And yet that market share number just stays flat, if not drops.
I know this is obvious, but just to be clear: the number of Mac users IS growing. In order for the number called "market share" to grow, the Mac market has to not only grow, but grow FASTER than the Windows market. To do that, Apple would have to overcome the fact that their machines stay usable longer and need replacement less often than Windows boxes.
I'm not saying market share isn't at all important, but I'm happy simply knowing that the number of Mac users is increasing daily.
(Also, re pro machines... Apple's iPod success in no way indicates that they have slowed work on other products. The iPod makes a profit--Apple can afford the staff for it without pulling them off of Macs )
Curious: did any of the users who switched due to the "halo effect" hesitate when it was learned one would have to purchase MS Office at full price, for $400? Or did you buy the Student/Teacher edition? Or obtain an illicit copy? Or do you use your Mac for home use -- iLife so forth -- and skipped MS Office, using TextEdit to handle Word documents when necessary? Or was it all no big deal?
The only thing I'm squeamish about, is that a survey of 200 users isn't a hell of a lot. Regardless, the gauntlet has fallen. There better be evidence of a halo effect in Apple's financials in the near future, or the stock will get hammered.
You must really hate most psychological studies then because many of them use polling of under 100. There are exceptions but 200 is pretty normal for most polls and surveys and in fact is edging the high side.
(In fact...the 200 number is actually a higher percentage than the number used for presidential election polling!)
Please explain.. 1100 of the total number of voters is about 0% of the total voters.. 200 is about 0% of the total iPod buyers. In fact, if you got a total population of 100 individuals in a country, and you then ask 1 person about who he will vote for, you have asked a higher percentage than the example you gave. Still, you couldnt give any confidence intervall at all.
Assuming the asked users were picked out without any bias , the survey of 200 users would give about 7% of error!
Quote:
Just looking at the number and making the assertion is simply stupid. You have to know much more about the sample, the methodolgy and the questions asked.
Yes, just because some survey show some good numbers for Apple, the survey is still has to obey the "natural laws" of statistics. Thats why this survey shouldnt be considered more than anecdotical evidence.
The only way Apple is going to have a Halo effect, and boost marketshare, is to increase their unit sales. As it stands, their quarterly sales have been stagnating at under one million/qtr. for about 4 years now. They really haven't had much success in the Mac market since the early days of the iMac, which all fizzled when Apple shifted their product line to the G4.
I'm hoping, and wishing Apple makes some gains this quarter and breaks that elusive 1 million barrier that they haven't done in years, and I really think it's going to happen. They're finally firing on all cylinders now and ready to strike, as I see it:
- it seems G5's are in good quantities now, as duals 2.5GHz are available
- a hot new G5 iMac that's clearly better than the outdated, and unavailable (last quarter) G4 iMac
- newly refreshed iBooks
- a lower priced PowerMac (finally!) for those that want a separate monitor and don't have $2000
- refreshed displays that complement their hardware much better
Hopefully Powerbook sales won't dwindle this quarter as I doubt they'll be upgraded before '05, and they're already getting long in the tooth.
Apple stores, a Switch campaign, really haven't done much to help Apple's marketshare, so I'm hoping an iPod halo effect proves true. I guess we'll see next conference call.
Thats why this survey shouldnt be considered more than anecdotical evidence.
I agree, and I find the funniest thing about it all is that it's a Wall Street analyst, dammit. It would not look so suspicious or crazy if such claims were made on AppleInsider forums by a 15 y.o. Mac fan.
They call themselves analysts, not speculators or dummies. They are considered experts. This, IMHO, means either:
The world has lost its marbles. People have become so blind that every one-eyed man is a visionary. We've become so stupid in general that he who knows how much 2x2 is approximately is a genius.
These analysts are simply trying to fool masses into buying Apple stock with an ultimate goal of dispensing with theirs in the most climactic moment.
Apple stores, a Switch campaign, really haven't done much to help Apple's marketshare, so I'm hoping an iPod halo effect proves true. I guess we'll see next conference call.
I hope so too. 2 million iPods last quarter... anywhere from 2.6 to 4 million projected this quarter - they better be getting some more sell-through on their Macs to accompany the iPods.
Curious: did any of the users who switched due to the "halo effect" hesitate when it was learned one would have to purchase MS Office at full price, for $400? Or did you buy the Student/Teacher edition? Or obtain an illicit copy? Or do you use your Mac for home use -- iLife so forth -- and skipped MS Office, using TextEdit to handle Word documents when necessary? Or was it all no big deal?
