Apple Maintains Mac Sales Momentum Amid Overall Worldwide PC Market Decline

[MarkusL]

Define "best."

5400 rpm hdd.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

That's just delusional.

I love my MacBook, but I am under no illusion that it is both overpriced for what it is. The same could be said for the majority of Apple hardware - with exception to the Mac Pro which truly is a marvel.

The Mac Pro was a "marvel" when it came out, but no longer. They need to keep it up-to-date! They have been terrible about doing this (and they don't lower the price just because the components go down in value and that's the worst part). They used to be able to get away with this to some extent because the machine was very expandable, but no longer. They should at least make the GPU slots standard so someone else can offer updates and they should offer a consumer level GPU so the machine can be used as an alternative to a high-end iMac (I'd much rather have $2500 Mac Pro with a high-end gaming capable GPU than a high-end iMac with a monitor I don't need or want).

Overall, I don't mind that Mac hardware costs more (to a point) since the security from malware and the usefulness of a UNIX back-end (all kinds of software you can get or is easily ported from Unix/Linux markets) and I happen to prefer the interface as well (and how easy you can do bootable backups that are 100% transferable with zero hassles of "Microsoft Genuine Advantage) and now the lack of spyware too. Those things are worth something to me in the OS and I'm not under the delusion that the OS isn't part of the cost.

HOWEVER, I still need to be able to find a model that works for me! I'm not asking Apple to lower their prices. I'm asking them to offer me a proper desktop computer! I may not be today's "normal" as I still do most of my computing on a desktop and spend more time with a whole house media center than playing with an iOS device, but I still want/need a good CPU + good GPU. The 2012 Mac Mini Server was awesome for CPU and available connectivity at the time (USB3 and Thunderbolt and dual monitor support), BUT the GPU was weak and even weaker in the server model. I do not want an iMac. I want to pick out my own monitor (and I have plenty here). If the 2012 Mac Mini server had a good GPU option, it would have been the perfectly little desktop (i.e. without any GPU/CPU expansion prospects, but as a stand-alone, it would have been exceptional, especially given the relative size, even if it had to be little bigger to accommodate a higher quality GPU.

So the next Mac Mini model improved the GPU (still not "great") but removed the quad-core and i7 options (and dual drive internal). Where's the 'server' Mac now? First, they got rid of XServe (and said the Mac Mini was the new server) and now you can't get a real Mac Mini server either (it's just a glorified entry-level POS now). The Mac Pro costs too much and has hardware you don't need for a server (i.e. Pro graphics cards; most servers don't even bother with any kind of fancy graphics since that's not their function).

So where does that leave me? I want a computer that can be a server, a desktop PC and play some games (I'm OK with the selection of games on the Mac, but the GPU should at least play 1080p games on medium). There are no real options and that's the point. Mac users keep talking about how this model or that model would cannibalize some other model, but there is NO MODEL that is a regular "desktop" computer, regardless of size form. Desktop means desktop parts, not mobile or Pro (Xenon and Pro GPU are not consumer desktop products! Apple offer literally NOTHING in this area. Their iMacs force you to use whatever monitor it has and they still use mostly mobile parts.

I have at least some hope that Apple will release a Skylake Macbook Pro with Thunderbolt III that will allow an easy external GPU upgrade. Even if they have only two ports on the computer itself, one Thunderbolt III combo USB-C port would allow a dock box + gaming level GPU and make the machine portable AND a desktop powerhouse. THAT is my only real hope or I'm going to have to build a Hackintosh. There are simply no other options. The high-end iMac 5K has a POS graphics card in it. It couldn't play a decent 4K game if it had to even if you booted into Windows! Like I said, it's ridiculous the most valuable Tech/Computer company in the world can't offer a competitive desktop machine or at least throw users who want to game (not rabid, but reasonable) a freaking BONE once in awhile. In the past, you could at least get a Mac Pro and put a high-end NVidia card in it. It would cost you a lot, but it was an option and it would game well under OS X and be a killer multi-media and desktop machine to boot. Right now there's nothing really out there.

