Apple Records Nearly Half of U.S. PC Desktop Retail Industry Revenue

[Eidorian]

I have no idea. Perhaps you can tell me?

Sadly I can't. Can you? I don't think I've ever seen anyone buy a retail disc of Windows.

And I assume the profit margin on the $50 OEM copies they ship with almost every single new PC on the planet is razor thin?

Again, where is the outrage?

A pretty good price for the software that runs all your other software on any i386 or x64 computer it's tied to. That's besides the point though.

Who said anything about Snow Leopard? People here are griping about Apple's profit margins on Macs - maybe they should look at Microsoft's profit margins on those 10 cent CDs they ship?

Hating on Apple is a one-way street.

I don't expect you to live on MacRumors but the ever so wonderful comparison has been made in several threads and there's an image macro of it too.

Those 10 cent DVDs do have their expenses for Microsoft in the long term as well beyond the initial cost.

 

[Bafflefish]

And the credibility and analysis goes about as far as what I can say.

With the desktop processors we're using now the iMac's hardware is peanuts. The display is now several times more than the computer hardware behind the panel. I'm not denying that fact. There's also the Dell U2711 in the cards as well.

The real money maker was the 3.06 GHz Early 2009 iMac compared to the E7600 at base today. The overnight price drop there was nothing short of comedy. The margins are lower this time around but it's not the value people are falling over to prop up right now.

While I do think the 27" iMac is a good product, it's amusing to see just how much people fawn over it, especially given what's driving the display at that resolution (the mobile Radeon 4850).

There's also the fact that a lot of people prefer 16:10 for monitors, and don't really care much for 16:9.

I am excited to see what the Dell U2711 ends up being priced at though.

 

[Bafflefish]

My sister got an Acer -- cute little thing that... that I found almost impossible to navigate with the "trackpad" and click button. Terribly frustrating.

I'll gladly spend more to get something that works and isn't frustrating.

Was it an Acer netbook? If so, I hate the trackbad/button arrangement they use.

 

[Eidorian]

I am excited to see what the Dell U2711 ends up being priced at though.

I'm not fond of 16:9 either. I'm holding out for at least a 1920 x 1200 display right now. Though my main goal is to get a monitor that is at least 1200 pixels tall and the 16:9 27" monster does accomplish that.

The U2711 is rumored around US$1,000 when all is said and done. I'm sure everyone here is going to hop on that.

 

[*LTD*]

I hear that and I think ********, because judging by many of the comments that I hear from Mac users ever since I got my Macbook, their Macs can come filled with dog **** and they will still give Apple a high rating simply because it's Apple. Whenever I hear that, I always think that. My MacBook that I treat like gold is of such crap build quality.

"by many of the comments that I hear from Mac users ever since I got my Macbook"

vs.


http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10019711-37.html

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...tisfaction-up-despite-struggling-industry.ars

http://digg.com/apple/Apple_leads_2009_customer_satisfaction_survey

http://www.macnn.com/articles/05/08/16/apple.no..1.on.csi/

http://theappleblog.com/2009/05/06/apple-customer-satisfaction-its-the-experience/

http://blackfriarsinc.com/blog/2007/04/behind-scenes-why-apples-customerbase

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/ByteOfTheApple/blog/archives/2008/08/mac_customer_sa.html

http://www.cultofmac.com/apple-posts-highest-score-ever-on-customer-satisfaction-index/2553

http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/22467/

http://bindapple.com/apple-satisfaction-2009-report/

http://www.macnn.com/news/25971

https://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/14/iphone-3gs-trumps-palm-pre-in-satisfaction-survey/

http://www.ipodobserver.com/ipo/article/iPhone_Satisfaction_Off_The_Charts/

http://www.theiphoneblog.com/2009/08/14/iphone-3gs-99-pure-satisfaction/

http://www.mactivist.com/2009/06/iphone-macs-ipod-sweep-2008-customer-satisfaction-rankings-in-japan

http://www.9to5mac.com/jobs-satisfation-rate-high

http://www.jdpower.com/Business/ratings/smartphone-ratings

http://www.v3.co.uk/v3/news/2248040/apple-keeps-top-billing

http://www.eweek.com/prestitial.php...ustomer-Satisfaction-Study-Finds-453807/&ref=

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2352796,00.asp

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2006/08/5002.ars

http://www.osnews.com/story/15553

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1689554/posts

https://forums.macrumors.com/archive/index.php/t-224872.html


They're the same year after year, for quite a few years now.

