.
If the next 2+ quarters are bad then sure a trend is forming... this current decrease is likely a mere blip. The new product lines should ensure decent growth through the next 2 years.
Are these YOY comparisons? Microsoft just announced new products that wouldn’t be in the most recent quarters sales figures.
Yes they are rogifan_new. Of course you are right about the new products.
Most of this dollar increases are due to additive products to the Surface division. That’s is, they have more products to sell, so the dollar sales grow. There is little to no evidence that continuing product lines have seen any real growth.
Honest question: Have any of you actually tried Surfaces, for work or otherwise?
What are you impressions? What are the distinct pros and cons?
My employer (school) is replacing our old Dell laptops with Surfaces this year. I don't know what model, but I have to assume it's the detachable screen laptop one. I'm sort of interested to try it, but I have a host of major concerns, mostly related to compatibility and connectivity. I don't even use my laptop for my primary work device....I'm on a personal MacBook Pro.
I teach music, so I really need an optical drive (I can certainly buy one, I guess). We also project everything onto smart boards, but I think the new devices may not support it (rumor is they've declared the boards obsolete). This is a problem, because ALL of my visual aids are in the Smart Notebook software and likely can't be converted. I think they may have a wireless projection solution. I will say that at least it will have Bluetooth. My current windows machine either doesn't have it, or it's not enabled.
I do have a sinking feeling that I'm going to go back to using the Mac as not only my main administrative and creative machine, but my instructional one as well. That Surface may become a paperweight. Don't even get me started on how we all already have iPads, and I can't my Mac on the actual full-access wireless network!
"Surface originally appeared as a response to the iPad, which immediately began crushing PC sales after it appeared in 2010 and began Disrupting the market. Common PCs and notebooks were over-serving most users' needs while introducing excessive complication into their lives. The super-simple and highly mobile iPad appealed to everyone from children to business executives.”
Remember all the comments about the iPad being a toy and simply a media consumption device. No “real” work could be done on the iPad? But those people never quit so on it goes.
The iPad was very much more a passive (content consumption) device than an active (content creation) device in its origins. If you think otherwise, perhaps you never had the first gen iPad. Nobody could hold it for extended periods of time due to its size and weight. Yes, it was the perfect solution for a whole group of users who had been basically forced to own laptops and desktops just for their very simple needs. Once affordable (a key metric) tablets arrived (independently of platform), those users could put their laptops and PCs into secondary uses.
However, don't kid yourself, they were far from 'magical'.
They served a purpose just as the iPod Touch did but were extremely limited when it came to active use.
Later, when Pages et al arrived there were some serious file format issues between the different versions and email attachments would be a HUGE problem for years after.
In my experience the iPad Mini 2 was when the stars aligned for iPad (although email attachments were still a curse!).
iPad was so not magical that Huawei decided to make cheap knockoffs of them.
Note: All of these unit sales comparisons suffer from the same inherent flaw: If you want to use the Mac or iOS operating system you have a single source with a very limited selection. Every Apple OS user will be buying from that single source even if distributed via a few retail partners. Every sale of product will be recorded by Apple. Some people will simply accept the feature or form limitations offered thru that small selection of products (relatively speaking) in order to use their preferred OS.
Obviously the same restrictions don't apply to Microsoft's OS (or Android for that matter). thousands of variations and builds and form factors with only the OS they rely on being the common thread. Product sales will be recognized by who knows how many different OEM's. Don't like the Surface keyboard or memory options or form factor or price? There's options from not-Microsoft companies that might be more pleasing, no need to accept any limitations beyond those flowing from the OS itself. Pick and choose the specific unit from whatever company you think matches best with your wants/needs.
Otherwise the typical creatively written DED article. I love his way with words, excellent stuff.
He specifically talked about The Surface whose specs are singularly controlled by Microsoft to match up with what is done at Apple. It is an excellent article.
Sure he did. If iOS were available on devices from other OEM's Apple's iPad numbers would not be as lofty, maybe not even impressive if there were dozens of competitors on the platform.
No doubt Panos Panay has Apple envy but I doubt Microsoft is really invested in growing Surface too much. Don’t want to piss off HP/Dell/Lenovo etc.
