Mac Market Share Update

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
47,082
9,059


A new Gartner report (reported by AppleInsider) notes that despite increased sales, the Mac has yet to gain a market share increase.

The report, however, partially conflicts with a previous ZDNet report based on preliminary Gartner data.

U.S. Mac Market Share
1Q 2005: 3.8%
4Q 2005 (AI): 3.5%
1Q 2006 (ZDNet): 3.5%
1Q 2006 (AI): 3.6%

Worldwide Mac Market Share
1Q 2005: 2.2%
1Q 2006 (ZDNet): 2.3%
1Q 2006 (AI): 2.0%

The PC industry as a whole is growing, with overall PC shipments in the U.S. booming 7.4% quarter over quarter and 13.1% year over year, so Mac sales would have to increase at a greater rate than the market as a whole in order for the Mac's market share to increase. Similarly, if Apple does not keep pace with the market, its share will decrease.

In a time when many users interested in buying a Mac have been waiting for Intel-based versions, Apple roughly maintaining its current market share is perhaps a feat unto itself. AppleInsider provides the following analysis:

To Apple's credit, [the .1%] uptick in U.S. PC market share was achieved during a quarter when most prospective Mac buyers were prolonging their computer purchases in favor new Intel-based models that had yet to come to market. This suggests the company could begin to realize some share gains in the latter half of the year, once all of its PC offerings are readily available with Intel processors.
Also from the report, Dell is beginning to lose some ground to rival HP. HP's worldwide market share increased 1.1%, while Dell lost 0.4% according to the report. Similar trends were also present for the companies' respective U.S. market shares.
 

jaydub

macrumors 6502a
Jan 12, 2006
797
2
iGary said:
As long as enough people know about it to keep Apple in business, I could care less. Well kept secret Macs are.
Indeed. Along with a greater market share comes rushed products to please all of those buyers, and I'd rather Apple take their time providing software and hardware I'll be happy using.
 

WildCowboy

Administrator/Editor
Staff member
Jan 20, 2005
17,267
1,172
Those fluctuations are essentially meaningless when it comes to judging long-term market share for Apple. The short-term impact of machine release cycles for the various manufacturers swamps the small variations that could be present.
 

fowler.

macrumors 6502a
Apr 18, 2004
585
0
Pasadena
iGary said:
As long as enough people know about it to keep Apple in business, I could care less. Well kept secret Macs are.
and that's how i've always felt.

who needs market share?
 

longofest

Editor emeritus
Jul 10, 2003
2,818
1,324
Falls Church, VA
jaxstate said:
:cool: I never believed in "The Halo" effect.
"The Halo" effect may be what is allowing Apple to remain competitive at this point (as in, it may be what has allowed Apple to turn in okay numbers during a quarter when most users were waiting for more intel products.
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,546
1,186
A level, non-increasing Mac marketshare means Apple is matching the same growth as the rest of the industry.

In other words, it means MORE Macs are selling, not the same or less--and that's enough to keep developers developing :)

And matching the industry growth during the Intel transition when everyone's been waiting for a new lineup? Not bad at all.
 

nagromme

macrumors G5
May 2, 2002
12,546
1,186
jaxstate said:
:cool: I never believed in "The Halo" effect.
The "halo" effect (or less non-sensically, the "gateway" effect) is real, as evidenced by many individual reports and also some larger surveys. You may doubt the size or importance of it, but it IS real :)

And it's NOT an overnight effect. The iPod effect makes people consider a Mac more seriously when the time comes to replace their current computer--or maybe the one after that. It does NOT make them jump up in large numbers and buy a new computer despite already owning one.

The effect is a gradual snowball, but, I believe, a large one.
 

081440

macrumors regular
Mar 14, 2006
155
3
New Jersey
The numbers look pretty good, esspecially keeping up with industry growth during the Intel transition, I thought Apple would really suffer after announcing they would go with Intel precessors, but they seemd to have done pretty well so far. And all the consumer machines, the majority of sales, are out so hopefully we'll see greater market share numbers in the future.

Personally I hope Apple gets to around 10% and then stops. Cause too large a share might cause problems with quality. (Everyone else can use LINUX, heck with Windows :p )
 

hayesk

macrumors 65816
May 20, 2003
1,425
50
iGary said:
As long as enough people know about it to keep Apple in business, I could care less.
Sorry for the nitpick, but the phrase is "I couldn't care less". If you could care less, that implies you do care about Apple's market share.

That said, I agree with your sentiment 100%. I couldn't care less if Apple sold 1 million computers in a quarter where 100 million computers were sold. 1 million is a lot of computers - enough to keep Apple in business.
 

mark88

macrumors 6502a
Oct 30, 2004
509
0
Your hear about PC virus's every single day in the media, PCs run an OS that's over 5 years old, Macs can now run that OS aswell, Vista just keeps getting delayed and delayed....

If Apple can't capitalise on these things right now then it ain't ever gonna happen..
 

stomachdoc

macrumors member
Jul 28, 2004
54
0
Outside of Boston
Well, I'm not a marketing guy, but it seems to me that, once Leopard comes out, the dual-booting capabilities should be publicized, which should make any customer on the fence about switching go for a Mac. In reality, I'm not sure why any home user wouldn't buy a Mac, unless they are heavy duty gamers.

If they play their cards right, there's no reason why they shouldn't be #1 in the home consumer market after Leopard.
 

netdog

macrumors 603
Feb 6, 2006
5,758
37
London
I would actually be more interested to know about the comparitive size of the base of active Apple and Windows machines. Surely the Apple Update and Windows Update could yield some estimates. I know that there are still some OS 9 and older machines that wouldn't be registered, but there are also a number of MS-based systems using the similarly unsupported Win95 and even DOS.

Of course, Apples running Boot Camp or Parallels could very well appear twice.
 

Super Dave

macrumors 6502
mark88 said:
Your hear about PC virus's every single day in the media, PCs run an OS that's over 5 years old, Macs can now run that OS aswell, Vista just keeps getting delayed and delayed....

If Apple can't capitalise on these things right now then it ain't ever gonna happen..
That's not true. Microsoft may be having a hard time, but Apple isn't the easy sell it usually is. With FUD about intel versions of software and some of their product line still not switched over. If Apple doesn't gain market share next year after Office and Adobe CS are available then they never will.

David:cool:
 

rockthecasbah

macrumors 68020
Apr 12, 2005
2,395
2
Moorestown, NJ
i agree with iGary and frankly would like to keep it that way. I love seeing Apple do well sales and stuff, but as far as I'm concerned I don't need Apple to have very wide usage. Part of Apple computers are that they are special. They don't have virus/spyware problems which would only be more threatening if usage increased. They are on their own plane of coolness which is kept partly because they are not widely used in the computing community.

As far as the iPod Halo effect, I disagree that it doesn't exist. iPods have opened up many of my friends and others whom I know to Macs. They have more importantly made Macs more appealing and popular, even if sales don't translate that. While I do believe it was greatly exaggerated that the iPod would accumulate huge sales of Macs, many people don't regularly buy computers. Over the next few years I believe that sales will be boosted still from iPod sales, but not at the extremes as presented when the speculation surrounding this theory popped up a few months ago.