New MacBook Pro Has Already Outsold All Competing Laptops This Year

[FreshBoy]

Why don't they do total sales of other laptops vs the macbooks? With windows pcs you have choice.

Not a great choice in fairness. A lot of balls of scrap made for windows

 

[CmdrLaForge]

Pretty amazing if you think about it. Looks like there was a lot of upgrade pressure.

 

[Altis]

All of the "models" look pretty "aggregated" to me. I wasn't aware that there were "hundreds of different" Surface Books, for example. And you will note that, speaking of the Surface Book, it was announced for pre-order virtually at the same time (actually one day before) the new MBP. So I would think that is a pretty damn good comparison, product vs. product-wise.

As for the other competing products? Well, their sales are just plain embarassing.

No...

The SurfaceBook competes with hundreds of Windows 10 laptops and tablets. You can buy just about any size, shape, form, power, port combination, etc etc. If someone has different needs than the SurfaceBook, they can get a Razer Blade Pro, for example.

There are really only 2 or 3 mobile MacOS devices according to these categories. If someone wants a different MacBook, well, that's really the only choice.

So it's more accurate to think of the "MacBook Pro" category as nearly all mobile MacOS devices.

 

[brianvictor7]

What world are you guys living in? These prices are about on par with previous years. If you want a cheaper laptop go to Dell.

I bought my rMBP in 2012 for about $2500. The new ones include a Touch Bar, thunderbolt ports and a MUCH FASTER SSD and still around the same price.

So, the issue here is that for 3 years Apple sells its 13" 256 GB machine at $1,499, essentially unchanged for 3 years (I know because I bought the 13" Oct 2013 256 GB), then bumps the price up by $300 for the new entry level machine (if you opt for the touch bar with 256 GB and new form). It is what it is: a grab for more cash when the customer (myself and several others) feel that maybe a $100 increase was justified. But, since the computers are awesome, people it seems are willing to pay for them.

 

[falainber]

The original analysis is pointless. Comparing Apple laptops (with one/two models in each screen size) to a specific model of other vendors which have dozens of different models for each screen size is just stupid. After reading such analysis one would have to conclude that Apple is going to conquer the dominant market share in no time but it never happens. Apple's market share is not far from where it was ten years ago.

 

[Ries]

Another Apple PR spin graph... revenue... How about adding some lenovo, dell and HP and then use unit sales instead. The MacBook would be dwarfed. Q1 2016 Apple had 4.6mio desktop/laptop sales, Lenovo had 12.5mio. Dell XPS line, where is it?

 

[pjarvi]

Of course, if you compare anything Apple makes versus the competition based on revenue, Apple will always win. That's because they overcharge for everything and even marked up the new models by $200-$500 just to trick all the idiot Apple investors into thinking they were doing well.

 

[eldo33]

Of course, if you compare anything Apple makes versus the competition based on revenue, Apple will always win. That's because they overcharge for everything and even marked up the new models by $200-$500 just to trick all the idiot Apple investors into thinking they were doing well.

AGREED!! i don't trust these articles anymore. the units sale figures is more accurate then margin.

 

[apolloa]

This story has been spun more then a Forrest full of the worlds spiniest spiders!!

The title of the article on the website who made it is this:

Apple’s newest MacBook Pro generated 7x more online revenue than MacBook at launch

Hardly shouting about it selling more then 'any other laptop' despite the article only highlighting 4 other laptop models, not even manufactures! A complete made up farce of a report spun even harder by MacRumors who should be utterly ashamed of making up so much click bait crap!

I suggest you read the actual article and ignore MacRumors spun click bait version:

https://intelligence.slice.com/apples-macbook-pro-launch/

 

[RiddlaBronc]

Rich mommies and daddies buying their kids these computers to be the cool kids in hs/college.
As someone mentioned earlier, for heavy real pro users these fall short.

 

[Celebion]

My Phone syncs over WiFi.

Correct me if I'm wrong but last I checked, you had to physically connect the iDevice to the Mac first in order to activate Wifi sync.

I just reset my iPad and iPhone last weekend and had to connect both with the USB cable to my Mac and then check the box for Wifi sync.

 

[gnasher729]

There's a lot which is problematic about this article.

For example, the metric here is gross revenues, not units sold.

Now explain what is problematic with that. Revenue is what ends up in your pocket (and then you subtract cost and end up with profit).

