Apple's Notebook Shipments Rise 30% on Strength of New 12-Inch Retina MacBook

[ramonabynes]

I mean, it's back-to-school season. You can't attribute anything to the rMB without a breakdown. A lot of people are still buying Airs. Plus the 2015 model of the rMB was $500+ off for a while at an authorized retailer. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1137882-REG/apple_z0rm_mjy321_12_macbook_early_2015.html/AP/Y

 

[Seraph301083]

Mac Pro PLEASE!

 

[noone]

Nice to see a bump in laptop sales. The new MacBook is nice looking and for a non-power user like me would be a good choice. I was tempted to buy one to replace my 2012 MBP, but I just don't like a screen size on a laptop smaller than 15".

If they offered a 15-inch Macbook, it would very likely be my next laptop. I'm not as "on the go" as I used to be and I don't need my laptop to be a workhorse anymore. I could easily use this as my primary internet/email/general use machine and have a desktop for the occasion I need more horsepower.

 

[tardegrade]

I'm pretty surprised. I couldn't imagine that many people paying $1300 for a weaker processor and 1 almost unusable port

When my brother got his it was £50 more than the same spec MacBook Air that I have (8Gb Ram, 256 SSD). I'm a Systems Developer for a Telecoms company so I use my Air all the time. I honestly prefer my brothers MacBook. It's lighter, better screen and faster for the things that I use my laptop for. I think people are looking at CPU stat's and going a bit too far. IRL it's a great laptop. Those people who are going to cane the CPU are probably looking at MacBook Pros anyway.

 

[Bubba Satori]

I'm pretty surprised. I couldn't imagine that many people paying $1300 for a weaker processor and 1 almost unusable port

The Macbook is a nice $600 netbook.
Great for students.

 

[S.B.G]

If they offered a 15-inch Macbook, it would very likely be my next laptop. I'm not as "on the go" as I used to be and I don't need my laptop to be a workhorse anymore. I could easily use this as my primary internet/email/general use machine and have a desktop for the occasion I need more horsepower.

Yep, that's the same boat I'm in. I have a really nice Alienware PC at home for any heavy tasks that I may need from time to time, and basically use my MBP for the general everyday stuff like email and web browsing. The power I have in the MBP is now a bit overkill for what I do.

 

[citysnaps]

I'm pretty surprised. I couldn't imagine that many people paying $1300 for a weaker processor and 1 almost unusable port

Many people said the same thing for the original $1,799 MacBook Air in 2008, with 80GB spinning hard drive, Core Duo processor, 2GB of RAM, and one USB port.

 

[LordVic]

But this was the headline here on July 11:
Apple's PC Sales Fall Behind ASUS as Buyers Await Next-Generation MacBook Pro and Other New Models

So Mac sales are up 30% but others are up more? Or this is just guesses and estimates from firms that really have no idea how much of what is sold?

The whole article is slightly misleading.

First, Apple's notebook sales went up from Last quarter, not Y-o-Y from last year.

in 1Q16 according to the chart, Apple sold Approxiately 2.5m units. (7.1% of 35622)
IN 2q16, Apple sold App. 3.3m units. So A good increase over last quarter.

But compared to "Y-o-Y", Apple still sold less units than they had in the previous year.
1st 1/2 fo the year overall (Last column) shows that Apple's total sales so far is 23.4% lower than the first half of the year in 2015. So if they managed to sell 5.8m units in the first 1/2 of 2016, at this point last year, they sold 23.4% more laptops.

So while Apple's position overall in branded laptops hasn't overall changed compared to their competition for the quarter, on the 1/2 year Apple has currently sold nearly 25% less laptops at this point in the year than last year showing a decline in overall laptop shipments. This puts them in the "losing" category of sales. With Acer, Samsung, Apple and Toshiba all having sold less laptops this first 6 months of the year than last year.
[doublepost=1470843610][/doublepost]

Many people said the same thing for the original $1,799 MacBook Air in 2008, with 80GB spinning hard drive, Core Duo processor, 2GB of RAM, and one USB port.

The original MacBook Air sales were really bad. the real breakthrough in sales didn't happen until the redesign that saw additional USB port added. Removal of the "door". magsafe, and SSD standard, with a price adjustment down to $999.

The MacBook will likely see similar changes once it replaces the MacBook air in the lineup and costs from Manufacturing of scale go down enough that the MacBook's price can be lowered and still maintain profit margins

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

Many people said the same thing for the original $1,799 MacBook Air in 2008, with 80GB spinning hard drive, Core Duo processor, 2GB of RAM, and one USB port.

Except in 2008, those weren't bottom-of-the-barrel parts like the m-series Skylake (and lowest m3 in this case for $1299) is in the Macbook.

 

[monty77]

2016 MB 12" owner here ... picked it up in tax free shopping at the airport a couple of weeks ago. Wasn't sure at first but I'm in love. Power wise it's FINE for almost anything .. I run a Windows 10 VM on it quite happily, my 2013 rMBP was a little snappier but not much, and it's a delight to carry around and the screen is incredible.

