As reported at the Mac news site Macminute: “Apple captured 2.3 percent of the worldwide market share in the second quarter of 2003, down from 2.7 percent a year ago, but slightly up from the 2 percent it had in the first quarter, according to research firm IDC.“
Apple Worldwide Market Share Declines Year Over Year
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
130 Comments
2003-07-21 2:49 pm
Anonymous
“The facts are apple’s market share has increased in every single market except for professional desktops. It’s no wonder… their professional desktops were in a bad need of an update. It was Apple’s desktops which dragged Apple market share down. Thankfully, Apple’s newest desktops are poised to gain market sahre too. So no, Apple doesn’t have to become a reseller of comodity PCs, and no, they don’t have to sell computers at a loss and no they don’t need to compete in the bare bones comidity market and no they don’t need to allow clones.”
As we’ve seen with every one of their other computers… people aren’t so concerned about lowest possible price because Apple’s computers offer so much more for the same price as other PCs… and those bare bones PCs don’t offer much. What this proves is that consumers will buy your products if you can create such significant added benefit that it compells them to buy.”
See my previous post….the $749 emachine offers almost as much as a similarly specified dual 1.25 GHz G4.
Summary
• Dual 1.25GHz w/ 2MB L3 Cache per processor
• 512MB DDR333 SDRAM (PC2700) -1 DIMM
• 160GB Ultra ATA drive
• Optical 1 – Apple SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
• Optical 2 – None
• ATI Radeon 9000 Pro dual-display w/64MB DDR
• 56K internal modem
• Apple Pro Keyboard – U.S. English
• Mac OS – U.S. English
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/706…
Subtotal $2,049.00
The eMachine could be upgraded with a NForce2 dual channel motherboard,(firewire)and FX5200 GPU for around $150.
“Price is NOT the be all end all in selling computers.”
For most people it is <major> concern.
Eugenia, this topic was already covered and this was already proven. Why would you need to start the flame wars all over again, unless that is your intention to begin with?
2003-07-21 2:52 pm
Anonymous
They didn’t get a foot into the door because Apple refuse to sit down and negotiate. It is either what ever price quoted on Apple Store or the highway. Sorry, when a large orgarnisation is willing to give you the opportunity to sell them 14,000 computers, who really gives a shit whether or not you only make $50-$100 off each computer. Money is money and as so long as you’re not losing money off the transaction, why should you give a shit what the margins are on such a large purchase.
Publicity such as supplying 14,000 computers to an organisation is pretty hard to beat. Imagine if the headline was, “Apple supplies Munich with 14,000 eMac’s”. Imagine the publicity and attention it would receive. It would be the best example of proof of concept for any business to study.
Unfortunately Apple just doesn’t get it and they will never get it until they get some real hard core enterprise sales people who have the skills and the power to negotiate a deal.
2003-07-21 2:54 pm
Anonymous
From someone’s previous post:
“Updates and introduction of new software like iLife, iSync, Jaguar and Panther, Final Cut Pro/Express, Shake, DVD Studio Pro, Soundtrack, Keynote, Safari, Xcode.”
The *vast majority* of people do not have an “iLife”, do not have fancy cell phones that they “iSync”, do not make movies, do not make their own dvd’s, do not make their own soundtracks, cannot use a presentation package that hardly anyone else uses, don’t care that much about their browser, and lastly, do not develop code.
The simple matter is that Apple is focusing on the fringes of computer users. As the mass of computer users grow, this fringe will grow at a very small rate compared to the central mass. Apple will continue to survive, but their computers will only be used for very specialized purposes by people who are able to afford them.
Apple is “luxury computing”. Most people do not live in luxury and have to devote most of their time to survival, not frivolous activities. The livelihood of most people is not based on computer technology.
There’s nothing wrong with “luxury computing”. It just is something that will continue to shrink as the world has less and less place for luxury.
2003-07-21 2:54 pm
Anonymous
All I can say is:
PowerMac G4 Dual, Apple US price U$1,949.00
PowerMac G5 Dual, Apple Brazil price U$5.200,00 (R$14.990,00)
Now… how can Apple expect to increase sales outside US if they practice such prices?!?
2003-07-21 2:59 pm
2003-07-21 3:02 pm
Anonymous
Nice one, the price you quoted for the eMachine was in UNITED STATES DOLLARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! that price doesn’t include GST or shipping.
Think about what you post before posting it, then you won’t make such stupid ad hoc attacks. As for comparing an eMachine to a Apple PowerMac, what an idiot. Want to compare like with like, compare a Dell Precision or an IBM Intellistation to a PowerMac G5, then it will be a accurate comparision.
The question isn’t about raw price, but what Apple Mac provides for a give price vs. what a PC from a bigname vendor gives for a given price.
2003-07-21 3:09 pm
Anonymous
“All I can say is:
PowerMac G4 Dual, Apple US price U$1,949.00
PowerMac G5 Dual, Apple Brazil price U$5.200,00 (R$14.990,00)
Now… how can Apple expect to increase sales outside US if they practice such prices?!?”
The Apple $1,949 G4 costs about the annual salary of a Indian university graduate. India produces 100,000+ graduate engineers per annum.
The future market is for sub $100 devices. PCs will be as much commodities as microwave ovens and toasters in 5 years. I’ve never heard anyone boasting about how cool their toaster is.
2003-07-21 3:15 pm
Anonymous
“The future market is for sub $100 devices. PCs will be as much commodities as microwave ovens and toasters in 5 years. I’ve never heard anyone boasting about how cool their toaste”
sub $100 is a bit cheap there mate but i agree with the main idea here.
Just look at the new samsung PDA chips it clocks at 533 MHz. PCs can be had for $400. Apple is doing a good job of addressing a couple of group now. They tend to purchase the higher end devices. Apple is doing a good job with education in the US
Apple will need to target the mid-stream PC buyers in the US and the rise of computer users in developing nations. The snob pricing game has to end. They can do it gradually, and i think they have, but it has to end within the next 2 to 3 years. Apple is losing huge opportunities and they MUST keep IBM happy.
2003-07-21 3:24 pm
Anonymous
Apple will need to target the mid-stream PC buyers in the US and the rise of computer users in developing nations.
Are all contries external of North America considered developing nations?
2003-07-21 3:30 pm
Anonymous
“Are all contries external of North America considered developing nations?”
of course not. those are just two large markets, pc users in the US, and potential pc users in developing nations. I really think the latter is quite important because MS is not as entrenched in developing nations. Its a difficult sell though, very cost sensitive. but is also where the growth will come from in the future.
that said, if apple comes up with a solution for pc users in the US then i’d assume it could be targeted to Europe, Japan, S. Korea, australia, New Zealand, etc. etc. etc.
2003-07-21 3:31 pm
Anonymous
Has anyone calculated the market share of Ferrari, Porsche, or Lamborgini?
Small market share is also a sign of excellence and quality.
2003-07-21 3:34 pm
Anonymous
The problem with that analogy is that the Ferrari, Porche and Lamborgini all run fuel that can be purchased anywhere. Macs cannot run PC software (available everywhere) and by losing market share they’re losing store shelf space.