Honest question: Have any of you actually tried Surfaces, for work or otherwise?
What are you impressions? What are the distinct pros and cons?
I've been using the Surface Pro 4 at work for about 2 years now. It's not a good machine. It's buggy, even using Microsoft Office, Excel crashes at least a couple times a week. Using an external monitor is hit and miss. Sometimes upon boot it won't recognize the monitor without multiple restarts. Mapping network drives is a constant struggle as it fails to remember which drives I have mapped. It's slow and heats up quite often. Our company was pretty excited about the potential of these machines, but has already started phasing them out in favor of HP laptops which are performing much better. I have not experience the product after the 4th generation so I don't know if they have improved, but based on my experience I would not recommend them.
Most of what you mention is the OS. Windows and MS other software is crap of course, even a good machine wouldn't be sufficient.
Honest question: Have any of you actually tried Surfaces, for work or otherwise?
What are you impressions? What are the distinct pros and cons?
I working sales and we are on the road much of the time. The base system for interaction with corporate was Windows. There were sales apps used for the actual sales where you could use iPads. The Android app was always buggy and not used. When the Surface arrived several people in the office got one over the next couple years. It made sense Windows available for research and corporate work and the sales app all in one convenient place. They all ended up being expensive paperweights. They were buggy and difficult to maintain. Most had iPads and went back to them or old laptops and used the office PC for corporate work. I was the one usually helping them since I had worked extensively in Windows in my IT past. Basically, working with them was very far from intuitively obvious.
"Surface originally appeared as a response to the iPad, which immediately began crushing PC sales after it appeared in 2010 and began Disrupting the market. Common PCs and notebooks were over-serving most users' needs while introducing excessive complication into their lives. The super-simple and highly mobile iPad appealed to everyone from children to business executives.”
Remember all the comments about the iPad being a toy and simply a media consumption device. No “real” work could be done on the iPad? But those people never quit so on it goes.
The iPad was very much more a passive (content consumption) device than an active (content creation) device in its origins. If you think otherwise, perhaps you never had the first gen iPad. Nobody could hold it for extended periods of time due to its size and weight. Yes, it was the perfect solution for a whole group of users who had been basically forced to own laptops and desktops just for their very simple needs. Once affordable (a key metric) tablets arrived (independently of platform), those users could put their laptops and PCs into secondary uses.
However, don't kid yourself, they were far from 'magical'.
They served a purpose just as the iPod Touch did but were extremely limited when it came to active use.
Later, when Pages et al arrived there were some serious file format issues between the different versions and email attachments would be a HUGE problem for years after.
In my experience the iPad Mini 2 was when the stars aligned for iPad (although email attachments were still a curse!).
iPad was so not magical that Huawei decided to make cheap knockoffs of them.
LOL! I see you didn't read my comment about the iPad Mini 2.
So, let me ask you directly. Was the iPad Gen 1 magical for you?
Huawei has some decent tablet models but my Mini 2 is still serving its purpose and I'll have my eye on the Mini 5 this Black Friday.
Honest question: Have any of you actually tried Surfaces, for work or otherwise?
What are you impressions? What are the distinct pros and cons?
My employer (school) is replacing our old Dell laptops with Surfaces this year. I don't know what model, but I have to assume it's the detachable screen laptop one. I'm sort of interested to try it, but I have a host of major concerns, mostly related to compatibility and connectivity. I don't even use my laptop for my primary work device....I'm on a personal MacBook Pro.
I teach music, so I really need an optical drive (I can certainly buy one, I guess). We also project everything onto smart boards, but I think the new devices may not support it (rumor is they've declared the boards obsolete). This is a problem, because ALL of my visual aids are in the Smart Notebook software and likely can't be converted. I think they may have a wireless projection solution. I will say that at least it will have Bluetooth. My current windows machine either doesn't have it, or it's not enabled.
I do have a sinking feeling that I'm going to go back to using the Mac as not only my main administrative and creative machine, but my instructional one as well. That Surface may become a paperweight. Don't even get me started on how we all already have iPads, and I can't my Mac on the actual full-access wireless network!