 

[inlovewithi]

Brilliant theory.



Your current model MacBook or one from a few years ago?

I just got a brand new HP laptop at work today. And not one of the cheapo $500 models either. It's not even close to a MacBook in build quality.

It's a Macbook from June 2007. I used to come to this site, read about how superior the Apple products were, so I felt fine pay so much extra for a Mac. When I finally got it the 1st thing I noticed was how cheap the screen was compared to my Dell Inspiron 8200 that I got in 2003. I figured it was 2007, by 2003 Dell's screen was beautiful I assumed technology would have improved to the point that all screens were at least equal quality. Since I hated the screen so much, the Macbook was played 99% of the time connected to my monitor, with the lid open. I only touch it to turn it on, yet at the point were the lid and the computer meets, it developed a crack. I soon find that it's an eventual problem with all white macbooks. Then battery, it started buldging and doesn't fit properly. Not only is it sticking out, but it presses against the trackpad which makes any touch on the palm rest register as a mouse click, makes it impossible to type unless I take off the battery or use a usb keyboard. I can't even put my computer into sleep mode because of that, I assume it's because of that, because any little vibration turns it back on. (And no it's not the remote sensor). There's also a crack at the bottom and to the back. I'm no slob and I paid a lot of money for it, so I always treat it like gold. Lots of other miscellaneous problems.

 

[inlovewithi]

"by many of the comments that I hear from Mac users ever since I got my Macbook"

vs.


http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10019711-37.html

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...tisfaction-up-despite-struggling-industry.ars

http://digg.com/apple/Apple_leads_2009_customer_satisfaction_survey

http://www.macnn.com/articles/05/08/16/apple.no..1.on.csi/

http://theappleblog.com/2009/05/06/apple-customer-satisfaction-its-the-experience/

http://blackfriarsinc.com/blog/2007/04/behind-scenes-why-apples-customerbase

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/ByteOfTheApple/blog/archives/2008/08/mac_customer_sa.html

http://www.cultofmac.com/apple-posts-highest-score-ever-on-customer-satisfaction-index/2553

http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/22467/

http://bindapple.com/apple-satisfaction-2009-report/

http://www.macnn.com/news/25971

https://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/14/iphone-3gs-trumps-palm-pre-in-satisfaction-survey/

http://www.ipodobserver.com/ipo/article/iPhone_Satisfaction_Off_The_Charts/

http://www.theiphoneblog.com/2009/08/14/iphone-3gs-99-pure-satisfaction/

http://www.mactivist.com/2009/06/iphone-macs-ipod-sweep-2008-customer-satisfaction-rankings-in-japan

http://www.9to5mac.com/jobs-satisfation-rate-high

http://www.jdpower.com/Business/ratings/smartphone-ratings

http://www.v3.co.uk/v3/news/2248040/apple-keeps-top-billing

http://www.eweek.com/prestitial.php...ustomer-Satisfaction-Study-Finds-453807/&ref=

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2352796,00.asp

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2006/08/5002.ars

http://www.osnews.com/story/15553

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1689554/posts

https://forums.macrumors.com/archive/index.php/t-224872.html


They're the same year after year, for quite a few years now.

The point is that a large percentage of Apple users will praise it no matter what.

 

[MattBaker]

Now that I'm thinking about this more, it is retail sales -- online sales not included. So this makes more sense to me.
I'm not sure this is a very good way to measure computer sales. Obviously, a lot of sales are going over the internet. E.g., does Dell have any retail sales?

These figures include online sales. Says so pretty clearly in the article.

 

[cumanzor]

Yes, because Apple chooses to run itself like a business and not a charity by not participating in the $400 POS PC market.

Evil bastards.

So, all sub $1000 computers (that is, all computers that aren't from Apple) are a POS??

Thanks man, you've opened my eyes.