Seriously, there are some Mac users which refuse to accept the fact that losing market share is a *bad* thing. How anyone can be so blind as to spin it to a positive is beyond me.
2003-07-21 3:38 pm
Anonymous
To use the same analogy you could argue that almost all methods of transportation will get you to your destination. Thus on a Mac you have almost all the same CATEGORIES of software you have on Windows, ie graphics, finance, games, internet, communications, office & works, etc…
Surely?
2003-07-21 3:41 pm
Anonymous
Apple has COOL commercials, COOL looking machines, COOL looking OS. But has their marketing been successful? Not really. So maybe they should consider marketing in a more objective voice and less abstract. They should mention OS X in their commercials. They should mention what OS X can do.
Cool can only get them so far. And it gives them an image of being overpriced – which in the case of iBooks, for example, is not true at all. They should advertise the fact that they are in fact CHEAPER than comparable PC laptops.
2003-07-21 3:43 pm
Anonymous
I agree that losing market share is a bad thing.
With a growing worldwide market, however, the Mac user-base could in fact INCREASE in number but still be recorded as a DECREASE because of the huge surge in Windows users worldwide. Simple statistics like this can be misleading. Concrete numbers woiulf be preferred, broken down by continent and market.
2003-07-21 3:48 pm
Anonymous
Seriously, there are some Mac users which refuse to accept the fact that losing market share is a *bad* thing. How anyone can be so blind as to spin it to a positive is beyond me.
Welcome to the world of the “Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field” in Jobs-land down really is up!!!
The thing is…it won’t be much longer and there will be more commercial software available for Linux than for Mac…and one of the major draws of *nix geeks to the Mac will be gone. If Photoshop and/or Quark come to Linux, or Gimp and Scribus become considerably more mature and useful…Apple will be in SERIOUS trouble.
I don’t think Apple’s dead yet…they’ve lived this long with far bleaker market outlooks than this, right?
However, I think Apple’s relevance is rapidly fading, much like what occurred at SGI during the 90’s.
Sure their stuff’s good…but not good enough to warrant the premium anymore.
64-bit desktop…who really cares? Unix core…Windows XP is just as stable as OS X from what I’ve seen. Ease of use…the software we’re used to is the easiest to use…Many aspects of Macs are too different for average Joe Windows user to feel comfortable with, without considerable time investment for retraining, plus default out of the box Windows XP really is rather “dumbed-down” to a nearly idiot-proof level (i did say NEARLY).
2003-07-21 3:49 pm
Anonymous
“Nice one, the price you quoted for the eMachine was in UNITED STATES DOLLARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! that price doesn’t include GST or shipping.”
“I was comapring it with an almost identically priced US$799 eMac.”
Think about what you post before posting it, then you won’t make such stupid ad hoc attacks. As for comparing an eMachine to a Apple PowerMac, what an idiot.
Macs are cheaply built too – in fact they are <below> the quality of many PCs. Any person that knows anything about PC hardware knows that a quality generic PC is better quality than a Dell or any other major branded PC. The eMachine has an Asrock (Asus) MB and Apple qaulity (cheap) parts.
“Want to compare like with like, compare a Dell Precision or an IBM Intellistation to a PowerMac G5, then it will be a accurate comparision.”
There is nothing special about the G5 hardware. It isn’t even workstation quality. A cheap consumer (FX5200) US$75 GPU, non-ECC generic DDR RAM, no SATA RAID. No self respecting gamer would build something that low specification. How about a Matrox Parhelia 256MB GPU? What about 10,000 RPM SATA RAID (let alone a proper 15,000 RPM SCSI RAID)? Why not use RD1066 ECC RAM? By the time the G5 is on sale in Australia my local PC shop will have NForce 3 boards (SATA RAID is standard)in stock (they already sells Opterons). Maybe I will buy a Parhelia or 9800Pro GPU and some ECC DDR433 RAM to go with it.
“The question isn’t about raw price, but what Apple Mac provides for a give price vs. what a PC from a bigname vendor gives for a given price.”
And what is that exactly? Major hardware vendors sell way below retail for large clients. A major vendor will supply a corporate desktop costs less than half the price of a a Mac of equal performance for large clients.
http://www.ap.dell.com/ap/au/en/gen/default.htm Seems that Dell Australia is offering the 4600 for $1799 (AUD$300 more than the base 800/128/cd only eMac)
Dell™ Dimension™ 4600 Desktop AUD$1799
Processor
Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor 2.66GHz
Memory
512MB PC2700 DDR-SDRAM at 333MHz
Hard Drive
60GB1 Hard Drive
Display
17″ CRT Colour Monitor (16.0″v.i.s.)
Dell™ Dimension™ 8300 Desktop AUD$2499
Processor
Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor 2.8GHz with Hyper-Threading Technology
Memory
256MB PC3200 DDR-SDRAM at 400MHz
Hard Drive
80GB1 HDD
Monitor
17″ CRT Colour Monitor (16.0″v.i.s.)
Optional Drive
DVD2+ RW3/+R with CD-RW Combo Drive
Seems like Dell Australia are offering <twice> the performance as similar priced eMacs!
2003-07-21 3:57 pm
Anonymous
K, Both of you quoted articles, which I really don’t think you read:
Bascule:
A brief synopsis:
Revenue UP 8.1% to $1.55 billion
Sales UP, selling 771,000 systems in the fourth quarter
From your linked article
The Cupertino, Calif., computer maker reported a profit of $19 million, or five cents a share, compared with earnings of $32 million, or nine cents a share, in the same quarter last year. Apple’s quarter ended June 28.
Revenue rose 8.1% to $1.55 billion from $1.43 billion in the year-earlier period.
In other words – revenue was up, but profits are way down. 9 cents this quarter last year – 5 cents this quarter. In other words they are selling more of the things that they don’t make much money on.
Revenue UP, Profits DOWN. Not good.
Swamp donkey
Apple shipped 770,000 Macintosh computers, its primary revenue source, during the quarter. In the same period a year ago, Apple sold 808,000 Macs, but this year’s third-quarter number was up from the 711,000 units shipped in the second quarter of 2003.
For the fourth quarter, which ends Sept. 30, Anderson said Apple expects a “high single-digit increase in revenue and a slight increase in earnings” over its third-quarter figures. Analysts surveyed by Thomson First Call expect earnings of 6 cents a share on sales of $1.56 billion.
K, to continue with Bascule using SD’s quote., Bascule said sales UP 771k. Well, as we can see from SD’s article quote, they sold almost 38k less units this quarter from same Q last year. I’ve read the same thing in numerous other articles.
Sales DOWN.
As for SD, things aren’t looking so rosy because they are still down from last year. Yay, they are projected to go up to 6 cents/ share but that is still down from 9 cents last year.
—————
This year’s economy is no worse than last year’s and IT spending is slightly up, so they don’t really have much of an excuse.
In another article someone linked above, it was also demonstrated that they made almost no money on their core business. All their profit was on their investments. In other words, their rainy day fund is keeping them dry.