A bit steep yes, but I just bought the pro version so that I could get Virtual PC, as I wasn't sure if I could totally separate myself from Windows. I used VPC like 3 times and then deleted it. Wasted some cash, but then I've wasted much more buying Antivirus software, firewalls, fix-its, endless calls to tech support, some of which I had to pay for, time wasted reinstalling software, etc, etc... just to keep windows running at all. I convinced my company to switch based on all of these other unforeseen costs that the windows machine incurs in maintenance. Buying a Mac eliminates all the nonsense and headache and wasted time, $400 bucks for MS office that doesn't crash on a machine that doesn't crash was cheap by comparison
I agree, and I find the funniest thing about it all is that it's a Wall Street analyst, dammit. It would not look so suspicious or crazy if such claims were made on AppleInsider forums by a 15 y.o. Mac fan.
They call themselves analysts, not speculators or dummies. They are considered experts. This, IMHO, means either:The world has lost its marbles. People have become so blind that every one-eyed man is a visionary. We've become so stupid in general that he who knows how much 2x2 is approximately is a genius. These analysts are simply trying to fool masses into buying Apple stock with an ultimate goal of dispensing with theirs in the most climactic moment.
Believe me. I have made quantitative consumer stratification analysis where the characterization of some of the groups are based on <30 people. Big companies (in my case a company with over 1000000 customers) base their strategies on junk like this.
I told those-in-control that they would be much better served by making one survey per year that was done thoroughly and with much better representation. But they refused it every time. Now I am convinced that it isn´t the results in themselves the companies are interested in but only the flow of numbers. They really don´t care if the numbers are right but only that they have some kind of numbers to go by. The marked analysis dep. love to have more more MORE numbers to analyze (job security) and the bosses feel some kind of security in their decisions. Most of it doesn´t serve a purpose but is a closed system that feeds itself.
Assuming the asked users were picked out without any bias , the survey of 200 users would give about 7% of error!
Ops, what I meant (and correct me if im wrong here) is that with 200 people asked and the outcome space only has 2 possible values (Clearly, this survey got a bigger outcome space, but lets ignore it), the margin of error is 7% (95% confidence interval).
Curious: did any of the users who switched due to the "halo effect" hesitate when it was learned one would have to purchase MS Office at full price, for $400? Or did you buy the Student/Teacher edition? Or obtain an illicit copy? Or do you use your Mac for home use -- iLife so forth -- and skipped MS Office, using TextEdit to handle Word documents when necessary? Or was it all no big deal?
It didn't stop me one bit. I purchased MS Office Pro for $499 from the Apple store. I also picked up FCP.
It only cost a little more to go first class. Except the price of the 20" iMac puts me in the pilots cabin! :eek: I have a Dell notebook computer, Precision M60, that comes with direct support from AutoCad if I should ever have any problems. AutoCad is very important to my business. It is fully loaded and cost almost the same, including the direct support.
I am not complaining about Apple's prices (I did buy one afterall), but they could get their prices adjusted a little lower to make it easier on people like me who buy a new computer every 8 - 12 months but want the best they can afford.
I am not complaining about Apple's prices (I did buy one afterall), but they could get their prices adjusted a little lower to make it easier on people like me who buy a new computer every 8 - 12 months but want the best they can afford.
Eric
Apple computers typically hold good resale values on eBay, so when you do upgrade a year down the line it should be a relatively inexpensive upgrade if you decide to go that route.
Now I am convinced that it isn´t the results in themselves the companies are interested in but only the flow of numbers. They really don´t care if the numbers are right but only that they have some kind of numbers to go by.
It looks like market analyses (or what it used to be) is no longer an economic instrument, but a justification for inept management. I often see signs of such an approach in commercial organizations, which makes me think that making money is not their actual business.\
Back to the topic. Even if in reality only 0.1% of iPod buyers went to buy their first Mac, it would be cool, too. Because the iPod division is profitable in itself and because the halo effect, even negligible, comes sort of for free. It's just strange that some dep. heads are resigning on the company's (seeming?) rise.
Ops, what I meant (and correct me if im wrong here) is that with 200 people asked and the outcome space only has 2 possible values (Clearly, this survey got a bigger outcome space, but lets ignore it), the margin of error is 7% (95% confidence interval).
Typically initial estimates for analysis are -50% to +30%. Subsequent estimates narrow that until you have a hopeful final error range of around + or -10 to 15%.
As it happens it doesn't matter in this case if those results are 7% off, which the analyst has assumed they are roughly anyway, the point is growth is expected to be ahead.
Guessing not a lot of people have actually spent any time with analysts. They do actually generate their reports from somewhere but you need to read the fine print and you need to understand the assumptions they make. Where gross errors happen usually has little to do with the survey method and more to do with an incorrect assumption somewhere.