Haha, the ammount of arrogant assumptions that can be taken from such a comment are hillarious.

• All $400 computers are ****
• People who buy $400 are in need of charity
• Only companies that sell stuff at premium prices are successful.

 

[*LTD*]

So, all sub $1000 computers (that is, all computers that aren't from Apple) are a POS??

Thanks man, you've opened my eyes.

Mostly. The first problem is they don't run OS X.

 

[Vulpinemac]

I'm not fond of 16:9 either. I'm holding out for at least a 1920 x 1200 display right now. Though my main goal is to get a monitor that is at least 1200 pixels tall and the 16:9 27" monster does accomplish that.

The U2711 is rumored around US$1,000 when all is said and done. I'm sure everyone here is going to hop on that.

You're a little behind the times, there. I'm already 1920 x 1200, and I'm on a 2-year-old 24" iMac. I'll grant I paid a little more than $1000, but I got a full computer in that display unit.

 

[lilo777]

Mostly. The first problem is they don't run OS X.

Most people do not like OS X.

 

[AidenShaw]

Mostly. The first problem is they don't run OS X.

For many of us (like about 95% of the market), Apple OSX is part of the problem - not the solution.

It's great that Apple OSX solves your problems, I'm happy for you.

However, many of us have applications or needs or simple preferences for the way Windows works. For us, the "it doesn't run Apple OSX" complaint isn't an issue - it's actually an advantage.

You're a little behind the times, there. I'm already 1920 x 1200, and I'm on a 2-year-old 24" iMac. I'll grant I paid a little more than $1000, but I got a full computer in that display unit.

Apple's gone backwards since your system - the 21.5" Imac has cut off the bottom of the screen, and only has 1080 vertical pixels.

Most "16x9" displays cut off vertical pixels, rather than adding horizontal pixels.

 

[Eidorian]

You're a little behind the times, there. I'm already 1920 x 1200, and I'm on a 2-year-old 24" iMac. I'll grant I paid a little more than $1000, but I got a full computer in that display unit.

If Apple's mainstream desktop was more than $400-500 Core 2 on the back of a monitor I'd consider it. Target Display Mode isn't much of a solution. I don't need another desktop either. Right now I don't even consider Core 2. It's either Athlon II or you just go straight to the Core i5 750. It's a waste of money otherwise.

I'm fine with my Late 2007 Macbook since Apple does compete well in the 13.3" notebook arena. I don't see a need to replace it either since there haven't been any significant improvements for me. A Core 2 Duo, 4 GB of RAM, and a 320 GB hard drive from 2007 are still overkill for what meager work I do on my Macbook.

For many of us (like about 95% of the market), Apple OSX is part of the problem - not the solution.

It's great that Apple OSX solves your problems, I'm happy for you.

However, many of us have applications or needs or simple preferences for the way Windows works. For us, the "it doesn't run Apple OSX" complaint isn't an issue - it's actually an advantage.

I like OS X. I don't like Apple as much.

 

[gunraidan]

Wouldn't Apple be at a disadvantage counting retail sales too?

I mean the only major retail chains that sell Macs are Apple Stores and Best Buy.

 

[Vulpinemac]

The point is that a large percentage of Apple users will praise it no matter what.

Obviously, you didn't read a single one of those articles. Every one of them said that the reason Apple users are so enthusiastic about their machines is that Apple truly satisfies their customers.

Oh, I'll grant that there will be some lemons; every brand will have some. Apple tends to have fewer by proportion. The interesting thing is, the one anecdotal example right here could easily have been avoided by simple, ordinary care. Laptops are noted for getting hot. The battery problem mentioned was felt by every single laptop maker at the time; he could have simply taken it back for warranty replacement--he chose not to do so. Simply by using a laptop stand that lifted the unit off the desktop would have prevented a lot of that heat buildup which permitted the battery to swell.
In other words, for supposedly treating his macbook (ibook) like gold, he treated it like a slab of toast. It's not like laptop stands are expensive, after all.

Here's the thing: for all that I've used both PCs and Macs over the years, I have had the best reliability out of my Macs every time. Even building my own PCs didn't give me a machine that lasted longer than the Mac sitting next to it, and I spent almost as much money on the parts to build them.