IT departments and its decisions to buy stuff are a shame to humanity, with almost no exception.
"Surface originally appeared as a response to the iPad, which immediately began crushing PC sales after it appeared in 2010 and began Disrupting the market. Common PCs and notebooks were over-serving most users' needs while introducing excessive complication into their lives. The super-simple and highly mobile iPad appealed to everyone from children to business executives.”
Remember all the comments about the iPad being a toy and simply a media consumption device. No “real” work could be done on the iPad? But those people never quit so on it goes.
The iPad was very much more a passive (content consumption) device than an active (content creation) device in its origins. If you think otherwise, perhaps you never had the first gen iPad. Nobody could hold it for extended periods of time due to its size and weight. Yes, it was the perfect solution for a whole group of users who had been basically forced to own laptops and desktops just for their very simple needs. Once affordable (a key metric) tablets arrived (independently of platform), those users could put their laptops and PCs into secondary uses.
However, don't kid yourself, they were far from 'magical'.
They served a purpose just as the iPod Touch did but were extremely limited when it came to active use.
Later, when Pages et al arrived there were some serious file format issues between the different versions and email attachments would be a HUGE problem for years after.
In my experience the iPad Mini 2 was when the stars aligned for iPad (although email attachments were still a curse!).
iPad was so not magical that Huawei decided to make cheap knockoffs of them.
LOL! I see you didn't read my comment about the iPad Mini 2.
So, let me ask you directly. Was the iPad Gen 1 magical for you?
Huawei has some decent tablet models but my Mini 2 is still serving its purpose and I'll have my eye on the Mini 5 this Black Friday.
If it ships soon with Huawei's new BT tech, I'll weigh the options up.
I read it but iPad was magical. No need to push the goal posts to a few iterations later. Your knockoff iPad wouldn't exist if it weren't for the first iPad and Apples magic.
Honest question: Have any of you actually tried Surfaces, for work or otherwise?
What are you impressions? What are the distinct pros and cons?
We have one and you couldn't force us to use it. The only people who like them are Apple haters. It's complete garbage and runs Windows. My family has one but no one wants to use it anymore. It's tedious and doesn't know what it wants to be. Is it a knockoff iPad like NFL complained about? Or is it a Windows virus machine? Both? *shudders*.
Brea Mall, Southern California has my local Apple Store. It is always packed and the din inside is deafening. Up until a few weeks ago there was a Microsoft “super kiosk” in the middle of the pedestrian walkway nearby. I passed it every time I went to the Apple Store and always noted that the two or three staff outnumbered customers. Now it has quietly disappeared. I recall when this was the one of many placed at or near Apple Stores as an in-your-face move by Microsoft. Oh well.
This was the case in the 1980's with MS Stores. I can remember one appearing in a Mall in Manchester N.H. (if I remember correctly).
It was opposite the DEC store which was quite busy at the time. The MS Store had more staff than customers (1).
Then is 2014 I went to the Apple store in the Mall at Newark, Delaware. There was an MS store close by. Once again, the staff outnumbered the customers. The Apple store was very busy even though it had just opened for the day (Sunday).
Note: All of these unit sales comparisons suffer from the same inherent flaw: If you want to use the Mac or iOS operating system you have a single source with a very limited selection. Every Apple OS user will be buying from that single source even if distributed via a few retail partners. Every sale of product will be recorded by Apple. Some people will simply accept the feature or form limitations offered thru that small selection of products (relatively speaking) in order to use their preferred OS.
Obviously the same restrictions don't apply to Microsoft's OS (or Android for that matter). thousands of variations and builds and form factors with only the OS they rely on being the common thread. Product sales will be recognized by who knows how many different OEM's. Don't like the Surface keyboard or memory options or form factor or price? There's options from not-Microsoft companies that might be more pleasing, no need to accept any limitations beyond those flowing from the OS itself. Pick and choose the specific unit from whatever company you think matches best with your wants/needs.
Otherwise the typical creatively written DED article. I love his way with words, excellent stuff.
He specifically talked about The Surface whose specs are singularly controlled by Microsoft to match up with what is done at Apple. It is an excellent article.