So that tells us they don’t have any wriggle room in pricing their machines down. All of those people who think they can increase market share by decreasing their prices had better look elsewhere.
—————–
As for mindshare, many of you are speaking from a techie view – multitasking, etc. People don’t not buy Macs because of that. Ask any Windows person why they wouldn’t switch.
“Why wouldn’t you buy a Macintosh?”
Person A in my Office
“I’ve never dealt with Apple computers, I’ve only ever used IBM [Windows] computers.” He sits just on the other side of my OS X box and hasn’t ever been curious about it.
Person B “It’s not compatible and I’d have to buy new software, and I don’t want to learn something new.”
Person C “I don’t know – aren’t they all phased out?”
Me: “They still make good computers.” But she expounds on that: “They don’t have the special stuff on it… I haven’t heard of Apple computers coming out with anything new and different and better.” (I was typing that as she spoke.) In other words, she’s making up reasons for not even considering them. And she knows this is an Apple box behind me (to be fair it was here before her).
Person #4: “I don’t think they make any software that is compatible with Amateur Radio, that runs on Apple.”
You can call this #3 the most irrational, but it’s the the most common. They won’t because they won’t. You could call her stupid, but she’s far from stupid – she just doesn’t care about it. Apple has targeted itself to the artsy fartsy crowd for so long, it has absolutely no reach with the average Joe. Come on, look at the stupid collarless shirts The Steve wears. Like 1985. Spend some money on focus groups or something.
2003-07-21 3:58 pm
Anonymous
“Has anyone calculated the market share of Ferrari, Porsche, or Lamborgini?
Small market share is also a sign of excellence and quality.”
Porsche is jointly controlled by the Piech and Porsche families who also jointly co.trol VW (they are cousins).
Ferrari (and Maserati) is a subsidiary of FIAT. Ferrari went broke in the 60s. It runs at a massive loss. Ferraris use of cheap FIAT parts.
Lamborghini is owned 100% by VW (so is Bentley). Lamborghini has <never> made a profit on cars – it was originally a tractor maker.
2003-07-21 3:59 pm
Anonymous
“Uhh, why? The emachine will certainly have the same quality of components as a Mac. …”
By your logic, given eMachine’s ultra cheap pricing, they should command a larger market share than those who sell more expensive boxes. However, they don’t command a greater market share than Dell or HP.
I think most people want to pay for quality product. Sure, there will be those who will purchase a KIA or Hyundai for example, but most don’t mind paying a premium for a better built Honda or Toyota.
2003-07-21 4:02 pm
Anonymous
…that Apple is gaining market share every day and Microsoft infidels are committing suicides by thousands.
2003-07-21 4:05 pm
Anonymous
Exotic cars are usually (major)loss leaders…that is why they are owned by major carmakers. The exoticars (and Formula 1 racing teams) act as technology testbeds and PR machines. They usually lose a fortune on them.
2003-07-21 4:08 pm
Anonymous
“…that Apple is gaining market share every day and Microsoft infidels are committing suicides by thousands.”
And Bill Gates has given up his wealth and become a Franciscan monk!
2003-07-21 4:13 pm
Anonymous
I used to use Microsoft computers all the time and I thought they were ok. Then, one day, I saw a commercial on TV where some girl told me how evil Microsoft almost destroyed the Christmas for her and it was her Apple notebook that saved it. I got scared. I like Christmas and I didn’t want it to be ruined by evil Windows XP. The next day I went to the nearest computer store and bought a brand new shiny 12” iBook.
It is absolutely beautiful. The OS X is beautiful too. Most of the time I have nothing to do with my computer, so I just move the cursor around, place it over different pictures on the screen and see what happens. It is very relaxing and entertaining. Also, my iBook keeps my lap really warm. Those two features alone, plus the comfort of knowing that my Christmas is safe well justify the price of the iBook.
2003-07-21 4:17 pm
Anonymous
Ok, Apple is loosing ground in the average market, but what is happening in the areas where Apple is really targeting?
I was said that Apple’s market share in the video field is around 70% !! What is happening there? What about the audio field?
I mean, is obvious that Apple is racing to win the multimedia professional market!
2003-07-21 4:26 pm
Anonymous
< Eugenia, this topic was already covered and this was already proven. Why would you need to start the flame wars all over again, unless that is your intention to begin with? >
Eugenia cannot control the news, she reports the news, good or bad. Just because you do not agree with a particular topic doesnt mean that others do not. Im going to tell you what she says, if you dont like it you dont have to read it. No one is starting a flame war but I suspect many of you are looking for it.
< The facts are apple’s market share has increased in every single market except for professional desktops. It’s no wonder… their professional desktops were in a bad need of an update. It was Apple’s desktops which dragged Apple market share down. Thankfully, Apple’s newest desktops are poised to gain market sahre too. So no, Apple doesn’t have to become a reseller of comodity PCs, and no, they don’t have to sell computers at a loss and no they don’t need to compete in the bare bones comidity market and no they don’t need to allow clones. >
Show me some proof that they have increased marketshare ? I havent seen any news or analysts sites that have that info, I will tell you why. You are fishing. IDC has shown Apple went down and DELL went up and it burns your butt so you and every other Mac user comes in here and starts spouting false statistics. Now, cmon people lets use some common sense. Apple is not poised to regain marketshare because look at the userbase they are going after, the home desktop. Average consumers dont know what an OS is, they dont know what 64 bit is and to be honest they could give a crap less, they see the Mac in the corner price tag $3,000 + for the Mac, in the other corner they see a Compaq, HP, Sony, Toshiba, eMachine for $799.00 or even $500.00. Their only requirement is that they want to do e-mail, web browse, their kids type up reports for school. Guess what, they are going for the PC, its a better value and it does what they want it to do. Price plays alot inot what decisions people make and yes Eugenia in her other editorial was right on the money, otherwise Apple will be in trouble.
2003-07-21 4:50 pm
Anonymous
Your thinking is way off…
The future will be different from now. The US has only about 170 million citizens.
Each, China and India have more than one Billion each !! That is a potential market one must not miss out or you are history. These markets will emerge and Europe/the US will be pretty marginal markets in a few years time from now for the selling of many products.
2003-07-21 4:53 pm
Anonymous
which actually are none in the first place since there is nothing in common. For driving a Porsche, I don’t really need anybody else to drive one — I get my tyres, gas, etc.. either way. On the other hand, the last five remaining Mac users will have serious trouble getting hardware, drivers, software, etc…
2003-07-21 4:54 pm
Anonymous
Has anyone calculated the market share of Ferrari, Porsche, or Lamborgini? Small market share is also a sign of excellence and quality.
Small marketshare can also mean other things…
Of course marketshare counts! Application writers are NOT going to write apps for Apple if there are few or no buyers
Once again you are confusing the significance of market share with the significance of total sales, and even then your logic is specious.
Total sales is obviously related to marketshare! If Apple had decent marketshare, many more software developers would be tempted to write their apps for apple machines. Don’t you understand…Windows wins BECAUSE it has APPS! Come on Apple, I want to buy one of your machines!