The fact is, Windows 10 is a damned good Operating System & best of all Microsoft have the backing & corporate infrastructure to not only support the machines en-masse in a business environment but also push forward on the consumer front.

My problem with Windows 10 isn't the OS functionality (it's actually gotten a lot more like OS X in many areas like "spaces" etc. and it's a lot less likely to slow down over time, fragment, etc. like the Windows machines of old), but rather I don't want Microsoft spying the hell out of me. The difference between Apple and Microsoft is CHOICE. When something crashes in OS X, I have the OPTION of sending or not sending a crash report and it shows me exactly what it's going to send before I send it. I can opt out of Apple's cloud services. There is NOTHING you can do short of 3rd party software (which could break on any upgrade) to keep Microsoft from mining data off your Windows 10 machine. Thanks, but no thanks (regardless of whether one thinks that's paranoid. It's my choice and it's why until things change, I will not buy a Windows 10 Machine. I bought a copy of Windows 8.1 Pro while I could for $93 and if I need to install a newer Windows on a future machine, that's what I will use (with Classic Shell added).

 

[MH01]

The same one that was based on NeXTSTEP oh so many years ago. Windows on the other hand is an amalgamation of code with it's roots still entangled with MS-DOS. Yes, both have issues but in my opinion Windows has way more than OS X. Especially when it comes to viruses and malware. Can you honestly tell me that someone can surf the web running Windows without paying a yearly fee to protect themselves from viruses and malware? Also if they don't, how much time and money do they have spend to get themselves back to "normal" operations? Hell, I catch flack from the OS X side because I promote using free malware protection. I don't really need it but I have it just in case!

These days I don't feel safe surfing the web on either Mac or Windows.

No need to spend money, Windows defender does a much better job than most payed solutions. Though suckers buy malware protection software on Mac also....

 

[melendezest]

I may resemble that remark, but in my case it is not that they suck, it is actually the opposite. They are really good computers, just they abandoned my use case (portable professional) which is 17 inch display with full speed processors and don't care about battery life. Since my 2010 MBP I would have bought 2 laptops by now if they were available. I did buy a new 2012 Mini, but again I don't see me ever buying a new mini unless they start offering a higher end version. The more recent versions do not have the performance.

Smaller and poorer performance are only acceptable options to people that only tweet, read MS documents, and send email. There are a lot of us that need something more.

EXACTLY.

Apple is narrowing down their loyal base. This can bite them if the fickle masses they currently cater to begin to notice that they don't need to use Apple to tweet, browse, email, etc.

I have a 2011 iMac 27", a 2011 17" MBP, and a 2012 15" hi-res matte screen MBP that I bought LAST YEAR. I used to upgrade yearly. No longer. Apple flushed my use case too. So I'll keep these until I really can't, until I find something better in the competition (this WILL take a while...OS X is still great), or Apple gets its head out.

I've been saying it since then: the whole narrow/focus/consolidate their product lineup mantra is obsolete.

This is not 1999. The market has changed. Apple needs to EXPAND their lineup to account for more use cases, particularly because the competition is catching up. Fast.

They did not learn soon enough from the "Droid does" + "AT&T-only" + "small-screen-only" scenarios, which allowed for Android devices and their OEMs to TAKE OVER their market share. Microsoft did, though, and (arguably) gave its customers the Windows they wanted.

I'd love to stay with Apple, but they need to give me what I need, or I'll go to someone who (Droid) does.

I already found I don't need iOS (my new Note 5 is wonderful...my wife chose it as well), and I sold all 3 of my Apple TVs (since my XBox One, PS4 and PS3s make them redundant), so the need for a Mac is in serious, serious jeopardy in my household.

 

[lupinglade]

Time to wake up, Apple. The Mac and OS X are your best products. Not these less useful pop-gizmos.

 

[DevNull0]

Most of Mac users are frustrated with this thing. That is what dirty business strategy of Tim Cook. Give minimum and slow upgrades as possible, serve half baked product and keep consumers always tempted and hungry, so they cant resist themselves to buy next version. Keep real updates on your rack to sell for next year. He knows, people will come anyway to buy their products. He is misusing the brand name, loyalty of Mac users and his power. They are just into making money, profits, big margins and market share war ! Poor Apple is in wrong hands

Exactly. And that can only last for so long. Because Apple has such a good reputation, Timmy can milk the customers as you describe, but eventually, Apple will come to mean last year's tech in overpriced pretty boxes and then even if Apple does offer the best products, they will have a hard time overcoming their reputation to get sales.