Sure he did. If iOS were available on devices from other OEM's Apple's iPad numbers would not be as lofty, maybe not even impressive if there were dozens of competitors on the platform.
No doubt Panos Panay has Apple envy but I doubt Microsoft is really invested in growing Surface too much. Don’t want to piss off HP/Dell/Lenovo etc.
I don’t think they mind pissing them off. They never have before. They’re just trying to compete on the higher end as Apple does. There’s no real profit on the low end, and Apple owns most of the high end markets in desktops, laptops and mobile. That’s the part of the action everyone wants to be in, but most don’t do well in. So what we’ve seen, over the years, is Dell and Hp buy high end gaming OEMs to add to their lines. A major problem in marketing is that it’s much easier to come down in class successfully, than it is to move up in class, successfully. Not saying it can’t be done, but it’s harder to build a high end reputation when you have a low end one, than the other way around. Buying your way out of it can work if you don’t destroy the company you’re buying, in the process, by trying to fit it into the main company’s mold, which frequently happens.
so Microsoft has started at the top. We don’t know their long range plans, but I’m certain that they’re disappointed in the Surface line’s sales trajectory. They’ve also tried less expensive ARM tablets with no success at all. That’s a problem for them because there are already two lines of tablets, Android and iOS. Android did well for a time, but then plunged to a mostly $100 and less third world market, with Samsung struggling to maintain a fraction of iOS sales with theirs. That market is moving to ChromeOS, so Android tablets are pretty much dead. But ChromeOS is doing well at the lower price points but poorly at the high price points.
so where does an ARM Microsoft tablet fall? Nowhere, apparently.
Note: All of these unit sales comparisons suffer from the same inherent flaw...
If you want to use the Mac or iOS operating system you have a single source with a very limited selection. Every Apple OS user will be buying from that single source even if distributed via a few retail partners. Every sale of product will be recorded by Apple. Some people will simply accept the feature or form limitations offered thru that small selection of products (relatively speaking) in order to use their preferred OS. That results in big Apple product numbers.
Obviously the same restrictions don't apply to Microsoft's OS (or Android for that matter). thousands of variations and builds and form factors with only the OS they rely on being the common thread. Product sales will be recognized by who knows how many different OEM's. Don't like the Surface keyboard or memory options or form factor or price? There's options from not-Microsoft companies that might be more pleasing, no need to accept any limitations beyond those flowing from the OS itself. Pick and choose the specific unit from whatever company you think matches best with your wants/needs.
Otherwise the typical creatively written DED article. I love his way with words, excellent stuff.
Except the article was about the product line, not the platform.
The new embedded video link in this article is a big disappointment. I may stop watching AI videos. I'm not interested in listing all its deficiencies here.
I think the Surface line’s ‘slow’ growth is due to a few factors;
1) The article compares the current slow-quarter with the peak-quarter 5 years ago. A peak to peak comparison shows $900m to $1,800m. Have Mac sales doubled on that time?
2) Surface Books are aimed at the premium notebook market which is small with many established competitors (including Apple) and unlikely to show runaway growth.
3) Surface tablets are a travesty to Windows users hence ‘real PC’. Neither Windows nor its fanbase ever embraced touch. Beyond a bit of scrolling, compromised buttons and some pen input, there are no touch-first controls. They were only going to sell to those who thought they could hit two birds with one stone only to realise they missed both.
The real question is; what aid Apple going to do with the Mac to catch Surface’s limited growth? Mac Pro and $2.5K notebooks won’t do it.
"Surface originally appeared as a response to the iPad, which immediately began crushing PC sales after it appeared in 2010 and began Disrupting the market. Common PCs and notebooks were over-serving most users' needs while introducing excessive complication into their lives. The super-simple and highly mobile iPad appealed to everyone from children to business executives.”
Remember all the comments about the iPad being a toy and simply a media consumption device. No “real” work could be done on the iPad? But those people never quit so on it goes.