 

[-hh]

Errr...you have me all wrong, and much of what you stated is wrong too...
{{maybe, maybe not}}
...I guess I just get baffled when stories of Apple's ridiculous profit margins come out and people here go "Yeah, go Apple!" Huh? ...

A weak Apple means the platform is weak.

A strong Apple means a strong platform. That's more money to invest in OS X as a platform, more money to invest in R and D for future products, more money to help third party developers and build better tools. More money to invest in future platforms like the web and HTML 5.

If you're going to tell me I'm wrong and much of what I've stated is wrong then at least have the decency to tell me which parts?

Similarly, what the real complaint here is one of perception: Microsoft makes margins as fat as (fatter?) than Apple's, but because Apple appears to be hardware-only company, the temptation is to compare them to the PC vendors ... who are commodities because they all sell Windows OS ... and not to Microsoft.

Maybe you need to do a little research, since Apple's prices are lower than they were 5 years ago, not higher. They're just not as low as the PC prices.

One can go back a lot further than that: today is also cheaper than 10 years ago, 15 years ago and 20 & 25 years ago ... and that's all before we take present value (inflation) into account.

The assumption here is essentially that just because the Windows PC became a commodity, that Apple is somehow obligated to follow.

Most people do not like OS X.

Golly - how can they actively dislike something that they're ignorant of?
Or is this merely a "Fear of the Unknown" paradigm statement?


-hh

 

[LagunaSol]

So, all sub $1000 computers (that is, all computers that aren't from Apple) are a POS??

Odd, since when are "all sub $1000 computers" equal to $400 computers (which is what I said)? You ≠ good at math.

Haha, the ammount of arrogant assumptions that can be taken from such a comment are hillarious.

There you go again - something you disagree with must be "arrogant." Perhaps you've heard the saying about assuming?

Let's take a look at your assumptions:

All $400 computers are ****

I've yet to see a $400 computer that isn't crap. I would be happy to examine one if you can point one out (if it's not a laptop, make sure you include the display, keyboard, and a free printer - because that's what the PC makers are advertising these days for $400 bills - and those are exactly the PCs I'm referring to).

People who buy $400 are in need of charity

I never said that. Again, you have to make up crap just because you have nothing intelligent to say?

Only companies that sell stuff at premium prices are successful.

More crap made up by you. Again, nothing intelligent to say.

Indeed.

Oh, and I'm still waiting for some samples of my "hypocritical comments" per your bogus accusations. Apparently you can't back up what you say?

 

[Vulpinemac]

So, all sub $1000 computers (that is, all computers that aren't from Apple) are a POS??

Thanks man, you've opened my eyes.

Haha, the ammount of arrogant assumptions that can be taken from such a comment are hillarious.

• All $400 computers are ****
• People who buy $400 are in need of charity
• Only companies that sell stuff at premium prices are successful.

• "All $400 computers are ****" Even Apple doesn't build a $400 computer, and when you consider the average reliablity of those $400 pieces of ****, I'm really amazed anyone buys junk like that. The problem is, some people really can't afford better than that. Which leads to...
• "People who buy $400 are in need of charity." On average, I would say you're exactly right. Especially in today's consumer market. You can't tell me that everyone who buys a Walmart* special can afford better.
• "Only companies that sell stuff at premium prices are successful." Well now, think about it. When you take everything into consideration, Apple currently has the highest Stock Market value of any computer maker with the highest Market Cap as well. They've got to be doing something right, right?

Now. You tell me. Who's the successful one, here?

 

[lilo777]

Here's the thing: for all that I've used both PCs and Macs over the years, I have had the best reliability out of my Macs every time. Even building my own PCs didn't give me a machine that lasted longer than the Mac sitting next to it, and I spent almost as much money on the parts to build them.

Here is the another thing - all of the components (except for the case) in Macs are the same as in PCs. Can you tell what exactly broke in the PCs that you assembled? It is my observation that nowadays PCs (including Macs) age faster than they break. It is true that Mac users stick with their machines longer than their PC couunterparts but this is simply because Macs cost more, so people have to save longer to buy a replacement PC users on the other hand can afford to replace computers faster.

