Numbers don't tell Mac's story

[MacBytes]

Category: News and Press Releases
Link: Numbers don\'t tell Mac\'s story (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20040331112931)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)

Approved by Mudbug

[wrldwzrd89]

Market share numbers and usage numbers can both be interpreted as misleading; this article only proves that point. Despite that, though, I like to hear that approximately 8% of computers in use are Macs. I wonder if any other Mac use vs. PC use statistics exist. I'd also be interested in Mac-only stats, like %desktop (PowerMac, iMac, eMac) vs. %portable (PowerBook, iBook) or %consumer (iMac, eMac, iBook) vs. %professional (PowerMac, PowerBook).

[nagromme]

There are some general points I agree with, but this is a poor article that may just make Mac users seem clueless:

"If you and I both sell our own widgets but yours last five times as long as mine, I'd have to sell five times as many as you do just to keep the same market share."

No... you'd have to sell exactly AS many to keep "market share," but would then have only 1/5 the installed base compared to me with the long-life product. The author tries to make a point that IS important, but then gets it wrong.

And there are lots of unsupported statements that too important just to leave that way--some figure is "probably an understatement"... Why? Even if you don't have your own number proven, you can still say specifically why you disagree with someone else's number. Otherwise don't attack that number.

"As for the 12 percent number, I feel it's probably a huge overestimate. But it's probably accurate..."

I don't know WHAT to make of that :)

The principle that there are more Macs in use than last months' "market share" suggests--IS a good point to get out to people. But preferably not like this. Oh well.

[wrldwzrd89]

There are some general points I agree with, but this is a poor article that may just make Mac users seem clueless:

There are lots of unsupported statements that too important just to leave that way--some figure is "probably an understatement"... Why? Even if you don't have your own number proven, you can still say specifically why you disagree with someone else's number. Otherwise don't attack that number.

"As for the 12 percent number, I feel it's probably a huge overestimate. But it's probably accurate..."

I don't know WHAT to make of that :)

The principle that there are more Macs in use than last months' "market share" suggests--IS a good point to get out to people. But preferably not like this. Oh well.
Now that I think about it, you're right - the article does contradict itself at times. Which begs the question - if it's a bad article, why was it posted on MacBytes?

[nagromme]

I think MacBytes evaluates links for relevance... I doubt they have time to proofread :) The topic is interesting and good to see in a newspaper, just badly handled.

Now... why it appeared TWICE in MacBytes is another question ;)

[gerardrj]

Now that I think about it, you're right - the article does contradict itself at times. Which begs the question - if it's a bad article, why was it posted on MacBytes?

The article is no better or worse than most others written by newspaper and television reporters across the US. It's become a major issue that reporters don't understand what they are reporting on and are much more likely to toss things out there without an substantial evidence or explanation. The article says SOMETHING, and that's all that's needed.
This piece could have been much more informative and thorough without turning in to a full scale piece on economics and technology.

[GaelDesign]

Actually, the 25 million Mac users was a figure that included previous Mac OS versions (9 and below). The number of OS X users specifically is more like 10 million, if Apple can be believed. Also, the fact that Macs last longer than PCs is somewhat of a myth. Macs use pretty much the same type of components as PCs these days. Any PC with decent-quality components in it will last years.

I'm a Mac guy all the way, but when Mac users accept nonsense like this article, it just makes us look stupid.

My 2c,

Jared

[COS]

Also, the fact that Macs last longer than PCs is somewhat of a myth. Macs use pretty much the same type of components as PCs these days. Any PC with decent-quality components in it will last years.

The Mac uses the same parts as PCs... but uses quality parts whereas most comodity PC makers will use slightly less than highest quality to save a buck. All of this is a moot point because even if the parts were identical, the issue is not so much that the Mac lasts longer... its the fact that the Mac stays in use longer. Mac users typically upgrade once every 2-3 years while the average PC user (at least those that i know) upgrade once ever 1.5 - 2 years.

What that means is that the Mac install base is much higher than that which most industry pundits give Apple credit for, but "market share" (which is solely determined by quarterly sales) is less... thus causing many to misinterpret the words market share when in actuality whats implied is install base.

[Fender2112]

:eek: The writer refers to HIS research several times. It would be nice if he would share it with us :)

The part I agree with the most is the notion that most folks do not realize there are different platforms. They do, however, know there are different BRANDS. They know Dell, HP, Gateway, Sony and even Apple. They just don't know about Windows, OS X, or Linux.

[slipper]

i love the point about BMWs. :D

[MrMacMan]

The article has good points.

If he were to tell us where he got his info from.



I mean now some Pc person can point over to that article and say 'look no sources he is making it out of thin air!'

:(

[Krizoitz]

Man, I wish I knew that I could have gotten paid to write that, I've been saying this for YEARS :)

[billyboy]

The BMW analogy was right on in terms of pointing out that BMWs are aimed at a particular auto market that has nothing to do with bog standard Fords. It would be interesting to know the figures on the market that Apple has a direct interest in - ie compared to Macs, how many Dells, IBM, HPs are sold in the fully specced tightly integrated desktop and laptop market?

Oh, it has all gone quiet as critics realise that Apple are very very successful at what they try to do - not trying to be all things to all fickle people.

[Fender2112]

The BMW analogy was right on in terms of pointing out that BMWs are aimed at a particular auto market that has nothing to do with bog standard Fords. It would be interesting to know the figures on the market that Apple has a direct interest in - ie compared to Macs, how many Dells, IBM, HPs are sold in the fully specced tightly integrated desktop and laptop market?

Oh, it has all gone quiet as critics realise that Apple are very very successful at what they try to do - not trying to be all things to all fickle people.

The BMW analogy is not new. Folks have being using it for years - 20 or so years actually.:)

[adamjay]

the BMW analogy is hogwash.

drive on the Autobahn through Bavaria and you will see one hell of a market share favoring BMW. drastically different from its market share in North America. and you will not find this drastic difference paralleled in apple's market share between different countries, regions.

unfortunately, our fearless leader Steve Jobs coined that Analogy.

There is no analogy to justify the small market share or user base (or however you want to spin it) that apple has or doesnt have. Its a pretty simple formula, Microsoft has extremely loose licensing guidelines for its OS, and Mac OS doesnt license to anyone. Even when Umax and Power Computing were able to make 'Mac Clones' the licensing guidelines were extremely strict, and got even more strict before Apple bought back the license.

Its all very unfortunate, but hey there's nothing like having pride in being the underdog, minority, black sheep, whatever.

Mac OS is "my precious"

[adamjay]

The BMW analogy was right on in terms of pointing out that BMWs are aimed at a particular auto market that has nothing to do with bog standard Fords.

the old bmw analogy is good in giving the Mac OS an air of sophistication, but most people don't drive BMW's because it makes their dayjob less stressful. the point that Jobs is trying to make with the analogy is that apple isn't marketing its products to the all of the other 95% of computer users. i can tell you that the market share in the field of Pro Audio would have to be anywhere from 70 to 80%, and that is 70-80% of audio professionals that make a living using computers to produce, edit, or record music. And certainly the entertainment industry has a large share of Mac's... you see more Mac's in print ad's that have nothing to do with computers (but want to show a computer to help sophisticate the shot), than PCs. and that's probably the Photographer's Mac you are looking at. Same for Films.... the last 2 movies i watched on DVD.. School of Rock and Under the Tuscan Sun were littered with ibooks and imacs.

perhaps the only weight that the BMW analogy holds is that the Mac's we see in entertainment are owned by BMW drivers. i dunno.