Another way of looking at it is the Apple brand name is worth a fortune, Timmy is converting that brand value into cash in the bank by spending the brand. If this keeps up, eventually the brand will become worthless and all they'll have is a big pile of cash in the bank and no good way to bring products to the market.

 

[dk001]

When I think about what sort of sales volume the PC manufacturers are doing in the $1,200 laptop range, my concern for them is that they aren't selling enough individually and so they are going to struggle with economies of scale against Apple. And if you go with good and expensive for your PC and then it dies in two years, you are going to be upset as a consumer. I'm upset for my company and its purchase of Toshibas.

At suggestion of above, I just looked at Dell's website. The XPS looks great. But the top of line 15 inch with super sharp screen is $2,300. For 10% more I can get me a high end 15" Macbook Pro with similar specs. Dell needs to beat Apple's prices by more than 10% in my opinion.

Exactly my point .
When we looked at what she needed the Dell and Lenovo were in the same range as the MBP.
Don't get me wrong, those machines are very nice. Just with the "price point" she now has more options.
[doublepost=1452707676][/doublepost]

The same one that was based on NeXTSTEP oh so many years ago. Windows on the other hand is an amalgamation of code with it's roots still entangled with MS-DOS. Yes, both have issues but in my opinion Windows has way more than OS X. Especially when it comes to viruses and malware. Can you honestly tell me that someone can surf the web running Windows without paying a yearly fee to protect themselves from viruses and malware? Also if they don't, how much time and money do they have spend to get themselves back to "normal" operations? Hell, I catch flack from the OS X side because I promote using free malware protection. I don't really need it but I have it just in case!

It can be done. I don't pay anything however I do use the built in Windows stuff. As for spending time and money to get back to normal ops, I don't need to. Normal ops is my daily norm. Run CCleaner 1x month and schedule a weekly scan. I also apply a lot of common sense.

 

[rdlink]

Why should it die in two years any more than an Apple should die in two years. I still have a P4 that's eleven years old and a Dell Inspiron that's 10 years old. Both of these are twice as old as my iMac. You sound like a salesmen's dream to me.

And you're an anomaly. There aren't many 11 year old PCs around. And I would expect that you've probably cracked your devices open a few times to repair and upgrade them. That's not something that most users of computers do.

 

[TallManNY]

Why should it die in two years any more than an Apple should die in two years. I still have a P4 that's eleven years old and a Dell Inspiron that's 10 years old. Both of these are twice as old as my iMac. You sound like a salesmen's dream to me.

It shouldn't die. But I've had more issues with PCs than Macs and so have my friends. Basically all the Toshibas we bought have had their pointer button fail within two years of purchase. And since the trackpad is wonky and doesn't work that well some folks have started having to carry a mouse when traveling.

I had a great old Dell myself that I bought used and it worked for a long time. I'm skeptical though of current hardware from these folks. Remember they are on razor thin margins. So you know they are cutting costs where they can in a way that Apple doesn't have to.
[doublepost=1452708654][/doublepost]

I think that the Price component is more complex than just the actual price; people are looking for a good value, i.e. price + capability. Today's Windows machines are actually a good value.

Now I also believe that Apple does sell because it's cool. This has been true for years, but they're really capitalizing on it now. Their "cool" factor is sky-high today, and there isn't a trendy tv show or coffee bar that isn't rife with gold/white iPhones and Macbooks. Apple's push into fashion and the luxury market is the culmination of this trend. For example, you don't need a Mercedes Benz to get from point A to point B. But you do if you want to be perceived by others as X, Y or Z (successful, wealthy, cool, etc).

Again, this is not to speak to the quality of Apple's products; I still think their products are outstanding. Their customer service is second-to-none. And the "cool" factor adds to these positive attributes.

But the capability of the product vs price, i.e. value, has clearly gone out of whack recently.

