I'm sure they regret it now. They were probably pouring most of their resources into the iPhone, which they did hit a homerun with. Nevertheless, even though it is a few years late, people will still be calling Apple's netbook/tablet as innovative.
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 US Market Share Slips in 1Q 2009
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm sure they regret it now. They were probably pouring most of their resources into the iPhone, which they did hit a homerun with. Nevertheless, even though it is a few years late, people will still be calling Apple's netbook/tablet as innovative.
Thank you.
Apple does have a hole to fill in their price ladder. The only way this supposed netbook/tablet would fit to lower cost is if they shove down all their iPod lines. Seems doubtful, but a small iPod Nano at $99/$150, iPT at $199/$299, then MaxiPod/Netbook at $499+.
It would be awesome if an Apple tablet would be able to run a fairly complete OSX, but I somehow doubt this device will be fully capable. It'll probably be limited to communication via the internet and a little else for low end processing.
Wait, so you mean you are comparing Apple to Microsoft?
....uhhh.... ok.
Wrong.
Market share=money when you sell devices that make money off of app sales and music/video sales. I doubt any decent company says "I'm just making great products for art's sake" and doesn't think about earnings and money.
Remember that Jobs himself has said that Apple is primarily a software company. It makes money from selling computers/devices that use their software or software they make money from (iTunes store apps and stuff).
What's the margin of error?
I have a hard time believing that these figures are so accurate that 0.1% is not below the level of noise.
I would have to see more proof of the methodology before I could conclude that Apple's "slip" is real or just part of a cloud of data that could represent a spectrum of realities ranging from a worse drop to a small increase.
Also, this is the worst example of using data selectively to make an editorial point. The injection of low-cost netbooks (which are low margin as well) skews the VOLUME numbers away from the Mac, but the company's true performance is measured by revenue and even more so by MARGIN.
I have a hard time believing that these figures are so accurate that 0.1% is not below the level of noise.
I would have to see more proof of the methodology before I could conclude that Apple's "slip" is real or just part of a cloud of data that could represent a spectrum of realities ranging from a worse drop to a small increase.
Also, this is the worst example of using data selectively to make an editorial point. The injection of low-cost netbooks (which are low margin as well) skews the VOLUME numbers away from the Mac, but the company's true performance is measured by revenue and even more so by MARGIN.
The XBox 360 is a cash cow. The box itself is not profitable (neither is the Playstation) but software profits off the 360 beat the other 2 major competitors (in the US anyway, which is surprisingly the largest market)
At the foot of the table is an explanation that figures are for thousands of units, i.e. HP shipped 4 million odd, and Apple 1,135,000
"Gartner's Preliminary U.S. PC Vendor Unit Shipment Estimates for 1Q09 (Thousands of Units)"
It won't have Mac OS X. I'm nearly positive about this. A device that size would benefit greatly from having its own multi-touch custom OS, just like the iPhone has its own OS.
Now, it will be closer to the Mac OS than the iPhone's...I'm guessing you can take things like iLife or Photoshop and do a 3-week overhaul on them to basically run the same code but with a modified GUI made just for this device. So you'd still get full Mac programs on this thing, but they'd be custom altered to specifically run on this new Apple tablet using multitouch gestures and larger icons and buttons.
I'm just guessing here, but I feel pretty sure about this. The "Desktop" metephor for computing is old and needs to go. Everyone knows it but no one can figure out how to change the desktop on traditional computers. But when Apple had the chance to start fresh with the iPhone, they ditched the desktop and pointer idea. I suspect they'll do it again when given the chance on a new tablet device.
I agree with you. Just like laptop sales have been steadily increasing as desktops become less popular, we are likely going to see netbook sales increase from here on in. When you talk about basic consumer use, the netbook is going to be just as useful as a $2000 computer. People used to drool over specs, but now they realize any computer (cheap or expensive) can send an email or write a Word doc. Due to this (and the economy), people are likely going to pick the cheaper computer.