USB-C is getting a hard time too. Plugged into my OWC dock I have all the connectivity I need via a single cable. Yes it's expensive. Yes there's more bang for buck with a Pro. A netbook it is not

Edit: it's the 512Gb m5 model.

 

[bbbb4b]

Except in 2008, those weren't bottom-of-the-barrel parts like the m-series Skylake (and lowest m3 in this case for $1299) is in the Macbook.

Uh, yeah actually, they were.
In fact, back then was almost EXACTLY the same situation as we're talking about today.

 

[citysnaps]

Except in 2008, those weren't bottom-of-the-barrel parts like the m-series Skylake (and lowest m3 in this case for $1299) is in the Macbook.

I would never use simplistic terms like "bottom of the barrel" parts. That said, the original Air was widely panned for being extremely under-powered by tech forum folk who thrive on specs, with little understanding of the overall objective of the laptop and the engineering trades that go with implementing it - i.e., size, weight, mobility, use cases, battery life, target audience, etc.

I see the same thing today with the recent rMB.

 

[talkybear]

30% up preceded by 40% down is not really growth: Assuming Q4 2015 is 100, then Q1 2016 is 60, Q2 2016 is 78......

Plus people who like the 12'' Macbook are probably the same group that Apple thinks they don't need a computer, just an iPad.

 

[ChrisCW11]

There is nothing "new" in MacBooks, hopefully the rumored Pro updates will breath some life back into the brand.

But I think Apple needs to wake up and realize that anytime they lower the price of something, it sells well, so DUH, why continue to think that laptops today need to be $3000+ and $1200 more than a top-spec PC laptop?

If Apple stopped their stupid profit mongering with the Apple Tax they could very well start ramping up sales figures with better value with greater units sold than trying to earn top profit on a lower number of units sold. There are two profit models, low cost/high volume, or high cost/low volume. Apple can't keep assuming high cost/low volume is going to win for them in the long run, it hasn't done well for them in 2016.

So, why doesn't Apple try the other profit model for a change? I mean make the next MacBook Pro very well equipped at $1500. I can tell you know, a very well equipped MacBook Pro at $1500 would put HP, Dell and Lenovo out of business, I would buy one in a heart beat.

But alas, I am sure Apple will try and market a $3800 obscenely stupid costing laptop in the post-PC era and then lament that MacBook sales are declining so that must mean that consumers are simply not interested in computer anymore.

Consumers still want laptops, just most consumers are not interested in stupidly priced laptops. When Apple lowers the price on their products, sales increase, duh.....

 

[kwikdeth]

I mostly chalk it up to people who for whatever reason could no longer wait for updated MBPs or want to spend money on out of date tech. Apple execs will of course spin it to "they love the new form factor" when they use that to justify putting nothing but two USB-Cs on a 15" laptop

 

[talkybear]

So, why doesn't Apple try the other profit model for a change? I mean make the next MacBook Pro very well equipped at $1500. I can tell you know, a very well equipped MacBook Pro at $1500 would put HP, Dell and Lenovo out of business, I would buy one in a heart beat.

Apple is always about profit margin.

 

[MrGuder]

I'm in the market for a new laptop but what I don't like with Apple is that if I want a 15" screen I'm forced to get the pro model when I am not a gamer nor do I need the fastest and best processors or the largest drives. I just want a retina 15" or 15.5" screen with a 256 flash drive but I'm forced to pay $2500.00 or more for a 15"

 

[talkybear]

I'm in the market for a new laptop but what I don't like with Apple is that if I want a 15" screen I'm forced to get the pro model when I am not a gamer nor do I need the fastest and best processors or the largest drives. I just want a retina 15" or 15.5" screen with a 256 flash drive but I'm forced to pay $2500.00 or more for a 15"

That's exactly why you should switch to PC. With a PC you can choose what you want, with a Mac Apple decides what you want.

 

[Michael Goff]

There is nothing "new" in MacBooks, hopefully the rumored Pro updates will breath some life back into the brand.

But I think Apple needs to wake up and realize that anytime they lower the price of something, it sells well, so DUH, why continue to think that laptops today need to be $3000+ and $1200 more than a top-spec PC laptop?

If Apple stopped their stupid profit mongering with the Apple Tax they could very well start ramping up sales figures with better value with greater units sold than trying to earn top profit on a lower number of units sold. There are two profit models, low cost/high volume, or high cost/low volume. Apple can't keep assuming high cost/low volume is going to win for them in the long run, it hasn't done well for them in 2016.

So, why doesn't Apple try the other profit model for a change? I mean make the next MacBook Pro very well equipped at $1500. I can tell you know, a very well equipped MacBook Pro at $1500 would put HP, Dell and Lenovo out of business, I would buy one in a heart beat.

