Yes and four other companies sold slightly more than 2,000 units with every one else selling less.
----------
My kids 2007 iMac will run ML when it is released... not sure where the 2-3 year nonsense is coming from.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Share of U.S. PC Shipments Rises to 12% in 2Q 2012
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes and four other companies sold slightly more than 2,000 units with every one else selling less.
----------
My kids 2007 iMac will run ML when it is released... not sure where the 2-3 year nonsense is coming from.
Can somebody explain the regular drops in the last figure? We see a clear globally increasing trend in market share percentage. It seems that there is something bringing down the share in the 1st quarter....
----------
Let's use some standardized reply to express the VOTE DOWN. They will eventually see that the button was more practical than many quotes with this message.
----------
God, I miss the VOTE DOWN button.
Let's use some standardized reply to express the VOTE DOWN. They will eventually see that the button was more practical than many quotes with this message.
I did but only partially for environmental reasons. My crummy old eyes can't really take advantage of the retina display so that would be a waste (I opted for the Hi-Rez display and even it is more than I can really use. I needed at least 500Gb of drive space, but I didn't have unlimited money. The old style gave me what I needed for what I could spend. In addition I have the option of replacing the HD with an SSD down the road when the prices drop, adding RAM if needed, and replacing the battery myself. This means that I think I can get several more years out of the old beast before I'll need to replace it which is an environmental benefit.
My iMac's five years old and Mountain Lion still supports it. I don't think this "2-3 years" means what you think it means.
I think you are misunderstanding what a Retina display does. It's better to think of it not as having four times as many pixels, but as having the usual 1440 x 900 pixels, but at a much higher quality. And your crummy old eyes will appreciate it. Yes, needing 500 GB is a valid argument against it, but your eyes would be better off with a retina display.
Apple always has a good 4th calendar quarter (that's the Christmas quarter), and there is one "back to school" quarter where lots of students by MacBooks. Then there is always some slowdown when something new is announced and a huge rush of sales when the new thing actually comes, so sales always go up and down through the year. That's why you can only make meaningful comparisons to the same quarter in the previous year. Even then it can be tricky.
Last edited:
Mac Pro sales, even if a new one were launched, are an unmeasurably small percentage of the overall PC market.
A month after launch there's still a 3-4 week wait to get one. I'm pretty sure they're selling well.
God, I miss the VOTE DOWN button.
If they're going to get rid of the down vote button then get rid of the up vote to.
Your stat is wrong...at best it is: 1 out of every 12 people who purchased a computer bought a Mac.
Apple does tend to have blow-out 4th quarters - perhaps lots of people give Macs as Christmas presents? - followed by a lean 1st quarter. If Macs are more popular Christmas gifts than PCs, it might partly explain it.
My understanding is that this article is about the US Market... It specifies that many times and on each chart. Maybe my understanding of the "market" and it's division is lacking (honestly it could).
I guess we shouldn't discuss maths education if people equate "12 percent" with "one in 12 people". (Just noticed you just copied the number from someone else).
In twelve percent of purchases (a lot more than "one in twelve") someone _spent the money_ to buy a Macintosh.
1. It doesn't mean they can afford it. Some people live over their means.
2. Not buying a Macintosh doesn't mean you can't afford it. I buy what I like, and what I can justify to myself, not what I can afford. Most people can afford nose rings but don't buy them because they don't like them.
3. Many purchases are made by companies, not by "people", and Apple sells somewhat less to companies. So it is very likely that much more than 12% of the individuals buying computers will buy Macs.
I would assume that most Americans can afford to buy a Macintosh. I _know_ that most British and most German people can.
Last edited:
You're not wrong, but keep in mind that Apple's share is growing in a market that they are helping to kill with another of their products (iPad/iOS).
You are very right 12% is not 1 in 12 it's closer to 1 in 8, my mistake... I'm a little slow this morning.
And I agree with your points...
This is the dumbest statement I've heard in a long time. I typically stay tight lipped about Mac vs. PC argument (considering they're incredibly similar computers and it's based on personal preference), but your comment stands out amongst the pantheon of stupid statements.
What computer were you using? Because if you buy/use a cheap, piece of **** PC, then guess what? You're going to get cheap, piece of **** service. It's like going to McDonald's and expecting a gourmet burger. The fact is Mac doesn't cut corners for their products, so the end result is that it's an expensive product with all the bells and whistles, but with a massive price tag. They don't sell budget computers for the monetarily less endowed individual; if you can't afford it, you can't buy it (they do however offer great discounts for students, which is how I ended up with my MB). As a result, they don't sacrifice quality.
