70% of Mac users don't use pro apps

[hans1972]

In 2017, there was a round-table discussion billed as "a small roundtable discussion about the Mac", including Phil Schiller, Craig Federighi and John Ternus from Apple and Matthew Panzarino, Lance Ulanoff, Ina Fried, John Paczkowski and John Gruber. This was in connection with the Mac Pro debacle.

In that discussion, Phil Schiller said the following (summarised):

• 15% of Mac users used a pro app regularly
• 15% used a pro app less frequently (a few times a month)

which leads to

• 70% never uses pro apps

In this context a pro app was defined as applications for things like music creation, video editing, graphic design and software development. Your usual suspects. I don't think the percentages of changed much since then.

Of those 70% who never use a performance insensitive application, a lot of them would be satisfied with a Neo. This is especially true when one takes price into the account. A lot of casual users are willing to sacrifice a few things for getting a decent computer at a good price instead of getting a great computer at a high price.

The same type of users from the Windows PC/Chromebook world are also potential buyers.

That's the markets Apple now have a competitive model in.

Do I think every user of MBA will buy a Neo in the future? No. Do I think huge percentages of Windows users or Chromebook users will switch? No.

If Apple gets 3% of people who are going to buy a Windows machine or a Chromebook in 2026 to buy a Mac instead, it would represent something like 4 million users and would be a huge success.

If Apple sells 5 million of the MacBook Neo in the first year to both current Mac users and others, it would be a success.

Source: https://daringfireball.net/2017/04/the_mac_pro_lives

 

[jz0309]

In 2017, there was a round-table discussion billed as "a small roundtable discussion about the Mac", including Phil Schiller, Craig Federighi and John Ternus from Apple and Matthew Panzarino, Lance Ulanoff, Ina Fried, John Paczkowski and John Gruber. This was in connection with the Mac Pro debacle.

In that discussion, Phil Schiller said the following (summarised):

• 15% of Mac users used a pro app regularly
• 15% used a pro app less frequently (a few times a month)

which leads to

• 70% never uses pro apps

In this context a pro app was defined as applications for things like music creation, video editing, graphic design and software development. Your usual suspects. I don't think the percentages of changed much since then.

Of those 70% who never use a performance insensitive application, a lot of them would be satisfied with a Neo. This is especially true when one takes price into the account. A lot of casual users are willing to sacrifice a few things for getting a decent computer at a good price instead of getting a great computer at a high price.

The same type of users from the Windows PC/Chromebook world are also potential buyers.

That's the markets Apple now have a competitive model in.

Do I think every user of MBA will buy a Neo in the future? No. Do I think huge percentages of Windows users or Chromebook users will switch? No.

If Apple gets 3% of people who are going to buy a Windows machine or a Chromebook in 2026 to buy a Mac instead, it would represent something like 4 million users and would be a huge success.

If Apple sells 5 million of the MacBook Neo in the first year to both current Mac users and others, it would be a success.

Source: https://daringfireball.net/2017/04/the_mac_pro_lives

while I'm not so sure that the 2017 statement is still valid today, I totally agree with your last 2 paragraphs

 

[icymountain]

In this context a pro app was defined as applications for things like music creation, video editing, graphic design and software development. Your usual suspects. I don't think the percentages of changed much since then.

This is a very limiting definition of "pro app"...

 

[4sallypat]

I agree about the limited use.

I have the EDU Pro Apps bundle and only use FCP - mainly on my Mac Studio.

Amazed at how well it works on my Neo:

 

[DeepSix]

Not surprised, Mac is a status symbol and need to show it off at Starbucks everyday.

 

[conmee]

Not surprised, Mac is a status symbol and need to show it off at Starbucks everyday.

That's why I changed my order from 14" M5 Base 24GB to 16" M5 Pro 64GB... not gonna let base owners kick silicon in my face that's for damn sure... but I do keep my head down anytime a Max owner shows up... gotta know my place in the pecking order. haha 😉

 

[CalMin]

I'd say the 70% is about accurate based on my friends and family. In fact, I'd be surprised if it wasn't higher because FCP, Logic, etc are serious tools for those with specific creative requirements.

The exception might be Photoshop and there are many more 'serious' amateur photographers these days because of the accessibility of seriously good low cost camera hardware.

 

[Madhatter32]

And to think I thought that I was a pro using Microsoft Office on my Mac. Apple considers me a noob.

 

[hans1972]

This is a very limiting definition of "pro app"...