Apple's attention to aesthetics drives sales. This in turn is supported by their (amazing) marketing, which always has positioned them as the "cool" company (Mac vs PC ads are the best example I can think of).

Thus, the competition's strides (both Android, Samsung, and Windows products to name a few) in quality appear to be largely ignored (particularly by the media), because Apple commands truly great mindshare.

However, charts like these show the truth: Apple is still niche (albeit happy about it and profitable as all hell).

What this all means is that Apple will suck our wallets dry while giving us "just enough", and will never get back to building the BEST product they can. This has become their mechanism for the comeback: make the (arguably) "best-looking" products, instead of the (arguably) "best overall" products they used to.

It is hard to say how much "cool" is a factor. Looking good is different from being "cool" in my opinion. I might pick a color for the walls in my house because it looks good to me. But that isn't the same as thinking paint color will make me look "cool". I just don't think in the U.S. that folks think they are looking "cool" when they buy a Mac. The Macs are ubiquitous in a coffee shop in the U.S. But Macs are pretty much ubiquitous among the middle class to upper middle class educated folks who might be doing work at a coffee shop as well. I just don't see it as "cool".

Certainly as the iPhone approaches 50% of all smartphones sold in the U.S. can we agree that folks aren't buying them because they think they will look "cool" when they bust out the same phone that nearly all of their peers have?

Aesthetics does drive sales. Maybe you think acknowledging or purchasing something on the basis of aesthetics is the same thing as buying it because it seems "cool" to you. But I see it as very different. The key difference is that being cool can change and has traditionally been something that changes quickly. I don't think Apple is going to go out of fashion in that way because I don't think fashion is driving many purchase decisions.

This is a little different in poorer countries where Apple products are closer to the Benz example you give. In those countries where their middle class can't hope to buy any Apple product or at least it is a real stretch, then maybe the Apple products have a luxury appeal to them.

Side note. I have an Apple Watch and I feel like I look much less "cool" wearing it than I do when I wear a nice mechanical automatic. So I'm sacrificing coolness for functionality. I also think it would be arguably cooler to bust out smartphone that folks aren't familiar with than my iPhone 6S (though my BBRY ain't that phone, in fact it gets me mocked from time to time. ha ha).

 

[melendezest]

It is hard to say how much "cool" is a factor. Looking good is different from being "cool" in my opinion. I might pick a color for the walls in my house because it looks good to me. But that isn't the same as thinking paint color will make me look "cool". I just don't think in the U.S. that folks think they are looking "cool" when they buy a Mac. The Macs are ubiquitous in a coffee shop in the U.S. But Macs are pretty much ubiquitous among the middle class to upper middle class educated folks who might be doing work at a coffee shop as well. I just don't see it as "cool".

Certainly as the iPhone approaches 50% of all smartphones sold in the U.S. can we agree that folks aren't buying them because they think they will look "cool" when they bust out the same phone that nearly all of their peers have?

Aesthetics does drive sales. Maybe you think acknowledging or purchasing something on the basis of aesthetics is the same thing as buying it because it seems "cool" to you. But I see it as very different. The key difference is that being cool can change and has traditionally been something that changes quickly. I don't think Apple is going to go out of fashion in that way because I don't think fashion is driving many purchase decisions.

This is a little different in poorer countries where Apple products are closer to the Benz example you give. In those countries where their middle class can't hope to buy any Apple product or at least it is a real stretch, then maybe the Apple products have a luxury appeal to them.

Side note. I have an Apple Watch and I feel like I look much less "cool" wearing it than I do when I wear a nice mechanical automatic. So I'm sacrificing coolness for functionality. I also think it would be arguably cooler to bust out smartphone that folks aren't familiar with than my iPhone 6S (though my BBRY ain't that phone, in fact it gets me mocked from time to time. ha ha).

I have 4 teenagers in 4 different schools, and I also did some graduate university-level course work, and I can tell you that Apple products are "cool", much the same way Nike or Jordans are in the shoe realm. This was not the case 10 years ago, at least not like it is today.

It is an issue of perception, regardless of how many people own the product. Apple understands the product doesn't make you cool, the product is cool.