But guess what? High-End PC's don't sacrifice quality, either! My brother uses a "high-end" PC, and guess what? It takes a dump on Mac computers. Any of them. And go figure, he paid less than the best Mac has to offer. As a result, he can game and do anything a Mac can do with absolutely no issues. Whatever PC you were using couldn't have been running Windows 7, because were it actually then you'd realize the OS doesn't crash. I have it on my laptop, and it has never crashed. Can you get that? And who would've thought that my POS MSi laptop still beats most Macs in Benchmarks. I won't even tell you how much I paid for it, because it was pennies. And the build is impeccable. If you buy a POS low-end Dell, watch some porn, get a virus, then complain about it, you deserve it.
And what the F does Steve Ballmer have to do with Dell? Dell runs an OS, doesn't build the hardware. If you've got beef about hardware, then go yell at Michael Dell. He'll probably giggle considering his net worth would suggest that you're in the minority when it comes to critical opinions on build quality of high end Dell's, but whatever. Ballmer? Yeah, he freaking blows considering he's managed to get Microsoft to miss on the mobile music arena, tablet platform, televisions, basically everything. He should've been fired a long time ago. But Ballmer has essentially nothing to do with the technological vision of Microsoft. Then again your question is so bassackwards that it's hard to make much sense of it...
I like this slow but steady incline. It reinforces the idea that Apple's market share is trending upwards at a stable, sustainable increase at times when others are dropping precipitously.
Yes, Asus makes the best consumer PC's, atleast when taking into account how much they cost. They give the best value. HP probably gives the worst value, they don't make the worst computers of course, but when taking the price into the equation... (still speaking of consumer PC's)
The rest of this quote continues. Look, you can disagree with him all you want. But try to keep things civil. FWIW (not much?), I think he made fairly rational point. Your response if seriously inflamed for god know's what reason.
I miss the down-vote.
In most countries, Apple is irrelevant as a computer brand. They don't sell business systems, they don't sell business software and they're too expensive for the majority of home users.
Also, the general consumer behavior is different outside the US - most people don't buy (expensive) gadgets as an accessory or status symbol. The majority still sees computers and phones and TOOLS, not as ends in themselves.
It's hard to sell a 13" MacBook Air for EUR 1250 when you can have an Acer Ultrabook with the same screen size for EUR 599. And this is a market where Apple is ONLY two times as expensive as the competition.
15.4" notebooks with Core i3 CPUs that are more than good enough for all everyday tasks can be bought for 400 Euros. Sure, you don't get the Apple Unibody design, it's all plastic. But you already get more horsepower for that money than most people ever need for their Office and web browsing purposes. 15" MacBook Pros on the other hand start at 1879 Euros in Germany - that's 4.5 times the price for the cheapest 15" model that Apple offers.
Yeah, I know the bla bla about when you compare, you need to compare on the same level. Well, I actually did that. I compared the CHEAPEST Acer model with the CHEAPEST Apple model in the same class. Duh!
If I spend the same money on, let's say, a Sony Vaio, among other things I get a much faster CPU, longer battery life, twice the RAM and an SSD disk instead of the slow hard disk that the Macbook Pro for that price only has.
You need some very convincing sales arguments to get NORMAL people to spend that amount of money on a computer, and then you need even more convincing arguments to talk them into spending the same amount of money on LESS hardware.
And again, let's not forget this tiny little detail here: Apple have turned themselves into a consumer brand. That's an awful lot of money for stuff that you will only use at home to surf the web and check the updates from your virtual "friends" on Facebook. And the reality is that those webpages that Safari/Chrome/Firefox display look exactly the same on all supported operating systems (which in the case of Chrome and Firefox include Linux and Android and not just OS X and Windows).
so basically use the numbers that make you feel good on the head and article and set the IDC numbers as a note at the end.
regardless, out of 87.5 million PCs looks like about 4 million of them will be MACs - the PCvsMac question was settled a long time ago, OSX will never be the end of Windows - people should let it go.
regardless, out of 87.5 million PCs looks like about 4 million of them will be MACs - the PCvsMac question was settled a long time ago, OSX will never be the end of Windows - people should let it go.
ASUS makes great stuff overall.
But, the best money to build ratio I've seen so far in the consumer world is Dell, the high end stuff is pretty good to.
Correct, HPs consumer grade stuff is terrible. But they make some pretty great workstations.
Applr has expanded its market a little bit. Which is good, but I think to many factors will keep it sub 30 percent.
What's with the ipad killing the pc market comments? The ipad can replace the laptop or desktop pc for light users. Other than that. No
----------
And I just don't think we will see huge OSX growth long term because, Apple doesn't sell mid range priced computers, in the 700 to 1000 dollar range, where I would guess lots of people buy at.
Also, apple does not provide anything for business, half the market right there, which is fine. They are a consumer company