It covers mostly what's resource intensive on a Mac:

• music creation
  • Logic Pro
  • Pro Tools
  • Ableton Live
  • FL Studio
  • Cubase
• video editing
  • Final Cut Pro
  • Adobe Premiere Pro
  • DaVinci Resolve
  • Avid Media Composer
• graphic design
  • Adobe Photoshop
  • Adobe Illustrator
  • Adobe InDesign
  • Affinity Designer
  • Affinity Photo
• software development
  • Xcode
  • Visual Studio Code
  • IntelliJ IDEA
  • pyCharm
  • Android Studio

Very few other applications used by professionals requires high amount of ram, CPU power or GPU power.

 

[DeepSix]

Are YouTube and Tik Tok pro apps? What about Snapchat?

 

[maflynn]

Are YouTube and Tik Tok pro apps? What about Snapchat?

No, those are considered social media

 

[icymountain]

Very few other applications used by professionals requires high amount of ram, CPU power or GPU power.

The list does not include scientific software, AI modeling, running virtual machines...

Also, it is strange terminology to call "pro software" what is just meant to be "resource intensive" (games may be resource intensive, but note quite pro... except for professional gamers of course).

 

[M.Brane]

"Pro" is a term that has been overused, and abused for quite some time.

 

[Harddrive]

For me it was the screen that sold me on a pro besides the fact since owning it I have only got 1 beachball so I think having extra power helps with applications and web browsers demanding more every year.

 

[maflynn]

sold me on a pro besides the fact since owning it I have only got 1 beachball

Same, I prefer to have more power not less when buying a new computer, but at some point as the M series gets more and more powerful, how much is too much? I mean at some point selecting a lower level computer may not be a step down given the needs of most people. We've been conditioned to think more is better.

 

[wyliej]

So, gcc, ImageMagick, and ffmpeg don't count? What about ollama or whatever your local LLM tool of choice is? (I realize that few of these existed at the home-computer level in 2017.) What about custom-written business software? What about video games? There are lots of resource-intensive ways to use a computer that don't fall under Apple's definition of "pro apps."

 

[Nekronos]

It covers mostly what's resource intensive on a Mac:

• music creation
  • Logic Pro
  • Pro Tools
  • Ableton Live
  • FL Studio
  • Cubase
• video editing
  • Final Cut Pro
  • Adobe Premiere Pro
  • DaVinci Resolve
  • Avid Media Composer
• graphic design
  • Adobe Photoshop
  • Adobe Illustrator
  • Adobe InDesign
  • Affinity Designer
  • Affinity Photo
• software development
  • Xcode
  • Visual Studio Code
  • IntelliJ IDEA
  • pyCharm
  • Android Studio

Very few other applications used by professionals requires high amount of ram, CPU power or GPU power.

This isn't an exhaustive list by any means and completely leaves out software that engineers, big data, traders and data analysts use, things like autocad, caseware IDEA, Alteryx, powerBI, even database and spreadsheets can be a resource hog when you are working with massive complex files.

That list above really just focuses on creatives. And the way "pro" is being used is rather silly here, even software that is not traditionally resource intensive can be depending on usage. Professionals could have need of a higher end device simply from using many lower resource intensive apps simultaneously that would struggle on a lower end device.

 

[bapegg]

This isn't an exhaustive list by any means and completely leaves out software that engineers, big data, traders and data analysts use, things like autocad, caseware IDEA, Alteryx, powerBI, even database and spreadsheets can be a resource hog when you are working with massive complex files.

That list above really just focuses on creatives. And the way "pro" is being used is rather silly here, even software that is not traditionally resource intensive can be depending on usage. Professionals could have need of a higher end device simply from using many lower resource intensive apps simultaneously that would struggle on a lower end device.

All of this is true. And I have seen programmers make simple mistakes with data bases and SQL servers that have either made the server grind to a halt or overload the network connections. Granted the network issues was back when everything was 10/100 speeds.

 

[hans1972]

This isn't an exhaustive list by any means and completely leaves out software that engineers, big data, traders and data analysts use, things like autocad, caseware IDEA, Alteryx, powerBI, even database and spreadsheets can be a resource hog when you are working with massive complex files.

There are no Mac applications for Caseware IDEA, Alteryx or PowerBI.
The number of people using CAD software on a Mac is minuscule.

Software that engineers, big data, traders and data analysts use often don't exist on the Mac or is severely lacking in functionality.

That list above really just focuses on creatives. And the way "pro" is being used is rather silly here, even software that is not traditionally resource intensive can be depending on usage. Professionals could have need of a higher end device simply from using many lower resource intensive apps simultaneously that would struggle on a lower end device.

Pro in this context is established as meaning create proes. Maybe you weren't involved in the big Mac Pro debacle around 2017.

The purpose of this wasn't to say that professional don't need powerful hardware, but that they are a minority on the Mac, thus Apple making a computer model for the majority makes sense.