I fear a flame war comming.
my fire proff suit for this one. I can hear it now ” It is not overall marketshare but the user base”
Sorry I am an APPLE fruit but I know that Apple has to start to regain MARKETSHARE to really make an impact, and not be a niche player.
*DUCKS BEHIND FIREWALL*
Apple already knows that… A few months ago one of their chief guys said in a big open meeting that their main effort now is to go back to 5%. Apple already knows the dangers… However, my personal opinion is that they aren’t going to get there with these prices they got, unfortunately, as the PC world has gone down to become super cheap, for good or worse… This is why I suggested this:
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=4037
Because I do care… for some reason I don’t quite know myself why… maybe I secretly like Steve Jobs and I don’t know it.
Seriously, who cares about market share? All the important apps are ported, most of the worthwile games are ported, expansion parts are easily available, so who cares if market share is 0.2%, 2% or 20%. Heck, I use BeOS which only has a handfull of usefull apps, and I dont care / complain about market share. It works for me, thats all that matters. And since I run an obscure platform, I dont need a virus checker/firewall and other crap software.
Apple needs more exposure. It’s as simple as that. Most people don’t KNOW about OSX and they imagine Apple machines as OS9.x style hindered core with what some have tried to call “multitasking”. Next to this they see their beloved Windows XP and the “Windows XP can do soo much, you can edit 25 second movies with Windows XP” smiley adds from Microsoft.
We need people to have easy access to these machines. PRICE, oh my god this cannot be over emphasized. They can produce excellent notebooks for $1,899 (AU) being cheaper than base model Dells but they can’t produce a PC for less than $1,500 (AU). In Australia, most PC manufacturers can create $900 (AU) PCs that include a monitor and possibly a CD-BURNER. The iMac is nice but it’s just slightly too expensive. Go on Apple. Create a super-cheap G3. The cheapskates (most of society) umong us will buy it.
well, I don’t think it is the same for all users. Most people want support, they want to sleep at night knowing that a new version, with new bug fixes, is coming soon. I don’t like the fact that BeOS is now unsupported and it has the bugs it always had with no one being there to fix them. Sorry, for you, BeOS might work as the OS of choice, for me, doesn’t anymore. I want new hardware support, I want an activce development community, I want new versions. To get those, you do need a healthy and alive company. Therefore, your “Seriously, who cares about market share?” is laughable for 99% of the “normal”, “non-geeky” people. Sorry Zenja, but it is.
“Seriously, who cares about market share? All the important apps are ported, most of the worthwile games are ported, expansion parts are easily available, so who cares if market share is 0.2%, 2% or 20%.”
Well Apple may not be number two for long with Linux’s rise on the desktop. Then the apps and the games will begin to disapear. Vendors are unlikely to support three systems.
“Heck, I use BeOS which only has a handfull of usefull apps, and I dont care / complain about market share. It works for me, thats all that matters. And since I run an obscure platform, I dont need a virus checker/firewall and other crap software.”
But will you be doing so in another five years time? How about ten? That hardware will be looking awfully old by then and there won’t be the drivers for newer hardware.
I’ll probably be counted as 3 Windows users or so for a while, though I just gave all my Windows PCs to family members (who I still live with). I’m using an iMac that cost less than $1400.
Still, if that were $1200 and came with, say, no Airport (mine has Airport) and a G3 or a slower G4 (mine’s 800 MHz), I think a few new fans would enter the arena. Prices are just *slightly* out of reach. This machine was one of the cheaper ones, but it’s plenty zippy.
Maybe Apple will lower the prices of G4’s soon, with the advent of G5’s. PPC is sorta hitting the same deal as x86 in that faster is mattering less and less. So maybe hardware will start costing less to manufacture, and manufacturers will start to think more in terms of lower prices than in terms of faster chips. Being a hardware company, Apple could stand to gain more by developing cheaper ways to make the same hardware / cheaper hardware with similar specs to current items, as opposed to making more expensive hardware.
Well it is a shame really, personally although i don’t own one myself (i use linux), i think that osx is the best desktop os there is. i’ve never heard any mac user complain about their computer, and i know quiet a view, whereas i never really hear anybody getting excited about their windows boxes, more to the point people complain most of the time (altohugh that has ceased a little bit with win xp). i think what it boils down to is the price, people are just not prepared to pay 400 more … shame really.
PS.: i don’t care i get flamed, i am simply voicing my personal opinion and if there are people out there who have got the time to waste to flame other posts – please go ahead, it is not my time you are waisting.
Just MHO — flame away
That is the ultimate question..
who and why??
If mac and apple stop pretending they are leading the computer industry and trying to price and market as such .. they might get some respect.
Nobody who likes performance buys something from a known lier about performance. (- market share)
If mac and apple stop pretending that there users care much about animations to close and open windows and instead focus on completing OSX to the functionality of windows and linux (its not .. its just not yet.. its not even if u can drag and drop .. it dosent mean the developers have what they want.. they dont yet) .. then maybe buisness would take them seriously.
If apple wants to maintain the a market in multimedia .. they cant buy up the few producers of mac multimedia sofware.. and bundling it with apple. No market for multi media apps.. no developers.. no market.
Apples killing itself…
Its once again creating a reality distortion field for the g5.. so no performance user will believe them .. so none will buy them.
Apple needs to actually focus on a buiesness operating system.. not flashy animations for when u close windows?(hello get the f out of here u window dont piss around annoying me). Otherwise buisness users will continue to ignore apple.
Apple needs to create a market for multimedia software.. not destroy the mac audio market buy buying logic.. and the mac video market by buying final cut. (Apple didnt write any of its amazing programs did it…? not itunes.. not final cut etc etc.
Apple is the cause of its own downfall.. Im surprise u guys havent realised this a couple of years ago when everyone else did (excpet apple).
Glenn
don’t mention that apple’s share of the laptop market has jumped to ±6 percent…..
“well, I don’t think it is the same for all users. Most people want support, they want to sleep at night knowing that a new version, with new bug fixes, is coming soon.”
I would think that most users want a computer that doesn’t have bugs in the first place, and will work for 10 or 15 years without needing to be updated or replaced, like any good TV or hi fi system.
Market share is a useless indicator of how an individual company is doing, because it is affected by a number of irrelevant, external factors.
Here’s a bit more accurate assessment of how Apple is doing:
http://www.smartmoney.com/bn/ON/index.cfm?story=ON-20030716-001490-…
A brief synopsis:
Revenue UP 8.1% to $1.55 billion
Sales UP, selling 771,000 systems in the fourth quarter
So what exactly does declining market share indicate? An increase in total sales volume of all computer systems, not a decrease in Apple’s sales, revenue, or profits.
Apple has an installed base of 32 million machines, or 12% of the US market. Contrarily, Dell has an installed base of about 26 million systems, or 10% of the US market.
and how much does HP, Gateway, and other PC makers have ? What is the combine install based of PC’s maker compared to Apple.
