Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple's 1Q 2008 U.S. Market Share Up from 2007

clevin said:
2007Q3: 8.1%
2007Q4: 6.1%
2008Q1: 6.6%

I call that a drop.
Click to expand...

As briefly mentioned in the article, Apple's third quarter market share typically sees a boost due to the back-to-school bump and their popularity in that market. And quarter-to-quarter variations are also seen due to the timing of product introductions and refreshes. Here are Gartner's quarter-by-quarter U.S. market share numbers for Apple going back a bit further:

1Q08: 6.6%

4Q07: 6.1%
3Q07: 8.1%
2Q07: <5.5%
1Q07: 5.2%

4Q06: 5.1%
3Q06: 6.2%
2Q06: 4.6%
1Q06: 4.0%
 
WildCowboy said:
As briefly mentioned in the article, Apple's third quarter market share typically sees a boost due to the back-to-school bump and their popularity in that market. And quarter-to-quarter variations are also seen due to the timing of product introductions and refreshes. Here are Gartner's quarter-by-quarter U.S. market share numbers for Apple going back a bit further:

1Q08: 6.6%

4Q07: 6.1%
3Q07: 8.1%
2Q07: <5.5%
1Q07: 5.2%

4Q06: 5.1%
3Q06: 6.2%
2Q06: 4.6%
1Q06: 4.0%
Click to expand...

thanks for the data, much more prospective :)
 
alana22 said:
I'll give you one right now. I own an iMac and a blackbook, and both have given me tons more problems than my Dell xps420. The Dell has higher specs and cost less as well. I prefer Mac OS X over XP, but machine-wise, the Dell smokes Apple computers.
Click to expand...

I find that shocking.
I've owned 4 Dells and 5 Macs in the last 10 years. Every Mac still works beautifully. I've never had to send or take any of them in for service. Only 1 Dell will still turn on.

And based on the above data, it looks like Apple might come close to hitting 10% in Q3.
 
skunk said:
Goodness, can't one have a light-hearted civil discussion here any more without being accused of antagonism? Remarkable indeed.
Click to expand...

"Light-hearted civil discussions" don't generally include wording like, "you seem intent on confusing," especially after I've made my point multiple times, and it seems to be clear to everyone but you. You're nitpicking for the sake of it, which isn't lighthearted or civil. It's grating -- and I think you know it.
 
pbbaker123 said:
This tells a different story, at least according to the title..

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9027558
Click to expand...

Not sure how that's at all relevant. It's common sense that Vista would be growing quickly as XP users "upgraded" to Microsoft's latest operating system. With Microsoft accounting for >90% of all users, it only takes a small percentage of users moving from XP to Vista to equal Apple's total share.

If you'd like to see Net Applications' data that also shows Mac's growing market share, check out this data.
 
how about posting the world wide charts from the article as well ?

because there the worldwide market grew not 3 percent but a whopping 12.4% going from 63.250 to 71.057

and all top 5 HP(17.5%), Dell(21.8%), Acer(25.2%), Toshiba(19.3%) and Lenovo(20.8%) outpaced that


in the US acer sold 400k units less
Worldwide including the US they still sold 1350k units more .. which is more growth than apple sold units in the US ... which is by far apples strongest market

edit: Apple has to get their thing together outside of the US where big vendors like HP, dell etc. are not as strong and still growing... they have to get into the worldwide top 5
 
skunk said:
... but without the Dell increase, the "industry as a whole" would have shrunk rather than expanded.
Click to expand...
No, I think the point is that if Dell didn't grow, somebody else would have picked up the slack. They're poaching share from each other-- "competing" in other words... PCs are commodities. Macs are single sourced.
skunk said:
Only that you seem intent on confusing the issue of market share with that of market size.
Click to expand...
I have to say that you seem intent on confusing what he's confusing. Earlier you thought it was "profound" vs "greater" influence, then you thought it was the use of "industry as a whole", now market "share" versus "size".