A slashdot reader is writing the same thing as me about this survey:
"Depends on what you define as "decent". At a 99% confidence level, a sample size of 200 means that the margin of error for this survey is +/- 9%. Even if you open it up to a 95% confidence level, the MOE is still +/- 7%. If you wanted to drop the margin of error down to +/- 3% at a 95% confidence level, you'd need a sample size of just over a thousand respondents."
Comments
Originally posted by BRussell
And yet that market share number just stays flat, if not drops.
I know this is obvious, but just to be clear: the number of Mac users IS growing. In order for the number called "market share" to grow, the Mac market has to not only grow, but grow FASTER than the Windows market. To do that, Apple would have to overcome the fact that their machines stay usable longer and need replacement less often than Windows boxes.
I'm not saying market share isn't at all important, but I'm happy simply knowing that the number of Mac users is increasing daily.
(Also, re pro machines... Apple's iPod success in no way indicates that they have slowed work on other products. The iPod makes a profit--Apple can afford the staff for it without pulling them off of Macs
Curious: did any of the users who switched due to the "halo effect" hesitate when it was learned one would have to purchase MS Office at full price, for $400? Or did you buy the Student/Teacher edition? Or obtain an illicit copy? Or do you use your Mac for home use -- iLife so forth -- and skipped MS Office, using TextEdit to handle Word documents when necessary? Or was it all no big deal?
Originally posted by the cool gut
The only thing I'm squeamish about, is that a survey of 200 users isn't a hell of a lot. Regardless, the gauntlet has fallen. There better be evidence of a halo effect in Apple's financials in the near future, or the stock will get hammered.
You must really hate most psychological studies then because many of them use polling of under 100. There are exceptions but 200 is pretty normal for most polls and surveys and in fact is edging the high side.
(In fact...the 200 number is actually a higher percentage than the number used for presidential election polling!)
Please explain.. 1100 of the total number of voters is about 0% of the total voters.. 200 is about 0% of the total iPod buyers. In fact, if you got a total population of 100 individuals in a country, and you then ask 1 person about who he will vote for, you have asked a higher percentage than the example you gave. Still, you couldnt give any confidence intervall at all.
Assuming the asked users were picked out without any bias , the survey of 200 users would give about 7% of error!
Just looking at the number and making the assertion is simply stupid. You have to know much more about the sample, the methodolgy and the questions asked.
Yes, just because some survey show some good numbers for Apple, the survey is still has to obey the "natural laws" of statistics. Thats why this survey shouldnt be considered more than anecdotical evidence.
I'm hoping, and wishing Apple makes some gains this quarter and breaks that elusive 1 million barrier that they haven't done in years, and I really think it's going to happen. They're finally firing on all cylinders now and ready to strike, as I see it:
- it seems G5's are in good quantities now, as duals 2.5GHz are available
- a hot new G5 iMac that's clearly better than the outdated, and unavailable (last quarter) G4 iMac
- newly refreshed iBooks
- a lower priced PowerMac (finally!) for those that want a separate monitor and don't have $2000
- refreshed displays that complement their hardware much better
Hopefully Powerbook sales won't dwindle this quarter as I doubt they'll be upgraded before '05, and they're already getting long in the tooth.
Apple stores, a Switch campaign, really haven't done much to help Apple's marketshare, so I'm hoping an iPod halo effect proves true. I guess we'll see next conference call.
Originally posted by blabla
Thats why this survey shouldnt be considered more than anecdotical evidence.
I agree, and I find the funniest thing about it all is that it's a Wall Street analyst, dammit. It would not look so suspicious or crazy if such claims were made on AppleInsider forums by a 15 y.o. Mac fan.
They call themselves analysts, not speculators or dummies. They are considered experts. This, IMHO, means either:
Originally posted by bborofka
Apple stores, a Switch campaign, really haven't done much to help Apple's marketshare, so I'm hoping an iPod halo effect proves true. I guess we'll see next conference call.
I hope so too. 2 million iPods last quarter... anywhere from 2.6 to 4 million projected this quarter - they better be getting some more sell-through on their Macs to accompany the iPods.
Originally posted by Hobbes
I'm eager to be optimistic, but remain wary.
Curious: did any of the users who switched due to the "halo effect" hesitate when it was learned one would have to purchase MS Office at full price, for $400? Or did you buy the Student/Teacher edition? Or obtain an illicit copy? Or do you use your Mac for home use -- iLife so forth -- and skipped MS Office, using TextEdit to handle Word documents when necessary? Or was it all no big deal?