People will still find something in Macs to bitch about.
cuz it is slow, somehow.
as another example, look no further than Netscape
If Microsoft has proven one thing, it is that marketing is just as important as the product itself.
I life in Europe, and the Apple marketing is missing the point here. A poster of an iMac “thinking different” is not going to generate any sales. Most Europeans are completely unaware of the merits of the Mac. Apple needs to market the benefits of its products – plain and simple.
Just my 2 euro-cents.
apple has been dying since at least the last twenty years… i fully expect them to continue dying for another twenty years…
Of course marketshare counts! Application writers are NOT going to write apps for Apple if there are few or no buyers. At years-end I want to buy a nice laptop…maybe it will be an Apple, but not at New Zealand prices! I was even told by one retailer that Apple NZ are ripping people down here off.
First of all, they should get stronger in their niche markets, and get into new ones. Strengthen core markets like Graphical, Sound, Video, 3D, DTP, but also get into scientific market, CAD, EDA, medical imaging, modeling, simulation, visualisation,..
People who have both a Sun Blade 2000 and a Windows XP computer on their desk, should be able to replace them both with a powermac g5.
Mac OS X has a unix base, but Apple isn’t taking enough advantage from it IMO. In the same sense they should be able to sell more servers if they make it cheaper (initial cost and support), keep the unlimited client support, and make it allot easier to set up and administrate.
Other than that, I don’t think Apple can compete head on with Microsoft on the end-user market. They can make a cheaper product, but only geeks will buy it. There are just too many myths floating around, from the OS9 era. What they need first is better marketing (one clip countering one mac myth for example), and world-wide marketing. Not just in the US. Later on they can make their products a bit cheaper.
Application writers are NOT going to write apps for Apple if there are few or no buyers.
It’s a bit more complicated than that. If you write graphical applications, write it for a mac. They still have like 80% market share in that field. The same goes for allot other niche markets.
But yeah, they should make sure they don’t get pressed away entirely on the end user home market.
They say. And if Apple is at 0.1% market share they will still say it. And by the next year these two last people who still used Macs will be gone also
0.00% Market share, but hey it doesn’t matter
Wintel is better anyway, not some elitist(Linux) or rich mans ghetto(Mac) platform but the computing platform of the people
According to Steve Jobs at the WWDC, there are 7 million OS X users. Considering that Apple considers OS X to be the future of the company, it means Apple really has about 0.5% of the installed base of personal computers.
In other words, Apple is irrelevant. While they keep selling machines to long-time Apple customers, Apple has failed to expand their base of users.
Approximately 80% of Mac owners have refused to upgrade to OS X. Two things stand out here.
First, OS X doesn’t run well on most of Apple’s installed base of machines. It may be many of these Classic OS users will end up moving to PC because they simply cannot afford the new Apple hardware that is required for OS X.
Second, many Mac users simply do not like OS X. Mac users weren’t crying out for a huge bloatware candyland frankenstein OS running on top of 3 kinds of UNIX. Instead, Mac users were crying out for memory protection, multitasking, and stability. Instead of a fixed Classic OS, Mac users got something from another company that was hacked to run Mac apps.
Someone else, in a rather brilliant post, mentioned that Apple is competing with their own ISV’s, effectively killing the seeds of their own growth. Apple is going to find themselves haunted by their hubris and arrogance, thinking they can be a sole source supplier of all the hardare and software their customer needs and wants.
Apple had better hope they can gobble enough share away from Sun, HP, IBM, SGI, and other workstation vendors. They certainly are in no position to gain share in the personal computer market.
Overall, one can only look at Apple with pity. They have a good product and are doing everything they can to make sure it doesn’t do “insanely great” in the market.
1) The market isn’t about raw price but price/performance ratio.
2) So-called performance people make up 0.1% of the total market. Joe and Jane average don’t give a tinkers cuss, they simply want a computer that works.
3) Apple needs to bring their AUS and UK prices inline with the US operation. Charging up to in some cases $400 more than a machine bought in the US makes no sense. Yes, that does take into account GST.
4) The price issue isn’t about straight price but what you get for the price. If Apple started bundling Office X with all their machines I am sure it would be a compelling reason for many users to change.
I hope you realise that the figure given is actually the number of REGISTERED MacOS X users. Every person I know can never be bothered registering their software, what possible benefit does it give you?
and how much does HP, Gateway, and other PC makers have ? What is the combine install based of PC’s maker compared to Apple.
One in every 9 computers in America is a Mac.
Of course marketshare counts! Application writers are NOT going to write apps for Apple if there are few or no buyers
Once again you are confusing the significance of market share with the significance of total sales, and even then your logic is specious.
The Apple platform is quite well supported by a number of big names in software development, more than any other platform besides Windows.
Where is the application support problem on Macs? What is an area that is weak? I’m certain I’ll hear “games”, and once someone mentioned development tools for foreign platforms (i.e. Windows or console game systems), both of which are areas where the Mac is weak, I suppose, but for any average adult American interested in purchasing a computer these areas are not an issue.
According to Steve Jobs at the WWDC, there are 7 million OS X users. Considering that Apple considers OS X to be the future of the company, it means Apple really has about 0.5% of the installed base of personal computers.
Do you have any sort of source on this? What number are you using for the total installed base of computers in the world?
Zeitgeist (http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html) would place OS X systems at around 1% of the total installed base of computers in the world.
Bad?, no!
Niche?, elementary.
The “Think Different” marketing is an infantile disaster that insults the intelligence of the less mentally fit. They have a tradition of puting customers upside down once or twice a year, and like to play war games with developers and retailers. Nevertheless, their sales are not rocketing down, they are simply not rocketing up, elementary too.
Why don’t we dissect these numbers first. What is Apple’s share of the non-server market? And the consumer, business and educational markets?
Those $400 fairly-stable PCs are going to sell like hotcakes.
> Second, many Mac users simply do not like OS X. Mac users
> weren’t crying out for a huge bloatware candyland
> frankenstein OS running on top of 3 kinds of UNIX. Instead,
> Mac users were crying out for memory protection,
> multitasking, and stability. Instead of a fixed Classic OS,
> Mac users got something from another company that was hacked
> to run Mac apps.
Mac users were crying out for memory protection, multitasking and stability? OSX has all of these three feaures. Not only that but they got them in an absolutely brilliant package with excellent networking/io code from FreeBSD, apple-written platform code and the very mature mach kernel, message queue.
I discover to see how this is “hacked together”. Microsoft (which I gather you are a big fan of) has ripped some of this very code from FreeBSD and “hacked” it into their Windows OSs.
A fixed classic would have been very hard to deliver on. Firstly, classic’s kernel (which I do know very little about) was purely realtime, a concept that doesn’t work very well for Desktop/Server OSs and is better suited to embedded applications/information kiosks. Also, I/O was a complete mess in terms of interactivity. You couldn’t download something and do so much as open a menu bar as it would pause the download.
Anyone with the slightest clue as to how software is written should be able to understand that a re-write would be the only near possible solution. Not to mention the fact that the UI needed a big overhall. Prettiness is a lot more important than it used to be and the engine behind platinum wasn’t themable.
