swingerofbirch
macrumors 68040
Just because market share is stagnant does not mean the iPod success hasn't helped the Mac marketshare. For all I know, the Mac marketshare could have gone down farther without the iPod success.
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.
Mac Market Share Update
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Kane67 said:
If you see no benefits to OS X, there are certainly a lot of choices out there for you. Yet the fact is that many people DO see benefits to OS X, and buy Macs as a result.
As for Pixar using Linux, that does tell me something. It tells me they've been using UNIX software since before Macs ran UNIX. (It also tells me Steve Jobs is smart enough not to tell them to throw out software that works just so he can make a point.)
Would this "shambles" by any chance refer to Apple managing to keep pace with industry growth EVEN while facing the temporary lost sales resulting from a massive architecture shift?Stella said:
I'm not sure that really that many people knew enough about the transition to wait....nagromme said:
The people in this forum aren't typical consumers.
They haven't kept pace.. otherwise they wouldn't have lost market share.
as the above poster says - no everyone knew Apple were switching.
50% of international sales is pretty poor too - it should be alot higher... it doesn't matter if Apple are a u.s company - they are an international company 'competing' globally.
as the above poster says - no everyone knew Apple were switching.
50% of international sales is pretty poor too - it should be alot higher... it doesn't matter if Apple are a u.s company - they are an international company 'competing' globally.
nagromme said:
Well, as far as I'm concerned, the first generation iPods are significantly better than the iPod nano. My mac mini has zero issues, while the intel mac mini's had airport issues. Lastly, think about all of the PowerBook G4 owners who bought a revision "D" or whatever the last revision was...you know, the one with the freaky screens? Don't tell me that it gets "better" when it doesn't.nagromme said:
We like to pretend that things get better over time, especially with Job's RDF, but the truth is, Apple QC is dropping while consumers' expectations are rising. That's bad. Add on top of this Vista in 1st Q of 2007, and I just hope Apple has some mighty nice features for Leapord, otherwise the RDF might falter..
This entire conversationm is silly until the Intel transition is done. Apple is continuing to grow. It's also clear Apple executes its strategies MUCH better than most competitors.
Things are good and getting better. Though Apple isnät exactlz small anzmore, it is relative to M$. Yet, it is still deciding much of the direction of the consumer tech field. Geez, if we are worried about being in this position, so many of us should have ended it all in the 90s.
Things are good and getting better. Though Apple isnät exactlz small anzmore, it is relative to M$. Yet, it is still deciding much of the direction of the consumer tech field. Geez, if we are worried about being in this position, so many of us should have ended it all in the 90s.
Who cares?
Really, is like Steve said just because they sell more Ford's than BMW's it doesn't mean that Fords are better
We all know the majority of people is dumb and act like Longhorn cows
And that they cannot be as many Tigers as Longhorn cows
But I would rather be a Tiger any day than a stupid meal with horns...
Really, is like Steve said just because they sell more Ford's than BMW's it doesn't mean that Fords are better
We all know the majority of people is dumb and act like Longhorn cows
And that they cannot be as many Tigers as Longhorn cows
But I would rather be a Tiger any day than a stupid meal with horns...
I suppose suicide is always an option, but I don't think it's gotten that desperate yet...Marx55 said:
Linux market share is 0.4%, right now.
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2
how soon is now?
And, I think it's too early to tell if macintels are increasing market share. The Macbook's been out for 2 weeks and a lot of wait and see in Q1 and Q2. Conversions and switchers are just getting going (I just bought my first Mac last week after 20 years of being fairly hostile toward apple products and 2-3 months of deciding to go for it based on said halo) ... and the real test will be over the next 2-4 quarters, in my opinion. A musician friend told me over the weekend I was the 4th person he knew who jumped recently.
And by the way, I am enthused.
noel
macridah said:
And, I think it's too early to tell if macintels are increasing market share. The Macbook's been out for 2 weeks and a lot of wait and see in Q1 and Q2. Conversions and switchers are just getting going (I just bought my first Mac last week after 20 years of being fairly hostile toward apple products and 2-3 months of deciding to go for it based on said halo) ... and the real test will be over the next 2-4 quarters, in my opinion. A musician friend told me over the weekend I was the 4th person he knew who jumped recently.
And by the way, I am enthused.
noel
Frisco said:
I don't know where you are getting that from, every driver I have ever needed except one was already installed in OS X and worked great (mouse, digital camera, printer, etc). The one I had to install didn't seem second class (PodXT), infact it worked better than on Win2K.
Frisco said:
Really the only software missing is some specialty and vertical market apps (PLC programming, CNC milling, etc). How this is hurting Apple, I don't know. The switch to Intel is not really drastic at all. The core of a Mac is still the same and most people would never know the difference. Development is not any easier, the move to Cocoa is still as steep a curve, and little assembly code can be reused. Bootcamp is more significant, but as others have already mentioned, the real magic is yet to come with Leopard's virtualization.