What Reilly's saying makes sense. It is not the lone conclusion to be drawn from incomplete data, but I haven't heard him suggest that it was. All he's saying is that if you break the table down by product rather than by manufacturer, Macs have a disproportionate impact on the growth of the industry.

If you want to nit pick, you can ask how many of those Macs were actually bought to run Windows, and therefore are not distinct products from the other manufacturers...
clevin said:
no, why? im comparing the shipping market shares, not shipping #s, its apple against others, not apple against itself in this comparison?

I think comparison of same Q of each year is to check the growth of the company itself, not to compare against other companies. Did I not get this right?:confused:
Click to expand...
I think you got it in a later post but what your 3 quarters of numbers didn't capture, I think, is that Apple is selling to different customers than the others. Business purchases (a large fraction of Windows sales) runs on a different schedule, than education sales (a large fraction of Apple's market). So if you look at the school season sales, Apple's share will appear bigger, and if you look at January when most corporate budgets start, Apple will appear smaller.
 
Analog Kid said:
If you want to nit pick, you can ask how many of those Macs were actually bought to run Windows, and therefore are not distinct products from the other manufacturers...
Click to expand...

That's an excellent point actually. One of the key fundamentals here is that there is a whole new market segment available to Apple - windows users who want to use Apple hardware.

The stats are interesting although I would like to see how many of the sales were down to the Air and what the impact of the Air was on MB and MB Pro sales.

Oh and The Analog Kid is an excellent song. Not sure about Witchhunt though!
 
Analog Kid said:
If you want to nit pick, you can ask how many of those Macs were actually bought to run Windows, and therefore are not distinct products from the other manufacturers...
Click to expand...

On which point, you could ask how many of those Macs bought to run Windows ended up sticking with OS X.

The ability to run Windows on a Mac is, for the average switcher, a failsafe, a means to make sure they can always pull out of OS X if they don't like it. I'd bet my internal organs that most end up trying and staying with OS X.
 
alana22 said:
I'll give you one right now. I own an iMac and a blackbook, and both have given me tons more problems than my Dell xps420. The Dell has higher specs and cost less as well. I prefer Mac OS X over XP, but machine-wise, the Dell smokes Apple computers.
Click to expand...

Okay, so let me also give you one too.

At work I just recently got a new laptop. Dell, that is. Running XP with 4GB installed memory (not being able to fully use it without running virtual machines, by the way. thanks to xp.). I have used it for a month now and let me assure you I'd rather use my dad's G3 iBook that was supposed to be slow 6 years ago. It actually smokes this XP-running paperweight that looks like a computer.

It's all about software.
 
Much Ado said:
On which point, you could ask how many of those Macs bought to run Windows ended up sticking with OS X.

The ability to run Windows on a Mac is, for the average switcher, a failsafe, a means to make sure they can always pull out of OS X if they don't like it. I'd bet my internal organs that most end up trying and staying with OS X.
Click to expand...

Unless they need to use Office 2003 or 2007 or any other Windows only app. There are some things that Windows apps just do better than their Mac equivalents which, of course, if true the other way round too.
 
BongoBanger said:
Unless they need to use Office 2003 or 2007 or any other Windows only app. There are some things that Windows apps just do better than their Mac equivalents which, of course, if true the other way round too.
Click to expand...

Documents made with Office for Mac are perfectly compatible with its Windows version, and vice versa. How is it "better" to use a Windows version? In my book the Mac version crashes less, performs better and looks nicer. On the other hand, the Windows version forces me to hit ctrl+s all the time, eventually makes the whole system crawl and looks as dull as any other Windows application.

If it was Windows-only, then you had a point.
 
JFreak said:
Documents made with Office for Mac are perfectly compatible with its Windows version, and vice versa. How is it "better" to use a Windows version? In my book the Mac version crashes less, performs better and looks nicer. On the other hand, the Windows version forces me to hit ctrl+s all the time, eventually makes the whole system crawl and looks as dull as any other Windows application.