My point regarding the aesthetics is not to imply that it is the same thing as "coolness".

What I contend is that Apple is using aesthetics to up the "cool" factor in their devices, while ignoring actual functionality. Example: The Mac Pro. Or better yet, the Retina Macbook. They need to GTFOOH with that BS; it doesn't get any more obvious than that:

It's got only one port buuuuut... it's available in GOOOOLD!! The keys don't feel too good to type on buuuuut.... it's so THIN. You need (to pay more for) a dongle to charge and plug something in buuuuuut...it so LIGHT!! It's marginally lighter, much less powerful, and significantly more expensive than a MacBook Air buuuuuut....it's got a PRETTIER screen!! OK, I admit that one's a bit of a stretch but I see that as an artificial differentiator...done on purpose. There is no reason the Air is not retina by now other than that.

Now I somewhat agree that Apple may not go out of style, but this is because their marketing team is the BEST THERE IS, not because of their products' attributes.

And that's the point:

Apple has actually become a company that was really great at marketing their insanely great products to one that is FORMIDABLE at marketing.

So great is Apple's marketing team that their competitors purposefully make their own products inferior than their previous models in order to catch some "Apple coolness" (see Samsung's Galaxy Note 4 to Note 5 differences...you can do much less with the 5). But they're also available in GOOOOOLD. Unbelievable.

That is what Apple's focus is on now, keeping the products looking good, so that Apple stays "cool".

For my part, I hope they get back to building the BEST machines they can, not just the "coolest".

 

[Glideslope]

I love my Mac.

 

[mistasopz]

I don't think that's an even remotely accurate source of information. According to it:

2.79% of people use Snow Leopard and 2.59% of people use Lion. Mountain Lion has 0.01% and 0.04% of people use OS X, no version specified. Note that Mavericks, Yosemite, and El Capitan are all completely missing from the chart.

And it's not just OS X.

The chart says that more people use XP (46.86%) than 7 (37.54%), some people use 8 (0.11%), and nobody uses 10.

This information seems like it's either very dated, since 7 topped 50% and XP dropped under 20% according to most other sources years ago, or like they have a very limited data set. I suspect that it's simply old data, since current OSs are so severely under represented. I suspect it's from early-middle 2012, when Mountain Lion and 8 were each in beta test, but not yet released.

It says Dec 2015 and includes OSX 10.11...

 

[Roykor]

Its so 'weird' to see the mac sales are rising and rising, and at the same time, all my fellow creative designers in my professional network are leaving or all-ready left the mac / osx. I guess, the Mac these days are fine average computers that fits fine in your living room. The design is great and the less is more fits for most of us. But for me, its getting les and less interesting to update my 2011 iMac. I am even planing to switch to Windows and create an awesome powerhouse to drive my hungry Photoshop and Illustrator. No hard feelings. Just disappointed that i have to leave osx. The rest are just computer parts.

 

[Glassed Silver]

But Macrumours readers told me that the new Macs suck and no one would want them.

Yes they suck compared to what Macs used to be like.
No, people still want them, which is another things many around here complain about: that the masses don't look into things the way more educated buyers do.
That's why Apple gets away with so many things.

They don't target educated buyers, but the masses.
So when they say they want to make great computer for "everyone" they are lying, because if you look at home even long-standing Mac buyers who you'd think have a big pro-bias complain how they get less and less for their money with Apple computers, then something must be wrong, don't you think?

Also, in before "but the masses are always right", "but the new Macs are more powerful than that 5 year old machine I replaced", etc etc...
(side note: that Mac Mini got LESS powerful. Not even relatively.)
Also repairability and serviceability is tanking, but let me guess, in before "not needed, just get AppleCare" (okay, but after that? Or what if I know how to fix things myself, except they decide to glue and solder every damn piece to shave off a couple of millimeters?
"You're not supposed to do that" is another common reply to that. Okay, who are you to tell me what to do with MY property? Last time I checked the software wasn't mine, but the hardware still is.
"So shop the alternatives" - the problem is: When does Apple license out OS X? They don't. So where are the alternatives? They know how to use that OS X monopoly very well and I doubt they'd be in this spot if they were to open themselves up to a free market within OS X realms.
Then again, refer to figure A) how masses are typically not too concerned about quite important details that can make the difference of hundreds of dollars.