Apples are not expensive compared to off-the-shelf PCs built with quality components. A similarly configured Athlon-based PC w/ 15″ LCD display to my iMac is within $100 after adding in the WinXP OS, MSWorks, and MSMoney/Quicken licenses. In the terms of a $2000 system $100 more is nothing.
Now figure that the iMac isn’t going to need a new video card, CPU upgrade, RAM expansion anywhere near as soon since it doesn’t have the rediculously fast upgrade cycle driven by games. The TCO over 5 years on the Mac platform becomes $500 or more lower.
Sure you can get a crappy PC box for $600 with display but you’ll need to upgrade the thing every two years when Junior can’t play Quake 5 or whatever is the latest and greatest FPS.
I’ll freely admit I do not know at this time how a 1Ghz G4 compares with the 1.67Ghz (actual clock speed) Athlon XP used above. After this evening I will have a better idea as I begin using the iMac for my own primary usage role which is mostly multimedia content creation.
I think Apple made a few bad moves in recent months, IMO it started with the introduction of the LCD-equipped iMac which was always too expensive for a consumer machine. They pushed the idea of making pricier-but-so-attractive products has not paid off all that well, I think (I DON’T have numbers, just pure speculation, but the switchers I personally know mostly got iBooks, perhaps it’s the logical first step though, start with a cheaper machine for a good test-drive). The eMac kinda rectified that (albeit a bit late): G4 power for a very attractive price. Moving the G4 to the consumer line is a very good thing though, they really have to drop the G3 (it’s good enough in some ways, but generally it’s just too old despite the improved, faster models).
The G5s, regardless whether they’re really all that fast or not, are still a huge improvement over the aging G4 architecture, I suspect they will do very well starting this fall.
Customer response: Yeah, yeah… but show me the $1000 PC, will you?
Jim, you sound like an old commercial that doesn’t work, specially when you mention “upgrade cycle driven by games” and 5 years TCO.
Nice try, but your -pricing scheme- is not competitive in the real world.
“Upgrade cycle driven by games”??? LOL!!! ;>D
RE: Jim Kane (IP: —.tznet.com)
I’ll freely admit I do not know at this time how a 1Ghz G4 compares with the 1.67Ghz (actual clock speed) Athlon XP used above. After this evening I will have a better idea as I begin using the iMac for my own primary usage role which is mostly multimedia content creation.
I would say that it is pretty close to a Pentium III 1.3Ghz. It may sound slow, however, what the average user wants is over all speed, not clock speed. What is the use of having a fast processor with a slow hard disk. It has just been recently when hardware vendors FINALLY started using 7200rpm disks for their computers. Running Windows XP or 2000 on anything slower than a 7200rpm is painful.
RE: josha (IP: —.sympatico.ca)
I think Apple made a few bad moves in recent months, IMO it started with the introduction of the LCD-equipped iMac which was always too expensive for a consumer machine. They pushed the idea of making pricier-but-so-attractive products has not paid off all that well, I think (I DON’T have numbers, just pure speculation, but the switchers I personally know mostly got iBooks, perhaps it’s the logical first step though, start with a cheaper machine for a good test-drive). The eMac kinda rectified that (albeit a bit late): G4 power for a very attractive price. Moving the G4 to the consumer line is a very good thing though, they really have to drop the G3 (it’s good enough in some ways, but generally it’s just too old despite the improved, faster models).
Well, IMHO, they should never have released the LCD iMac and instead created the eMac, boosted the FSB, video card and possibly replace the USB1 with USB2.
That would be about the only thing I would change. As for the LCD, LCD screens are still a novelty. The end users seens absolutely no benefit in paying another $500 for something that is seems to more of a fashion statement than something that is practical.
The problem with your argument is that if this hypothetical family bought a Mac instead of a PC to eliminate the upgrade cycle then Junior will not be playing any new games at all. If they would be satisfied with a Mac that they never had to upgrade they should also be happy with a much cheaper PC as without the games they would have no need to upgrade a PC either. If the machines were to be used for the exact same purpose then the upgrade cycle would be the same. There is nothing magical about a Mac the allows it to run newer applications that require more power without upgrading.
What is the use of having a fast processor with a slow hard disk. It has just been recently when hardware vendors FINALLY started using 7200rpm disks for their computers. Running Windows XP or 2000 on anything slower than a 7200rpm is painful.
And don’t forget about the ram. It’s more important than the processor for overall speed (mac or pc).
And don’t forget about the ram. It’s more important than the processor for overall speed (mac or pc).
Agreed. No use having a super-duper multi-gigahertz machine when the RAM is running as the speed equivilant to a horse and buggy.
Apple is now capitilised at no more than it was in 1984 (counting inflation). It has 1/10 the marketshare of 1984. It made 1/20th the net profit in 2002 as 1984.
No sensible person would believe that Apple can recover. Apple technology is fine but it has abysmal management.
Steve Jobs destroyed Next and is doing exactly the same to Apple.
Apple has maybe 2-3 years left.
Read Warren Buffet on running businesses. He says only a company with a continuous history of profits and honest and competent management is viable.
Well, you have seen Apple’s demise for twenty years, true. In that time, they lost almost 20% market share as well. Now, here is the problem with your thinking: Aplle can’t keep on going as it was for another 20 years, simply because there is nothing left — they’d be at minus 18% market share by that time… 😉
To keep it serious again, Apple has to reeeally fundamentally change in a lot of respects or they’ll have a problem, as they always had: True, their death hasn’t happend *yet*, but going down from 20% to virtually nothing is pretty close, not at all as healthy as you wish us to believe.
I don’t want to argue whether or not an Apple is fairly priced in comparison to a similarly equipped PC — instead I will take this as granted for the sake of the argument.
The problem is not whether the price is appropriate, the problem is that not many people want to crank such an amount, no matter how fair it is. If most people don’t want to spend more than 500 or 1000 on a system, what do they care about fairly priced systems at the 2000-range? Apple is clueless.
“Well, you have seen Apple’s demise for twenty years, true. In that time, they lost almost 20% market share as well. Now, here is the problem with your thinking: Aplle can’t keep on going as it was for another 20 years, simply because there is nothing left — they’d be at minus 18% market share by that time… ;-)”
Apple has actually lost 90% of the original 20% market share they had in 1984 not 20%.
That is a disaster in any industry.
“Apples killing itself…
Its once again creating a reality distortion field for the g5.. so no performance user will believe them .. so none will buy them.”
You should ACTUALLY TRY one out before you post something that makes you look biased. I don’t care what the tool is as long as it gets the job done best.
I tried the G5 out at the expo, and it seems a HELLUVA lot faster than my dual xeon system.
I’m getting one to use at work, and later on I’ll be getting one for my home to place beside my Dell Precision.
sure sounds like apple has hit rock bottom…
———————
Apple rises after beating Q3 estimates
Revenue climbs along with Macintosh computer sales
By Rex Crum, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 6:01 PM ET Jul 17, 2003
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) — Apple Computer shares advanced Thursday after the company reported better-than-expected third-quarter results due, in part, to a strong education market and IPod music-player sales.