 

[nwcs]

The initial demand really doesn't tell us much just as showing up on top of Amazon's best selling list doesn't mean anything. What I'm curious about it how well they'll sell in the quarter compared to previous quarter and same quarter a year ago. Is this sustainable growth or continuing the long tail to when desktops/laptops become something only a small number of people need.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

Maybe you should take a closer look at whatever orifice you call upon. But in the "Windows world," people don't replace their computers ever couple of years. The PC laptops have been consistently more powerful than the MACs, so that people don't need to buy a new one for 5 years or more, while saving $500 to $1000 at the same time. A maxed out new 15" Pro is $4,300. That maybe fine with you in your elitist little world, but it's absolutely egregious to everyone else.

Well, let's just compare the 13" MBP to the 13.5" Surface Book, as closely configured as possible in the most "maxed-out" configs:

Surface Book:

1. "6th Gen. i7" (doesn't mention number of cores, so I assume ONE). That means it's using a Skylake CPU just like the MBP. No speed is listed, either.
   1TB SSD. But who knows how fast?
2. Nvdia GeForce GTX 965M w/2 GB DDR5 RAM.
3. 3000 x 2000 Touch display.
   
4. 2 USB 3.0, 1 miniDisplayPort, SD card reader, "Headset" port, "Surface Connect" port (WTF?). No TB, no USB-C. Total I/O Bandwidth: 10 Gbps, plus whatever the miniDP (which is ONLY a Display-Port!) can do.

MSRP (as configured) : $3199 (another place on the site said $3299 for the same config!)

vs.

13" MacBookPro w/o Touch Bar (just to keep it fair), cranked up to a similar config. :

• 2.4GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor (Skylake), Turbo Boost up to 3.4GHz
• 16GB 1866MHz memory
• 1TB PCIe-based SSD
• 13.3-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit display with IPS technology; 2560-by-1600 native resolution at 227 pixels per inch (with wide color gamut)
  
• Intel Iris Graphics 540
• Backlit Keyboard
• Two USB-C/Thunderbolt 3 ports (40 Gbps total I/O b/w), with support for Charging, DisplayPort, TB 3, and USB 3.1 Gen 2 (up to 10 Gbps). FYI, the TouchBar version has 4 USB-C/TB 3 ports (the right-two have limited TB bandwidth). (That's a good FOUR TIMES the I/O bandwidth of the Surface Book, with Ports that can be easily and cheaply adapted to a wide variety of uses).
  
  MSRP (as configured) : $2599

Update: Just to see, I went back and configured the top-end 13" MBP (with Touch Bar), the one that has a base price of $1999 in the U.S., to have the same options as the one above (fastest CPU, 16 GB, 1 TB). Even though it has a faster i7, faster RAM bus, better GPU than the non-Touch Bar version, plus a Touch Bar and FOUR (rather than 2) USB-C/TB3 Ports(!!!), it STILL comes in at only $2899, a full $300 less than the Surface Book!

So, what "elitist little world" were you speaking of, again?

 

[DStaal]

1st.... congrats on getting 8 years out of your Pro!!!
I'd suggest, if price is an issue- get the non "fancy F key" version, max out RAM, bump up the ssd to 512gb & that should definitely last you another 8!
If you need a more powerful video card or bigger ssd in the future, tb3 has the insane speed to allow those external upgrades at the same speed as if they were factory installed inside your machine.

In some ways, it's not much of the same computer as it was 8 years ago - I've replaced the graphics card a couple of times, replaced and added hard drives, added RAM...

I've thought about it - but the one problem with that configuration is that I've currently got over 1TB of disk used on my machine - spread over three disks. (Including one SSD.) Now, I might be able to trim that a bit - move a couple of my user accounts (I have a 'personal' account, a 'freelancing' account, etc) to an external disk, for instance, but the question is which and when - because that will mean that I can't use that account without that disk. At the very least. My main user account that I spend most time in is most of that 1TB on it's own - and that's with things like my iTunes library exported to an NFS share from my home server.

The drive size is really my main issue at this point - on a desktop I could feel comfortable going with an external Thunderbolt drive for user data, but not so much on a laptop, because that means it's no longer portable. (Or not portable without the external drive.)

Anyway, my main original point was that a lot of those sales are because of pent-up demand and the lack of other Mac options at the moment: Of course it's going to sell well, when people need to replace what they've had for years, and it's the only replacement available. That's not saying it's a bad machine - just that even an slightly below-average machine would sell well for Apple at the moment.