Discounting netbook sales is like saying, "well, I would like to see Toyota's car sale numbers without their Prius sales."
I'm not comparing them. I was just using the Xbox as an example of how to increase market share but make no money in it. In fact, Microsoft lost a lot of money in order to establish the Xbox. There are plenty of ways to increase your market share, some of which involve making money and some which don't. It's foolish to attempt to equate the two.
So, Acer is making lots of money off app sales and music/video sales?
Not true. Apple cares about making money through the selling of good products.
If they lose market share, than others are doing something better than Apple. And hence, Apple is losing money compared to the ones that are gaining market share. In this case the others are making netbooks and selling lots of them.
I agree that Apple needs to get in the netbook game. People would lap them up.
It's not just the economy
Sure, the economy is bad, and folks aren't spending money like they used to ... but the money that IS being spent is going proportionally more to the PC market. This has more to do with Apple's marketing and product strategy - than it does about the recession, IMO.
Netbook entry would be a big hit for Apple. I think tweaking the options, design, and prices on their other items would move product faster than otherwise - especially if folks are only looking at the economy as the culprit.
Sure, the economy is bad, and folks aren't spending money like they used to ... but the money that IS being spent is going proportionally more to the PC market. This has more to do with Apple's marketing and product strategy - than it does about the recession, IMO.
Netbook entry would be a big hit for Apple. I think tweaking the options, design, and prices on their other items would move product faster than otherwise - especially if folks are only looking at the economy as the culprit.
Look, in the 4th quarter of 2006 Dell sold roughly 5 times the number of computers as Apple. In that same time period, though, Dell made less money than Apple.
And you call making a bigger profit "making great products for art's sake?" I call that making money, and it's what Apple cares about. I think it's crazy for you to argue that that's the wrong priority for them.
You are right to say Microsoft lost money to establish the XBox, and if it were not for the RROD problem on the next gen, they would have done a lot better of it as well.
However, now that the Brand is established, the XBox 360 is one of the premier consoles in the industry. It might not sell as many units as the Wii, or be as powerful as the Playstation, but XBox Live and software sales make the XBox 360 probably more profitable them most consoles.
However, a lot of those profits go to software developers, so maybe Microsoft will report they aren't doing so hot with it. I think they established themselves now that they are on the right track to being very profitable in the future.
Towers? I thought laptops were outselling desktops by a wide margin these days. Are you basing that on anything?
True, but Apple also sold iPods, which are flash memory or HDD's with a little software at such a high mark-up from cost that it would almost be impossible NOT to make more money.
If all Apple cared about was market share, they would have operated quite differently over the last 10 years than they have, probably putting out netbooks, Mac mini towers, etc. Lots of knee-jerk products. But they haven't. I think that says a lot about what they think of market share. I.E. not operating in a way that sacrifices their other goals.
$399? Not a chance. Apple needs to get their low-end MacBook down to $899, maybe even $849 (or offer big drops on the aluminium MBs (unlikely)). Then, maybe just maybe, they can offer a 10" or so model at $699ish. They also need to sort out the MBP pricing. The difference from low-end to high end 15" is not worth $500.
All positive effects of competition, in my view. I imagine that Apple could try to use the same approach for a Netbook as they did for the iPhone, to have a closed set of applications that run in there, as a way to compensate for not running iLife. at least that's how I see it: iLife could be the big differentiator between the current Macs, the iPhone, iPod and Netbook family (BigMacs vs. SmallMacs 
)
Of course, I have said it before: Apple needs to keep making iLife better, otherwise, it won't even be enough of a differentiator between Macs and PCs...
) Of course, I have said it before: Apple needs to keep making iLife better, otherwise, it won't even be enough of a differentiator between Macs and PCs...
I wish I could see one with out any competition... just apple. I wanna see something that shows the "real world numbers"
.Now is apples chance to be less greedy and lower their prices (a lot) and give us a affordable computer.