 

[hans1972]

The list does not include scientific software, AI modeling, running virtual machines...

Also, it is strange terminology to call "pro software" what is just meant to be "resource intensive" (games may be resource intensive, but note quite pro... except for professional gamers of course).

If you haven't seen the word 'pro' being used in this context, then you didn't read comments on Macrumours in the 2013-2020 timeframe. It really started with the 2013 trashcan Mac Pro.

In 2017, AI modelling didn't exist on the Mac.

How many people do you belive run scientific software, AI modelling or VMs and not any of the before mentioned software groups? I don't think they constitute many percentages.

 

[hans1972]

So, gcc, ImageMagick, and ffmpeg don't count? What about ollama or whatever your local LLM tool of choice is? (I realize that few of these existed at the home-computer level in 2017.) What about custom-written business software? What about video games? There are lots of resource-intensive ways to use a computer that don't fall under Apple's definition of "pro apps."

These were examples, not an exhaustive list.

How many Mac users run gcc without having and IDE installed and used?

The same with ImageMacick? On the Mac it's mostly used by developers.

The point wasn't to make a complete list of professional software, but to measure the percentage of Mac users who need a powerful machine.

 

[Nekronos]

There are no Mac applications for Caseware IDEA, Alteryx or PowerBI.
The number of people using CAD software on a Mac is minuscule.

Software that engineers, big data, traders and data analysts use often don't exist on the Mac or is severely lacking in functionality.


Pro in this context is established as meaning create proes. Maybe you weren't involved in the big Mac Pro debacle around 2017.

The purpose of this wasn't to say that professional don't need powerful hardware, but that they are a minority on the Mac, thus Apple making a computer model for the majority makes sense.

You can certainly run these softwares on a Mac, sure it might not be native but it doesn't mean professionals don't do it. "create proes" presumably that's a typo...perhaps you mean to say creative professionals?

Very few other applications used by professionals requires high amount of ram, CPU power or GPU power.

That may be true in such a limited context of "creative pros" but the term pro or professionals is more encompassing - my point here is professionals use many, many more demanding apps than what you listed.

Also, given such a limited context, it makes little sense to me to extrapolate in the way you have. I haven't seen any solid stats on professionals or demanding workflows as a % of the userbase or potential userbase if Apple catered more towards other professionals in the same way they do creatives. I'd wager the number is higher than 30%.

 

[icymountain]

If you haven't seen the word 'pro' being used in this context, then you didn't read comments on Macrumours in the 2013-2020 timeframe. It really started with the 2013 trashcan Mac Pro.

There are two different things: giving a name to a product (which is the job of marketing folks) and looking at usage data and trying to make sense out of it (which the initial post of the thread is about). I cannot complain about naming in the first, but it is clearly unfortunate in the second.
My main criticism here is to use a dumb name for what should be called "resource intensive" or more precisely "CPU intensive", "GPU intensive", "RAM intensive" (or a combination of them). There are not difficult concepts and they are worth understanding when deciding "how much is enough".

In 2017, AI modelling didn't exist on the Mac.

Some people have done AI modeling long before that.

How many people do you belive run scientific software, AI modelling or VMs and not any of the before mentioned software groups? I don't think they constitute many percentages.

This is not the point.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

Same, I prefer to have more power not less when buying a new computer, but at some point as the M series gets more and more powerful, how much is too much? I mean at some point selecting a lower level computer may not be a step down given the needs of most people. We've been conditioned to think more is better.

Yeah I have been thinking about this a lot, and I bet the Neo will meet the needs of a shockingly high percentage of normal users. Some young people don’t even have a computer and do everything with their phone and maybe a tablet.

 

[hans1972]

There are two different things: giving a name to a product (which is the job of marketing folks) and looking at usage data and trying to make sense out of it (which the initial post of the thread is about). I cannot complain about naming in the first, but it is clearly unfortunate in the second.
My main criticism here is to use a dumb name for what should be called "resource intensive" or more precisely "CPU intensive", "GPU intensive", "RAM intensive" (or a combination of them). There are not difficult concepts and they are worth understanding when deciding "how much is enough".

Some people have done AI modeling long before that.

This is not the point.

The point is to determine how many uses a Mac for resource intensive tasks. The reason is those type of people can't use a Neo but a lot of the rest can. That's why it's important in this context.

Using "pro" or "creative pro" has been common parlance in the Mac world for probably two decades if not more. Apple has given us number at a point in time for a large part of these users since the number of users doing resource intensive tasks on a Mac in the sciences and data analytics have been historically low.

Let me ask this:

How do you propose we try to determine how many users of a Mac, does use it for resource intensive tasks on a weekly or monthly basis?