I'm well aware I've always paid extra with Apple gear to get top-notch manufacturing, a tightly integrated OS and hardware experience and all that, but here's two problems: these yearly OS upgrades don't seem to do them too many favors, the design isn't that shocking anymore (when did we see the last real iMac design revamp? And no, making super thin edges and bulging out the back even more doesn't count.) I'm not saying there needs to be a new design, but good God what's their focus? Thin, 5200rpm platters, protruding lenses (which they mocked themselves may I add) and degrading UX, at the very least in iOS. (iOS 6 iPad apps felt native and at home, ever after iOS 7 they seem to be a enlarged iPhone app, but hey look, you have an extra sidebar over there. That's all.

Then there's this dumbing down of features, the taking away of options and manual overrides.
The severely wrong attitude Apple has towards data integrity isn't fun anymore either.
If anyone wants examples: HFS+, even Journaled, isn't up to snuff anymore. I'm sorry, but this filesystem needs to get replaced pronto.
Safari tab limit on iOS: Okay, I get that for whatever reason one has to axe a tab once the limit is reached. (since most devices unload after 3-4 pages with 1GB of RAM anyways the tab switcher is really just a list of websites, why have a limit? ), however: a) it axes a tab without warning. If you ever wondered why there's a "back button" on a newly opened page in a new tab, it's the sites of the tab Safari decided to replace that new tab with. (replaced in-place)
So... since it keeps all the back step history anyways, why not just create more tabs?
The limit isn't 9 anymore (sweet Jesus), it's higher, but mighty Christ.

Then there's this half-assed integration of new features or the very asynchronous introduction when a feature lands on only one of their platforms, likely sharing vastly the same code as iOS and OS X are highly similar. (and next year the feature gets demoed again on stage for the other platform. *yawn*)

I could go on and on, but since I'm pulling that out of my ass anyways and sales are always reflective of product quality compared to earlier offerings, it's probably fruitless anyways.

Glassed Silver:mac

PS: also in before whining about me "whining", which is always very original.

 

[peterdevries]

Yes they suck compared to what Macs used to be like.
No, people still want them, which is another things many around here complain about: that the masses don't look into things the way more educated buyers do.
That's why Apple gets away with so many things.

They don't target educated buyers, but the masses.
So when they say they want to make great computer for "everyone" they are lying, because if you look at home even long-standing Mac buyers who you'd think have a big pro-bias complain how they get less and less for their money with Apple computers, then something must be wrong, don't you think?

Also, in before "but the masses are always right", "but the new Macs are more powerful than that 5 year old machine I replaced", etc etc...
(side note: that Mac Mini got LESS powerful. Not even relatively.)
Also repairability and serviceability is tanking, but let me guess, in before "not needed, just get AppleCare" (okay, but after that? Or what if I know how to fix things myself, except they decide to glue and solder every damn piece to shave off a couple of millimeters?
"You're not supposed to do that" is another common reply to that. Okay, who are you to tell me what to do with MY property? Last time I checked the software wasn't mine, but the hardware still is.
"So shop the alternatives" - the problem is: When does Apple license out OS X? They don't. So where are the alternatives? They know how to use that OS X monopoly very well and I doubt they'd be in this spot if they were to open themselves up to a free market within OS X realms.
Then again, refer to figure A) how masses are typically not too concerned about quite important details that can make the difference of hundreds of dollars.

I'm well aware I've always paid extra with Apple gear to get top-notch manufacturing, a tightly integrated OS and hardware experience and all that, but here's two problems: these yearly OS upgrades don't seem to do them too many favors, the design isn't that shocking anymore (when did we see the last real iMac design revamp? And no, making super thin edges and bulging out the back even more doesn't count.) I'm not saying there needs to be a new design, but good God what's their focus? Thin, 5200rpm platters, protruding lenses (which they mocked themselves may I add) and degrading UX, at the very least in iOS. (iOS 6 iPad apps felt native and at home, ever after iOS 7 they seem to be a enlarged iPhone app, but hey look, you have an extra sidebar over there. That's all.