The iPad was very much more a passive (content consumption) device than an active (content creation) device in its origins. If you think otherwise, perhaps you never had the first gen iPad. Nobody could hold it for extended periods of time due to its size and weight. Yes, it was the perfect solution for a whole group of users who had been basically forced to own laptops and desktops just for their very simple needs. Once affordable (a key metric) tablets arrived (independently of platform), those users could put their laptops and PCs into secondary uses.
However, don't kid yourself, they were far from 'magical'.
They served a purpose just as the iPod Touch did but were extremely limited when it came to active use.
Later, when Pages et al arrived there were some serious file format issues between the different versions and email attachments would be a HUGE problem for years after.
In my experience the iPad Mini 2 was when the stars aligned for iPad (although email attachments were still a curse!).
iPad was so not magical that Huawei decided to make cheap knockoffs of them.
LOL! I see you didn't read my comment about the iPad Mini 2.
So, let me ask you directly. Was the iPad Gen 1 magical for you?
Huawei has some decent tablet models but my Mini 2 is still serving its purpose and I'll have my eye on the Mini 5 this Black Friday.
If it ships soon with Huawei's new BT tech, I'll weigh the options up.
I read it but iPad was magical. No need to push the goal posts to a few iterations later. Your knockoff iPad wouldn't exist if it weren't for the first iPad and Apples magic.
Honest question: Have any of you actually tried Surfaces, for work or otherwise?
What are you impressions? What are the distinct pros and cons?
We have one and you couldn't force us to use it. The only people who like them are Apple haters. It's complete garbage and runs Windows. My family has one but no one wants to use it anymore. It's tedious and doesn't know what it wants to be. Is it a knockoff iPad like NFL complained about? Or is it a Windows virus machine? Both? *shudders*.
Did I mention it runs Windows?
So how did I move the goalposts?
The reference to the Mini 2 was in the very same post you were referring to!
Totally anecdotal, but at conferences and meetings that I attend, what was once all iPads seems to now be about 2/3rds Surface Pros. The people I know who use them as their primary PCs really like them. None of them are power users and they're all happy on Windows.
I'm sure that overall iPads are outselling these things by a large margin, but from what I've seen this is a successful product line for Microsoft.
I think the Surface line’s ‘slow’ growth is due to a few factors;
1) The article compares the current slow-quarter with the peak-quarter 5 years ago. A peak to peak comparison shows $900m to $1,800m. Have Mac sales doubled on that time?
One can cherry pick the absolute best and worst numbers, but the article makes it pretty clear that
A) Surface has only briefly moved from $1B quarters over the last 7 years of trying (black line on the chart)
iPad has peaked very high but remains pretty reliably around $4-5 B
C) Mac has also peaked but remains right around $6B
D) Other is moving beyond computing and yes, it is growing dramatically faster than Surface, and from a starting point twice as high.
2) Surface Books are aimed at the premium notebook market which is small with many established competitors (including Apple) and unlikely to show runaway growth.
3) Surface tablets are a travesty to Windows users hence ‘real PC’. Neither Windows nor its fanbase ever embraced touch. Beyond a bit of scrolling, compromised buttons and some pen input, there are no touch-first controls. They were only going to sell to those who thought they could hit two birds with one stone only to realise they missed both.
The real question is; what aid Apple going to do with the Mac to catch Surface’s limited growth? Mac Pro and $2.5K notebooks won’t do it.
You‘re asking for Apple’s $6B Mac business to grow as fast „as a percentage“ as Surface grew from zero, but really, Microsoft and Apple have the same market opportunities available to them. Microsoft devoted its efforts to building impractical design-heavy, poorly considered x86 PCs. Apple did make Macs better, but it created a new platform for mobile computing, and then entered wearables and other new markets to achieve growth. Microsoft didn‘t think to do that, so its results over the past decade have not been impressive.