As trading progressed, Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple (AAPL) bucked the tech sector’s swoon and rose $1.03 or 5.2 percent, to close at $20.90, its best finish in more than a year.
On Wednesday, the company reported income of $19 million, or 5 cents a share, down from $32 million, or 9 cents a share, in its fiscal 2002 third quarter. However, revenue for the period ending June 30 totaled $1.55 billion, up 8 percent from $1.43 billion a year ago.
“Strong portable, IPod, and display sales offset the profit (decrease),” said Fred Anderson, Apple’s CFO, adding that Apple posted its highest revenue in 11 quarters.
The results beat the consensus estimates of analysts surveyed by Thomson First Call, which called for a profit of 3 cents a share on sales of $1.49 billion.
“Customer response to our new products has been very strong,” said CEO Steve Jobs, who touted the success of the company’s ITunes music store and new IPod portable music players. Apple also closed the quarter out by unveiling its new Power Mac G5, which the company says is the world’s fastest personal computer.
Apple shipped 770,000 Macintosh computers, its primary revenue source, during the quarter. In the same period a year ago, Apple sold 808,000 Macs, but this year’s third-quarter number was up from the 711,000 units shipped in the second quarter of 2003.
Apple officials Mac shipments reflected a 5 percent increase in education sales during the quarter, and that the company was optimistic for the back-to-school selling season.
Notebooks continued to account for a growing piece of Apple’s sales making up 46 percent of all Mac shipment during the quarter. The company shipped a combined 351,000 IBook and PowerBook portable computers during the quarters, compared to 287,000 desktop IMac units.
Additionally, IPod sales reached 304,000 devices, a nearly six-fold increase above the 54,000 IPods Apple sold in the third quarter of 2002.
Anderson said Apple also continued to open new retail stores in the quarter, adding six new stores between April and June, as well as three more stores in July to reach 62 stores. The company has a goal of having 70 stores open by Thanksgiving.
Analysts weigh in on outlook
For the fourth quarter, which ends Sept. 30, Anderson said Apple expects a “high single-digit increase in revenue and a slight increase in earnings” over its third-quarter figures. Analysts surveyed by Thomson First Call expect earnings of 6 cents a share on sales of $1.56 billion.
Industry analysts said the growth in IPod sales, along the with the initial success of Apple’s ITunes online music store, which has so far sold 6.5 million songs, has given Apple some extra momentum as it rolls out its new G5 Macintosh and prepares to release a Microsoft (MSFT) Windows of ITunes by the end of the year.
“The buzz surrounding the music store has been key to IPod sales,” said Dan Niles, of Lehman Bros. “IPod (sales) should be up again in the September quarter as the company deals with supply constraint issues from overwhelming demand.” Niles has a “neutral” rating on Apple’s stock, and raised his fourth-quarter revenue estimate on Apple to $1.64 billion from $1.58 billion.
Merrill Lynch analyst Michael Hillmeyer noted that Apple’s June and September quarters are the most important for the company’s education business, saying Apple’s focus on notebooks for schools has helped its standing in the educational market.
However, Hillmeyer said that Apple might need to re-evaluate how it prices it new G5 PowerMacs, which start at $1,999, if it wants the devices to appeal to its traditional customer base.
“The new generation of G5 PowerMacs is impressive,” Hillmeyer said. “But if the company wants to regain lost share among mainstream and lower-end professional customers beyond next year, we believe it will have to eventually price its new PowerMacs aggressively.
Hillmeyer, who recently raised his rating on Apple’s stock to “neutral” from “sell”, upped his fourth-quarter revenue forecast on Apple to $1.65 billion from $1.53 billion.
Copyright © 1998-2003 MarketWatch.com Inc.
Historical and current end-of-day data provided by FT Interactive Data.
Intraday data is at least 15-minutes delayed. All Times are ET.
Intraday data provided by S&P Comstock and subject to terms of use.
WorldScope/IBES data provided by Thomson Financial Solutions.
Earnings data provided by Net-Earnings.com.
That switcher campaign really worked wonders, eh? *snickers*
Anyway, all they can hope for are niche markets, I just don’t know what they are going for. They have something which looks useful and carried the pricetag for scientific use (G5) shipping with an OS which was marketed to be used by adolescent female potheads. What gives? It’s not as if any of those would buy a G5. At the same time none of the John Doe users would want anything which is a G4 “cuz I heard like, they are slow and stuff…”. And the decline in userbase? Guess those are the geeks who afterall rather play with a free *nix and in general like to screew around with their hard and software.
more expensive items experience a steeper sales decline during recessions. That is pretty much economics 101 boys and girls. Look at the comparative sales drops of Honda accords compared to porches for the last 20 years during recessions.
Apple’s market share drop is also exaccerbated by the steep price drops in PCs. I really do believe that apple has to counter this “perceived” price penalty sooner rather than later or their share will continue to slide.
A low cost apple is a necessity in the short term. forget the apple is not expensive for what you get. Apple is expensive in absolute terms and that is more important. And i am not flaming apple. I like apple. I want to see them succeed.
The worst part is this, their final markets are gradually migrating away as well.
If they held on to their 5% and grew at the market rate there wouldn’t be an issue. For example, PC growth this quarter gone was 10.9%. Had Apples shipments grew at that rate then they would have maintained their marketshare.
Unforunately Apple tends to be a reactionary company rather than a pre-emptive one. Lets look at performance, why did it take a drastic drop in G4 PowerMac sales for Apple to FINALLY realise that their professional product line was in trouble?
The question is, how much of a fall has to occur beforce Apple do something about their consumer line of products? Consumers want power regardless of whether or not they require it. Apples job ISN’T to tell the consumer what they want, Apples job is to read the market and deliver. If 90% of the market want a PC with a cup holder, then that is what you provide.
Regarding the common redherrings being used. Mac’s use standard PC components, plain and simple. The Apple eMac uses a standard Sony Tube, standard Nvidia or ATI GPU, standard memory controller from VIA, standard hard disks and memory, yet, when I go through the vitual checkout, I am being charged twice the amount for memory upgrades. You would think that Apple would charge either the market rate or slight cheaper. Think about it, isn’t the whole point of customisation is to get the customer add things onto their computer resulting in more money made off each computer?
It is cheaper for me to purchase an eMac, then go off down the road to the local PC dealership, pickup some quality memory, 512MB DImms for around AUS$146 where as the Apple store is charging AUS$297. How can Apple justify charge 2x the price? btw, AUS$146 was for 512MB PC133 CAS2 SDRAM DIMM with a Lifetime Warranty.
Regarding the overall pricing, for a 17 Inch iMac in Australia, it costs AUS$3795 (incl. GST), however, if one were to directly buy it from Apple US, one would only pay $3045 (incl. GST). How can Apple justify a $700 difference in price?
These are the things that are killing Apple in Australia, add ontop the complete lack of Apple shops outside university campus’s, and all I can say is that doom is just around the corner for Apple in Australia.