Then there's this dumbing down of features, the taking away of options and manual overrides.
The severely wrong attitude Apple has towards data integrity isn't fun anymore either.
If anyone wants examples: HFS+, even Journaled, isn't up to snuff anymore. I'm sorry, but this filesystem needs to get replaced pronto.
Safari tab limit on iOS: Okay, I get that for whatever reason one has to axe a tab once the limit is reached. (since most devices unload after 3-4 pages with 1GB of RAM anyways the tab switcher is really just a list of websites, why have a limit? ), however: a) it axes a tab without warning. If you ever wondered why there's a "back button" on a newly opened page in a new tab, it's the sites of the tab Safari decided to replace that new tab with. (replaced in-place)
So... since it keeps all the back step history anyways, why not just create more tabs?
The limit isn't 9 anymore (sweet Jesus), it's higher, but mighty Christ.

Then there's this half-asses integration of new feature or the very asynchronous introduction when a feature lands on another of their platforms anyways, likely sharing vastly the same code as iOS and OS X are highly similar.

I could go on and on, but since I'm pulling that out of my ass anyways and sales are always reflective of product quality compared to earlier offerings, it's probably fruitless anyways.

Glassed Silver:mac

PS: also in before whining about me "whining", which is always very original.

I see and agree with most that you wrote. But every morning I start my top of the line Lenovo for work with Windows 10 and am disgusted by the way that OS is unintuitive. Settings all over the place, illogical processes and help not helping. Well, you get the picture.

I don't mind that the OS is dumbed down. I don't need to or want to twiddle with settings. I need to get work done and that is what OS X is great for.

 

[MrX8503]

It's funny to see people bash the Macbook retina for its compromises and now competitors are releasing a Macbook Retina clone.

It's like the Macbook Air all over again.

 

[shplock]

1)Macs have and always will be in the 7-15% of "personal computer sales" for a lot of reasons. This story is the same old story we hear every Quarter on MR.

2)As I've said before, Wintel people don't buy new computers every 2-3 years...it's probably more like every 5-7 for consumers and maybe 3-4 for businesses. The only exception to that rule is if a particular computer breaks or was never a good fit.

3)The Wintel industry offers a gazillion choices of computers with all sorts of needs/options while Apple ships a few laptops and a few desktops...I'm talking 100 Wintels vs. 10 Macs. Therefore, it's quite likely that Wintel users can buy/find exactly what they want (and me being a power user I like speed and performance) and hence do not have to upgrade soon compared to a Mac, that, unless you spend thousands of bucks, is outdated in 3 years. Putting the Windows vs. Apple OS argument aside, I can buy a 4 or 6 core high end cpu desktop with 32GB of RAM and numerous USB 3.0 and SATA3 ports and a 500GB SSD for far, far less than those specs (if they exist) on a Mac desktop.


I'm glad Macs have "gained" since last year but again, it's the same old single-digit % market share as usual.

p.s. I was dying to buy a new Mac Mini last year...the latest Mac Mini is shameful.

Just to correct you on a couple of points if I may...

1) You started by saying that Macs will always be in the 7 - 15% of PC sales yet further down you state that it's always the same old single digit growth. 15% is double digits. Pedantic I know but thought I would show that.

2) You say that consumers of Macs tend to upgrade every 2 years. That is a flawed logic argument when compared to those who upgrade from Wintel every 5 years or so. Those Mac users who upgrade every 2 years may do so because they wish to do and not because they need to. I have a 2013 Macbook pro 15" and won't need to upgrade it for at least another 2 years putting me on a apr with the Wintel users you state. There might be some Mac users who upgrade every 2 years because they need to as there are some Wintel users who upgrade more regular because they wish to. To further muddy the waters you must remember that lots of these Wintel users upgrading do so from Desktops that can be part upgraded so they are not upgrading the whole system, just a component or two. It is therefore like comparing Ice Cubes and Cogs.
Plus maybe having all those different configurations in Wintel land is part of the problem as in that it makes Windows more bloated and troublesome trying to deal with the myriad of options.