Comments
one reason why people buy phones these days is because of the cameras, and until this year, at least, Google’s cameras have been praised as the best, or equal to the best.
they have also had good battery life (again until this year).
and, they’re less expensive than the other flagship phones. Not by as much this year, but still by $100, or more.
it has nothing g to do with number of SKUs. Nobody is expecting Google to sell 200 million phones. But Samsung g’s Galaxy S series phone sale have been dropping every year since the S4-S5 series when they were estimated to be a bit over 50 million. Now those numbers are estimated, with the Note series included, to be about 30 million. I would think that Google should be able to sell 10 million a year, I never said, or hinted at “tens” of millions, but estimates have been closer to 3 million, with a maximum possibly being 4 million. Those numbers haven’t risen at all. With the poor reviews the new 4 is getting though, it could drop this year.
what you’re forgetting, just as you have with your comment about Surface sales, is that in a larger overall market, estimated as about 85% worldwide for both Windows and Android, that offers a far larger interface to sell a product in. If a product is selling poorly in that market, there’s something wrong. It doesn’t matter that there are a lot of vendors. If people want your product, you will sell ever increasing numbers, and will eventually become one of the large vendors. If they don’t, then you won’t.
2 in 1 sales aren’t as good as you might think. After a quick rise, they’ve been stuck at an estimated 10-16% of notebook sales and between 6-9% of all laptop sales. That’s not a major category, though it’s not tiny. If you include iPad sales, that number drops to about 3-5%. Not much to talk about. Even with its small sales, Microsoft’s Surface sales are the biggest in the general category, which doesn’t say much.
Scary how that chart shows Apples Other category neck and neck with Mac!
Fact based articles do prove this unfortunately.
iPad was so not magical that Huawei decided to make cheap knockoffs of them.
So, let me ask you directly. Was the iPad Gen 1 magical for you?
Huawei has some decent tablet models but my Mini 2 is still serving its purpose and I'll have my eye on the Mini 5 this Black Friday.
The M7 looks to be shaping up well though:
https://www.xda-developers.com/huawei-mediapad-m7-first-android-tablet-with-hole-punch-display/
If it ships soon with Huawei's new BT tech, I'll weigh the options up.
I read it but iPad was magical. No need to push the goal posts to a few iterations later. Your knockoff iPad wouldn't exist if it weren't for the first iPad and Apples magic.
We have one and you couldn't force us to use it. The only people who like them are Apple haters. It's complete garbage and runs Windows. My family has one but no one wants to use it anymore. It's tedious and doesn't know what it wants to be. Is it a knockoff iPad like NFL complained about? Or is it a Windows virus machine? Both? *shudders*.
Did I mention it runs Windows?
so Microsoft has started at the top. We don’t know their long range plans, but I’m certain that they’re disappointed in the Surface line’s sales trajectory. They’ve also tried less expensive ARM tablets with no success at all. That’s a problem for them because there are already two lines of tablets, Android and iOS. Android did well for a time, but then plunged to a mostly $100 and less third world market, with Samsung struggling to maintain a fraction of iOS sales with theirs. That market is moving to ChromeOS, so Android tablets are pretty much dead. But ChromeOS is doing well at the lower price points but poorly at the high price points.
so where does an ARM Microsoft tablet fall? Nowhere, apparently.
1) The article compares the current slow-quarter with the peak-quarter 5 years ago. A peak to peak comparison shows $900m to $1,800m. Have Mac sales doubled on that time?
2) Surface Books are aimed at the premium notebook market which is small with many established competitors (including Apple) and unlikely to show runaway growth.
3) Surface tablets are a travesty to Windows users hence ‘real PC’. Neither Windows nor its fanbase ever embraced touch. Beyond a bit of scrolling, compromised buttons and some pen input, there are no touch-first controls. They were only going to sell to those who thought they could hit two birds with one stone only to realise they missed both.
The real question is; what aid Apple going to do with the Mac to catch Surface’s limited growth? Mac Pro and $2.5K notebooks won’t do it.
The reference to the Mini 2 was in the very same post you were referring to!
This is no Jedi trickery!
You‘re asking for Apple’s $6B Mac business to grow as fast „as a percentage“ as Surface grew from zero, but really, Microsoft and Apple have the same market opportunities available to them. Microsoft devoted its efforts to building impractical design-heavy, poorly considered x86 PCs. Apple did make Macs better, but it created a new platform for mobile computing, and then entered wearables and other new markets to achieve growth. Microsoft didn‘t think to do that, so its results over the past decade have not been impressive.