But alas, I am sure Apple will try and market a $3800 obscenely stupid costing laptop in the post-PC era and then lament that MacBook sales are declining so that must mean that consumers are simply not interested in computer anymore.

Consumers still want laptops, just most consumers are not interested in stupidly priced laptops. When Apple lowers the price on their products, sales increase, duh.....

Should they be more like the PC makers that don't really make money? Really?

 

[Johnny907]

So before anyone starts celebrating, lets remember that these numbers are Quarter over Quarter. Yes, 30% more people bought Macs in Q2 than Q1, but that doesn't exactly make up for the over 40% drop in sales from Q4 2015 to Q1 2016. Surprise surprise, no one buys expensive things post Holiday season except TV's for the Superbowl. This also doesn't make up for the 23.4% year over year plunge in sales. And before you blame the market being down, Apple is the only one of the top 5 to see a drop, let alone a double digit drop. Everyone else saw sales gains year over year.
Finally, attributing this QoQ increase to the "new" Retina Macbook is dubious at best when more than likely, a large portion of these sales came from drastically reduced 2015 MBr's that are still flooding the market. You can pick up a 2015 model with fully upgraded processor for under a grand right now at several retailers. Considering the minor speed increase of the otherwise identical 2016 model, it would be disingenuous to give credit to that line over the much cheaper surplus of 2015 units. As Apple refuses to release actual sales numbers broken down by model, however, we'll never know.

 

[LordVic]

Should they be more like the PC makers that don't really make money? Really?

what makes you think that PC makers aren't making money?

Profit is profit whether it's 20%, 30% or 5%. there is nothing in this article to imply that the other PC makers aren't also making profits, and hitting their own goals.

Here's a hint. MOST of the tech world doesn't have this mindset about "40% profits mandatory". That's an apple thing. And its what people refer to as the "Apple Tax"

 

[Michael Goff]

what makes you think that PC makers aren't making money?

Profit is profit whether it's 20%, 30% or 5%. there is nothing in this article to imply that the other PC makers aren't also making profits, and hitting their own goals.

Here's a hint. MOST of the tech world doesn't have this mindset about "40% profits mandatory". That's an apple thing. And its what people refer to as the "Apple Tax"

They aren't making much money. You have around 40% of all of the profits split between every other PC maker. That's saying that 95% of computer sales 0nly account for 40% of the profit. That's not a business you want to be in. Companies are about making money, after all.

 

[LordVic]

They aren't making much money. You have around 40% of all of the profits split between every other PC maker. That's saying that 95% of computer sales 0nly account for 40% of the profit. That's not a business you want to be in. Companies are about making money, after all.

Making money is not the same as rampant profiteering.

again; profitability is irrelevant when you are profitable. "apple makes 40% of the industry profit", first of all is not true. Second of all is still completely irrelevant.

And if a business can thrive, be succesfull, meet its fiscal obligations, while constantly moving forward, who gives a rats ass if company b next to them is slightly more profitable.

Business and profitability isn't a zero sum game. not being first, doesn't make you last, or make you bad. Apple's profitability comes at a cost to the customer. In Apple's case, it's 40% profit margins on 3 year old hardware. This might fly for the short term, but eventually, users will start looking elswhere again, and those profits will start declining because volume will be less.

While Apple is one of the bigger players in the laptop business, in actual PC world they're still not in a position that they dictate the markets price points. When of current running computers, < 5% are estimated to be apple computers, overinflating Apple's profitability as some sort of Market victory is a red herring.

 

[Michael Goff]

Making money is not the same as rampant profiteering.

again; profitability is irrelevant when you are profitable. "apple makes 40% of the industry profit", first of all is not true. Second of all is still completely irrelevant.

And if a business can thrive, be succesfull, meet its fiscal obligations, while constantly moving forward, who gives a rats ass if company b next to them is slightly more profitable.

Business and profitability isn't a zero sum game. not being first, doesn't make you last, or make you bad. Apple's profitability comes at a cost to the customer. In Apple's case, it's 40% profit margins on 3 year old hardware. This might fly for the short term, but eventually, users will start looking elswhere again, and those profits will start declining because volume will be less.

While Apple is one of the bigger players in the laptop business, in actual PC world they're still not in a position that they dictate the markets price points. When of current running computers, < 5% are estimated to be apple computers, overinflating Apple's profitability as some sort of Market victory is a red herring.

You're right, it isn't true. I said the rest of the industry was about 40%. That implies Apple is making 60% of the profit, or near. Also, I read somewhere that their Mac profit margins were 19, not 40. Then we move to the idea that people will stop buying them. That could be happening, or sales could be lowering because they haven't updated them.

Either way, I'm sure you'll have another reason why Apple should be shooting to make about 15$ profit per computer as was the average.

http://bgr.com/2014/01/10/pc-profits-analysis-margins/

 

[Johnny907]

Q1 2017 will be a record quarter for Mac sales.

Why?