I have used Windows since the Days of Windows 95 and before(I can remember DOS lol). I am Computer literate and yet with Windows I have had so ma y problems with it due to it's nature of trying to deal with option after option of potential configurations from so many component suppliers and system suppliers. I have had far less issues with OS X.
I also wish to say that yes PC's can have far more powerful components in them though that is like saying a Car with 700BHp is better than a Car with say 450BHP...It matters what you do with that power not how much.

 

[Max(IT)]

Quite strange: according to this forum Apple is doomed and macs are nothing more than disposable computers....

 

[peterdevries]

Just to correct you on a couple of points if I may...

1) You started by saying that Macs will always be in the 7 - 15% of PC sales yet further down you state that it's always the same old single digit growth. 15% is double digits. Pedantic I know but thought I would show that.

Ultra pedantic but... The 15% refers to market share and not to growth.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

It says Dec 2015 and includes OSX 10.11...

Oh - there's a date picker in the top right corner I just realized. For some reason it was defaulting to 2011 for me. I set it to 2016 and now it shows numbers much more in line with what other sources say.

56% 7,
13% 8,
11% XP,
9% 10,
5.3% OS X.

Which is also in line with what you said - XP is over double all of OS X combined.

Wii U has a surprisingly large marketshare given how terrible Nintendo is at everything online. Do Microsoft's consoles lack browsers entirely?

 

[gnasher729]

Quite strange: according to this forum Apple is doomed and macs are nothing more than disposable computers....

The "disposable" bit is so ridiculous. As if someone buys a 15" Retina MBP (the best laptop you can buy for _any_ money) and treats it as "disposable". If the battery dies (which should happen after three years of abuse, or five years of reasonable use, or never for some people), what kind of brain damaged idiot would "dispose" of this computer instead of going straight to the nearest Apple Store and letting them put in a brand new battery? Even if the screen dies and is beyond repair for a reasonable amount of money, you put it on eBay and someone will turn it into a nice desktop computer.

 

[Mac2me]

Imagine how mac sales would be in if Tim actually kept up these amazing product cutting edge. Macbook air and macbook air need a major refresh.

And for those who give Tim all the credit for amazing sales, Jobs handed him the golden eggs. He just needs to keep the eggs warm.. if he can

And how many years along side Steve has Tim been handling the "warming of the eggs"? "if he can?" Really?

Apple is a team player. All the credit doesn't go to Tim and I don't think he feels that way at all.

 

[ani4ani]

The real message here, Wintels can be upgraded and therefore folks do....Macs can't (in the main) and so folks buy new....well about 5% of the market does.

 

[Lankyman]

I have 4 teenagers in 4 different schools, and I also did some graduate university-level course work, and I can tell you that Apple products are "cool", much the same way Nike or Jordans are in the shoe realm. This was not the case 10 years ago, at least not like it is today.

It is an issue of perception, regardless of how many people own the product. Apple understands the product doesn't make you cool, the product is cool.

Wow! insightful though the above is I also think it's a sad indictment of society that one is judged by the phone you own or the shoes you wear.

What a lot of people don't get though is that being cool is not to be ostentatious. In fact a number of people who have 'made it' now go out of their way to dress in everyday clothes and drive around in very ordinary often beat up vehicles.

It's much the same as the landed gentry in the U.K. these people don't need to make a show of their wealth or status, they've already arrived - in fact it's all a little vulgar in their eyes. They will often have a computer that belongs in a museum and use an old 3310.

 

[ani4ani]

I have only owned my Macbook Air for less than 2 years, but I can say that, so far, it is absolutely the best electronic device I have ever owned.....paid $750 for it at BB.....so it is probably the best value as well.

I use a 2011 MBA at work, and it is almost 5 years old. Hums along like a champ...no problems.

Admittedly, I am biased, but I think Macs are outstanding values if you keep them for their full useful life. Recent OS X upgrades have made my MBA faster and more reliable. Free upgrades to built-in apps like iWorks is also a real plus.

When you look at the total cost of ownership, I think Macs are great deals.

If your air is 100% reliable, how has the latest OS X upgrades made it more realiable?