Frisco said:
Why does everyone think that opening OS X is good for Apple-- this is one of those things that has been repeated so many times people just accept it without question.
First, Apple is not Microsoft. They are not a software company. That said, they could attempt to become one, but at what cost? How successful was the open platform strategy for IBM? In 2004, right before they sold the business off to Lenovo, IBM had 5.9% market share, putting them 3rd behind HP and Dell.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050118-4535.html
Now, that doesn't seem to say they really got rewarded for their decision. What would happen to Apple? Two things for sure, and possibly a third: other vendors would immediately start cutting slices out of Apple's hardware sales bringing their market share down. Apple's margins would fall under intense pressure bringing their revenue per unit down. If they were lucky, and OS X caught on, the growing popularity of the OS would, after some years, start to exert an upward pressure on demand for Apple hardware.
What would happen to their OS business? Contrary to what so many people think, being able to run on cheap hardware doesn't make you a best seller. Linux hasn't gotten very far outside of the server room and some hobbyists and it's free. OS/2 also failed despite being relatively open, and supported by a respected company. BeOS anyone? OpenStep?
What would OS X look like in this environment? All of a sudden, people would need OS X drivers for every random bit of hardware out there, and Apple would have to anticipate people mixing any piece of hardware with any other piece. For the most part, OS X would fail at this simply because there are too many devices out there and they won't get the support from hardware vendors that Windows does. Next thing you know, OS X starts to get a reputation as quirky and unstable because Apple doesn't have control any more.
So, I have a really hard time understanding why people want to cut Apple's computer revenue to essentially zero in the hopes that they'll eventually be able to sell 2 or 3 times as many copies of their OS.
I agree that Apple needs to grow it's market share (not that they haven't done quite well at this level for a very long time) for the very reason you give-- more and better development. Neither of your approaches will solve the problem though. I'm witholding judgement on the Intel move for the time being, but in general I think Apple is taking the right approach-- rapid development and release of innovative products. It gives the appearance that Microsoft is aging before our very eyes.
Cinch said:
Pointless? you mean, like your reply? got a better analogy, or are you just dissing? c'mon, man.
Apple, like any other company, does not have to compete on volume or market share to be successful. Apple stock price and dividends have gone up for years. Dell stock price and dividends have gone down. during that time, Dell increased their market share.
heck, i've been reading "Apple's market share is too low! they suck!" since like, oh, 1995.
and they're still here, stock price has quadrupled, and the brand Apple is known worldwide. what a failure. guess Apple should pack it in.
ulyssespdx said:
I agree with a lot of your points. But to be fair, you have to acknowledge the impact of the iPod as well...that's helped out Apple's stock price a wee bit, hasn't it???
Macs Run Windoze Is The Best Kept Secret Now
As more and more of us spread this news, consideration of Mac next time around will be even more serious - especially when Leopard will include Boot Camp as part of its foundation next year and Parallels Workstation has a full suite of drivers for everything one can hook to a Mac. So Halo is spreading from iPod to "Can Run Windoze Natively".
I agree. But what I think is now the best kept secret is that Macs run Windoze natively - which is huge. Lately I have been mentioning this to all PC users I encounter and not one of them knew it before I told them. Even Apple is doing all it can to keep this a secret notwithstanding Boot Camp assistance.nagromme said: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.
As more and more of us spread this news, consideration of Mac next time around will be even more serious - especially when Leopard will include Boot Camp as part of its foundation next year and Parallels Workstation has a full suite of drivers for everything one can hook to a Mac. So Halo is spreading from iPod to "Can Run Windoze Natively".
That's interesting because many people I've spoken (especially the ones that know I'm a bit of a Mac enthusiast) have actually brought up the fact that they heard Macs could now run Windows natively. I think it was fairly well published across the internet and many news sources also reported it. I suppose it just depends on what the people you know are interested in.Multimedia said:
comparing Apple market share to windows market share is sort of like comparing BMW to Unleaded petrol.
Apple v Dell v Compaq v Sony is where it should be
Apple v Dell v Compaq v Sony is where it should be
I've long been suspicious of computer industry market share reports, particularly in regard to Apple. These stats just don't pass the common sense test. I know this is anecdotal but look around and consider all your acquaintances, friends and colleagues. Do you see more Macs than 3 for every 100 people in that group? I do. Way more. I always have, even back in Apple's dark days in the late-90s. Everyone I talk to seems to have a similar response. Yes, there are definitely more Windows users out there, but the ratio is not that lopsided.
I'm not sure how to account for that discrepancy, but I am fairly certain that Apple's apparently low market share numbers are being exaggerated by something.
I'm not sure how to account for that discrepancy, but I am fairly certain that Apple's apparently low market share numbers are being exaggerated by something.
Old MacDonald had a farm...gekko513 said:
Ultimately in the long run FUD won't really have an effect on market share IMO. It may slow growth a little initially, but once they fix things up a bit, growth should accelerate again.
Marx55 said:
They don't want to...
They are a hardware company... how will they sell any frikken hardware when you can buy a cheapo PC box and run it on that