 

[cdpage]

So if that's the case maybe the Next Gen of iMac or MacPro would be better off if they dumb them down too...

it's like opposite world there. that said

Tim, could I please have an iMac with:

• High Glare
• Minimal RAM
• Less Ports
• No Monitor Rotation
• A Smaller Mouse
• More CPU Cores (speed is less important)
• Perhaps more permanent parts like RAM

 

[DStaal]

I think we will see an update to the Mac Mini, iMac, and Mac Pro lines in (hopefully Q1 but likely 2H) 2017. Intel is just sampling Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X HEDT CPUs, AMD just released new workstation GPUs, and a new unified Skylake Xeon platform is set to release in 2017 with the "biggest platform advancement since Nehalem." This hardware just wasn't ready to ship in time for the October event. Given this, my bet is that Apple will host an event which updates all of its desktop lines at once.

I think so too - but when, and what will they update to? And can I afford to wait that long with a machine that can't run current software so I can't update my skills?

 

[coolfactor]

But the new MacBook Pro is rubbish. /s

Seriously, I'm not surprised. One bit.

How do you know it's rubbish? Have you used it 8 hours a day for a week?

 

[Wild-Bill]

As for Apple losing it's way I completely disagree, I think the Touch Bar is being underestimated, I also think that people are moaning because they can't get their own way, some people are still moaning about the lack of a touchscreen Mac, when Apple have said a number of times that they won't do it, they have even given reasons as to why they won't do it and yet people still want to moan.

I disagree on the touch bar. For Apple to brand this machine a 'Pro', their primary imagery of the touch bar on their site, and the live demo should not have been a row of emojis.

It has already come out that they delayed the release of the new MacBook 'Pro' because of upstream manufacturing yield problems with the new keyboard. They delayed the release by a full quarter. I submit that, in those three months they should have devoted a lot more time to developing the touch bar to work with their own professional apps, say Logic Pro X, rather than focusing on ridiculous emoji icons.

 

[coolfactor]

It's really tempting to compare this to the election results.... but I shall refrain.

 

[dba7dba]

What I'd like to see is the comparison of Apple laptop sales with current update and the previous update. Should be easy for Apple since they compete against themselves only.

 

[ocnitsa]

It's funny how people keep trying to find someway to put a negative spin on this. Despite all of the weeping and wailing by the tiny minority, it's a huge success, period. Apple knows their target customer and makes products that appeal to the masses.

Apple knows their target customer. I agree.

Apple makes products that appeal to the masses. I agree.

But, Apple builds features into products that don't appeal to those masses. The masses still buy those products because Apple appeals to the masses. Yes, certain elements do appeal to those masses (portability and the way it looks and the prestige/aura of the company).

The way you put it implies that the products are designed for those people, but I honestly think if they were, the new models would include USB-A. I think that many people who don't know much about hardware or even input types will be surprised that they need a new dongle to connect their printer or whatever to their new computer...and I think many won't even know what to ask for exactly.

Honestly, it's like Apple has a multiple personality disorder. One side claims to "just work," another claims to be "magical," another claims to be "pro." Some would argue that different characteristics of a given model relate to those different keywords differently, but all three are evident...I think a fair number of people, though, are finding the "pro" part to be lacking.

It won't affect Apple's bottom line. And, it won't affect their future development. It did get us a discount on some dongles.

 

[Crzyrio]

So, the issue here is that for 3 years Apple sells its 13" 256 GB machine at $1,499, essentially unchanged for 3 years (I know because I bought the 13" Oct 2013 256 GB), then bumps the price up by $300 for the new entry level machine (if you opt for the touch bar with 256 GB and new form). It is what it is: a grab for more cash when the customer (myself and several others) feel that maybe a $100 increase was justified. But, since the computers are awesome, people it seems are willing to pay for them.

But you are getting more than you were before.

Before Price for a normal macbook : $X

New price of a NEW normal Macbook: : $X
New price of Normal Macbook + Additional Features = $X + 300

 

[Mainsail]

So, the issue here is that for 3 years Apple sells its 13" 256 GB machine at $1,499, essentially unchanged for 3 years (I know because I bought the 13" Oct 2013 256 GB), then bumps the price up by $300 for the new entry level machine (if you opt for the touch bar with 256 GB and new form). It is what it is: a grab for more cash when the customer (myself and several others) feel that maybe a $100 increase was justified. But, since the computers are awesome, people it seems are willing to pay for them.

Out of curiosity, why aren't you comparing the old entry level MBP 256GB for $1499 (price before new release) with the new entry level 2016 MBP 256GB for $1499? Wouldn't that be more of an apples to apples comparison....if so, then it seems like the prices are basically the same.

 

[now i see it]

Maybe waiting 527 days to update the damn thing had just a wee bit to do with the feverish ordering?
Customers were famished beyond precedent.