If it was Windows-only, then you had a point.
Click to expand...

Integration with MS Access mainly. Oh and usage of Access as well which OSX doesn't support. I found Office 2008 on the Mac to be slower and less stable than 2003 or 2007 on a Windows machine.

As for performing better and not crashing, my Thinkpad is fast, stable and looks fine - not that looks are important for a business tool anyway.
 
BongoBanger said:
That's an excellent point actually. One of the key fundamentals here is that there is a whole new market segment available to Apple - windows users who want to use Apple hardware.
Click to expand...

The whole market segment... that spends over $1200 on a computer. Which is a very small part of the market unfortunately. Apple will, I'm sure, expand downward, but hopefully will take their sweet time about it. I imagine the part of the market that never considers an Apple because of the price is probably about 80%, maybe Apple can drop that to 70% with new introductions. The trick is to maintain the same level of profitability at those lower prices without sacrificing anything.... just ask Dell.
 
BongoBanger said:
Integration with MS Access mainly. Oh and usage of Access as well which OSX doesn't support.
Click to expand...

You can't be serious. Access is a deadend product and even Microsoft does not want to support it anymore. It has severe limitations so it cannot even be called a database anymore by today's standards. Currently, even Excel (that got rid of the stupid 65536 row/column limitation) is more of a database than Access (that has 2GB limitation for a datafile).

Sure, it's a nice toy to show some quick examples regarding fundamental database designs, but for that purpose there are lots of miles better products.

Access. Seriously? It was a nice little app ten years ago. Not anymore!
 
cameronjpu said:
The whole market segment... that spends over $1200 on a computer. Which is a very small part of the market unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Do you know where to find good statistics on this? My feeling has always been that companies like Dell put a $400 PC out there not because people buy it but because people use it to compare against and then buy more expensive stuff.
 
Analog Kid said:
Do you know where to find good statistics on this? My feeling has always been that companies like Dell put a $400 PC out there not because people buy it but because people use it to compare against and then buy more expensive stuff.
Click to expand...

For sure they hope that not too many people buy them. The profit margins on these cheap PCs are really poor.
 
JFreak said:
You can't be serious. Access is a deadend product and even Microsoft does not want to support it anymore. It has severe limitations so it cannot even be called a database anymore by today's standards. Currently, even Excel (that got rid of the stupid 65536 row/column limitation) is more of a database than Access (that has 2GB limitation for a datafile).

Sure, it's a nice toy to show some quick examples regarding fundamental database designs, but for that purpose there are lots of miles better products.

Access. Seriously? It was a nice little app ten years ago. Not anymore!
Click to expand...

Really? That'll be news to the millions of people in corporations who still use Access for small database manipulation whilst using it also as a front end for SQL Server, etc.

Carry on.
 
Apple's "REAL" marketshare?

Anyone know of any recent studies where the analysts actually looked at Apple's computer market-share ONLY among consumers and at the different price brackets? I mean obviously most medium and large companies buy thousands of crappy low-priced PC's at a time from companies like HP and DELL. In the same vein, Most of the consumer market is for low-cost, sub-$1000 PCs. I want to know what Apple's market-share is in the actual market niche they inhabit, i.e. the consumer mid and high-end computer market.
 
winterspan said:
Anyone know of any recent studies where the analysts actually looked at Apple's computer market-share ONLY among consumers and at the different price brackets? I mean obviously most medium and large companies buy thousands of crappy low-priced PC's at a time from companies like HP and DELL. In the same vein, Most of the consumer market is for low-cost, sub-$1000 PCs. I want to know what Apple's market-share is in the actual market niche they inhabit, i.e. the consumer mid and high-end computer market.
Click to expand...

I think you were thinking about last month's survey saying Apple has 14% of US retail PC shares.

http://www.appleinsider.com/article..._of_us_based_pc_retail_sales_in_february.html

I believe the retail market is only 20-30% of the total pc market (i.e. companies buy up 70-80% of the pc's sold).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back