 

[Eidorian]

I'll have to get back on the longevity of $287 of computer.

 

[Vulpinemac]

Apple's gone backwards since your system - the 21.5" Imac has cut off the bottom of the screen, and only has 1080 vertical pixels.

Most "16x9" displays cut off vertical pixels, rather than adding horizontal pixels.

So you're telling me that the Apple 20" iMac had 1900 x 1200? Sorry, you make a very poor comparison. They didn't cut off the bottom of the 24" to make the 21.5", they stretched the 20" instead. Meanwhile, they stretched the 24" to make the 27". I think that's kinda neat.

Apple didn't go backwards, they moved forward--again.

 

[LagunaSol]

For many of us (like about 95% of the market), Apple OSX is part of the problem - not the solution.

Wow - sheer brilliance. *feverish applause*

What problem, exactly is OS X a part of? Please, enlighten me? Aside from the problem that it doesn't conform with your need for conformity? (And the need to foist your need for conformity on the rest of us?)

How about this analogy parallel to your nonsensical argument: if you have hemorrhoids (Windows) but you don't use Preparation H (OS X), then Preparation H is part of the problem - not the solution.

Einsteinian logic there.

It's not hard to see why Windows has 95% of the market.

 

[inlovewithi]

Obviously, you didn't read a single one of those articles. Every one of them said that the reason Apple users are so enthusiastic about their machines is that Apple truly satisfies their customers.

Oh, I'll grant that there will be some lemons; every brand will have some. Apple tends to have fewer by proportion. The interesting thing is, the one anecdotal example right here could easily have been avoided by simple, ordinary care. Laptops are noted for getting hot. The battery problem mentioned was felt by every single laptop maker at the time; he could have simply taken it back for warranty replacement--he chose not to do so. Simply by using a laptop stand that lifted the unit off the desktop would have prevented a lot of that heat buildup which permitted the battery to swell.
In other words, for supposedly treating his macbook (ibook) like gold, he treated it like a slab of toast. It's not like laptop stands are expensive, after all.

Here's the thing: for all that I've used both PCs and Macs over the years, I have had the best reliability out of my Macs every time. Even building my own PCs didn't give me a machine that lasted longer than the Mac sitting next to it, and I spent almost as much money on the parts to build them.

I noticed this the other day when I was reading the thread the other day about the 27" imac shipping cracked, or not working, that some of the Apple obsessed guys blame everybody but apple. After reading one of the guys saying that it was the fault of the Chinese I quickly had to get away from the thread it was so obnoxious. And now it's my fault that my battery went crap because for some reason I was supposed to to intuitively know that rather than placing my macbook down on my desk of this cold house I was supposed to buy a special stand for it. The problem had nothing to do with over heating, but something that was holding the white cover got lose. Other than that, battery works fine. Plus my macbook never over heats, because I'm obsessive about it staying cool, even putting it on sleep mode when the fans start going, and even not watching videos on youtube, but actually downloading it. Which reminds me of another problem that the macbook had the 1st six months that I had it that many other people had and that the audio would skip when it got hot, which made me more obsessive about always keeping it running cool.

 

[Vulpinemac]

If Apple's mainstream desktop was more than $400-500 Core 2 on the back of a monitor I'd consider it. Target Display Mode isn't much of a solution. I don't need another desktop either. Right now I don't even consider Core 2. It's either Athlon II or you just go straight to the Core i5 750. It's a waste of money otherwise.

Have you even been paying attention to what Apple is doing? You can get an i5 or i7 in an iMac now. They're ahead of you again.

I'm fine with my Late 2007 Macbook since Apple does compete well in the 13.3" notebook arena. I don't see a need to replace it either since there haven't been any significant improvements for me. A Core 2 Duo, 4 GB of RAM, and a 320 GB hard drive from 2007 are still overkill for what meager work I do on my Macbook.

I like OS X. I don't like Apple as much.

Interesting you should say that, since you seem quite happy with your 2 year old MacBook. After all, Apple's hardware was made to last longer than a mere 2 years. Give it 3 more years, and I think you'll be quite happy with what Apple has available then.