A bit steep yes, but I just bought the pro version so that I could get Virtual PC, as I wasn't sure if I could totally separate myself from Windows. I used VPC like 3 times and then deleted it. Wasted some cash, but then I've wasted much more buying Antivirus software, firewalls, fix-its, endless calls to tech support, some of which I had to pay for, time wasted reinstalling software, etc, etc... just to keep windows running at all. I convinced my company to switch based on all of these other unforeseen costs that the windows machine incurs in maintenance. Buying a Mac eliminates all the nonsense and headache and wasted time, $400 bucks for MS office that doesn't crash on a machine that doesn't crash was cheap by comparison
Originally posted by costique
I agree, and I find the funniest thing about it all is that it's a Wall Street analyst, dammit. It would not look so suspicious or crazy if such claims were made on AppleInsider forums by a 15 y.o. Mac fan.
They call themselves analysts, not speculators or dummies. They are considered experts. This, IMHO, means either:The world has lost its marbles. People have become so blind that every one-eyed man is a visionary. We've become so stupid in general that he who knows how much 2x2 is approximately is a genius.
These analysts are simply trying to fool masses into buying Apple stock with an ultimate goal of dispensing with theirs in the most climactic moment.
Believe me. I have made quantitative consumer stratification analysis where the characterization of some of the groups are based on <30 people. Big companies (in my case a company with over 1000000 customers) base their strategies on junk like this.
I told those-in-control that they would be much better served by making one survey per year that was done thoroughly and with much better representation. But they refused it every time. Now I am convinced that it isn´t the results in themselves the companies are interested in but only the flow of numbers. They really don´t care if the numbers are right but only that they have some kind of numbers to go by. The marked analysis dep. love to have more more MORE numbers to analyze (job security) and the bosses feel some kind of security in their decisions. Most of it doesn´t serve a purpose but is a closed system that feeds itself.
Originally posted by blabla
Assuming the asked users were picked out without any bias , the survey of 200 users would give about 7% of error!
Ops, what I meant (and correct me if im wrong here) is that with 200 people asked and the outcome space only has 2 possible values (Clearly, this survey got a bigger outcome space, but lets ignore it), the margin of error is 7% (95% confidence interval).
Originally posted by bergz
Sorry, but, Halo Effect?
awesome video! awesome!
Originally posted by Hobbes
I'm eager to be optimistic, but remain wary.
Curious: did any of the users who switched due to the "halo effect" hesitate when it was learned one would have to purchase MS Office at full price, for $400? Or did you buy the Student/Teacher edition? Or obtain an illicit copy? Or do you use your Mac for home use -- iLife so forth -- and skipped MS Office, using TextEdit to handle Word documents when necessary? Or was it all no big deal?
It didn't stop me one bit. I purchased MS Office Pro for $499 from the Apple store. I also picked up FCP.
It only cost a little more to go first class.
I am not complaining about Apple's prices (I did buy one afterall), but they could get their prices adjusted a little lower to make it easier on people like me who buy a new computer every 8 - 12 months but want the best they can afford.
Eric
Originally posted by aplnub
I am not complaining about Apple's prices (I did buy one afterall), but they could get their prices adjusted a little lower to make it easier on people like me who buy a new computer every 8 - 12 months but want the best they can afford.
Eric
Apple computers typically hold good resale values on eBay, so when you do upgrade a year down the line it should be a relatively inexpensive upgrade if you decide to go that route.
Originally posted by Anders
Now I am convinced that it isn´t the results in themselves the companies are interested in but only the flow of numbers. They really don´t care if the numbers are right but only that they have some kind of numbers to go by.
It looks like market analyses (or what it used to be) is no longer an economic instrument, but a justification for inept management. I often see signs of such an approach in commercial organizations, which makes me think that making money is not their actual business.
Back to the topic. Even if in reality only 0.1% of iPod buyers went to buy their first Mac, it would be cool, too. Because the iPod division is profitable in itself and because the halo effect, even negligible, comes sort of for free. It's just strange that some dep. heads are resigning on the company's (seeming?) rise.
Originally posted by blabla
Ops, what I meant (and correct me if im wrong here) is that with 200 people asked and the outcome space only has 2 possible values (Clearly, this survey got a bigger outcome space, but lets ignore it), the margin of error is 7% (95% confidence interval).
Typically initial estimates for analysis are -50% to +30%. Subsequent estimates narrow that until you have a hopeful final error range of around + or -10 to 15%.
As it happens it doesn't matter in this case if those results are 7% off, which the analyst has assumed they are roughly anyway, the point is growth is expected to be ahead.
Guessing not a lot of people have actually spent any time with analysts. They do actually generate their reports from somewhere but you need to read the fine print and you need to understand the assumptions they make. Where gross errors happen usually has little to do with the survey method and more to do with an incorrect assumption somewhere.
"Depends on what you define as "decent". At a 99% confidence level, a sample size of 200 means that the margin of error for this survey is +/- 9%. Even if you open it up to a 95% confidence level, the MOE is still +/- 7%. If you wanted to drop the margin of error down to +/- 3% at a 95% confidence level, you'd need a sample size of just over a thousand respondents."