Oh, btw, could someone please tell me on what merit can Steve justify adding Al Gore to the board? what IT or unique business experience does he bring?
Now sure, Apple could be an SGI and simply stick in a specialised sector, however, Steve also has to realise that one day many of the old guard who have proped up Apple via buying Apple hardware will look at Windows or what ever is the standard, and ask why they should pay extra for something with no perceived benefits.
For me, I am still trying to make up my mind. I keep my computer for 3-4years. Why should I spend $1899 on a 1Ghz eMac which could be obsolete in 18 months when I can buy a ThinkCentre A50p ($1 750.00), IBM ThinkVision C190 Monitor ($429.00) all for $2 179.00, throw $50 for delivery and you have a pretty good deal.
Ok, it’s flooding time. -swampdonkey-, I’ll do just as you did, I’ll copy-paste…
—————–
Although consumer PC demand led to better-than-expected sales growth in the second quarter, manufacturers that focused only on the consumer market were not the ones that benefited.
Apple Computer saw its worldwide market share drop to 2.3 percent, down from 2.7 percent a year ago, although slightly up from the 2 percent Apple had in the first quarter, according to research firm IDC. Gateway saw its shipments decline by more than 24 percent from a year ago, with its share of the U.S. market dropping to 4.2 percent, from 6.1 percent a year earlier.
By contrast, Dell and Hewlett-Packard saw most of the benefit from the upturn in PC sales, with each company posting double-digit gains. Dell and HP have strong consumer sales, but also sell a lot of PCs to businesses and governments.
Apple’s quarter “wasn’t as good as other top vendors, but they just announced new products,” IDC analyst Loren Loverde said of Apple’s market share drop. “Apple sales tend to respond to new products.” Loverde noted that Apple recently announced the Power Mac G5, which will start shipping in August and could boost sales.
Although unit sales were down, there were bright spots in Apple’s earnings report. The company last quarter had its highest revenue level in nearly three years by selling higher-priced machines, as well as more of its iPod music players. The iTunes Music Store offers another potential boost to the Mac maker.
Nonetheless, Apple’s market-share drop comes despite a year-old “switch” ad campaign specifically designed to boost Apple’s market share by wooing Windows users to the Mac. In the second quarter, Apple said it shipped 771,000 Macs worldwide, down from 808,000 units a year ago.
Gateway has embarked on a diversification strategy of its own, aiming to sell home-theater systems and flat-panel TVs alongside its traditional PCs. The company’s PC share has continued to slide in the U.S., with Gartner estimating that Gateway shipped just 493,000 PCs in the U.S. last quarter, down from 651,000 a year ago.
Although the company has struggled to maintain market share, CEO Ted Waitt said in a recent interview that the PC remains a critical part of Gateway’s plans.
“It’s a huge business and it’s going to continue to be a huge business, but the economics of the PC business dictate that we have to do a lot of other product lines,” Waitt said.
Some of Gateway’s market share losses have come as Dell and HP have been more aggressive in search of share by offering sub-$600 PCs.
“We haven’t competed as well as we’d like on the low end,” a Gateway representative said on Friday. “We have definitive plans to re-enter the low end of the market in the third quarter.”
Apple, meanwhile, is continuing to focus on its core Mac business while trying to expand into the music industry, both through sales of the iPod and through its iTunes digital music store.
The expansion into the music business could help offset relatively flat PC sales, but it isn’t clear how much benefit the company will get from selling music downloads. The company did say its iTunes Music Store was nearly at the break-even point, with 5 million tracks sold by the end of last quarter. The company expects to sell far more songs once it has a Windows version of iTunes available later this year.
Needham analyst Charles Wolf said in a research note this week that Apple could capture 20 percent of the U.S. pay-per-download market with its iTunes Music store. Wolf estimates that the overall U.S. online download market could reach $2.9 billion, meaning that the Apple store could generate $600 million in annual revenue.
As for the PC business, some analysts say it’s time to stop measuring Apple and Gateway by their slice of the overall PC market, anyway. Gateway and Apple, as well as laptop specialist Toshiba, address only part of the market, said NPD Group analyst Stephen Baker.
Gateway, for example, is much less aggressive at selling to large businesses, while Apple has concentrated at the high-end of the consumer market.
“Nobody expects that you can sell Acura TSX sports cars as Taurus wagons,” Baker said.
CNET News.com’s Michael Kanellos contributed to this report.
————–
Unautomated resume: Dell goes up, Apple goes down. It’s ok, Apple *is NOT rocketing down*, nobody panic. Just forget about the insanely great switching propaganda, it doesn’t get through. Apple stays niche, that’s all folks.
I just know this is going to be another 100+ comments article.
Apple, and more specifically the Macintosh brand, has something that the past decade of corporate trauma at Apple Computer has failed to tarnish: mindshare. It is this fact, plus reasonably competitive computer offerings, that have kept the show running.
Apple are aware of this. The “eye-candy-from-hell” filled Aqua interface, the big splashy retail stores in the U.S. (and soon to be outside the U.S.), the odd advertisements, the association with numerous bodies in multiple industries, the hiring of Al Gore… all of these things put Apple and the Macintosh into peoples’ minds, every day. In this case, no publicity is bad publicity, for Apple.
And its worked. Millions upon millions of people have will have seen the Apple Stores. Fierce commentary about Apple advertisements can be seen across the Internet. And as for Aqua, there have been so many mimics of the interface under other window managers it’s not funny.
The destruction of Apple’s mindshare is what will truly hallmark the death of Apple Computer. Not a shrinking marketshare, not in-house applications, not a slow upgrade cycle to Mac OS X, or anything else.
Of course, what Apple does to leverage this is another matter…
“Anyway, all they can hope for are niche markets, I just don’t know what they are going for. They have something which looks useful and carried the pricetag for scientific use (G5) shipping with an OS which was marketed to be used by adolescent female potheads. What gives? It’s not as if any of those would buy a G5. At the same time none of the John Doe users would want anything which is a G4 “cuz I heard like, they are slow and stuff…”. And the decline in userbase? Guess those are the geeks who afterall rather play with a free *nix and in general like to screew around with their hard and software”
Funny thing if the G5 boxes are big sellers IBM might just start making them too. IBM is respectable and isn’t going broke any time soon. Plus who would want the funkadelic tinfoil Apple look if you could get a nice 19″ black rackmount IBM with scsi raid and AIX as a workstation.
I suspect that the G5 will show less than stellar performance when realworld testing happens after their commercial release. The G4 performance turned out to be mostly piss and wind after Apples ludicrous ‘supercomputer’ claims were refuted.
(mac – me -nut)? e.g. Mac + a unit of time.
or
(mac – my – nute)? e.g. The Mac’s market share
“(mac – me -nut)? e.g. Mac + a unit of time.
or
(mac – my – nute)? e.g. The Mac’s market share”
The latter I think!
From: CooCooCaChoo
These are the things that are killing Apple in Australia, add ontop the complete lack of Apple shops outside university campus’s, and all I can say is that doom is just around the corner for Apple in Australia.
I have to agree. Whereas Apple U.S. has been putting in the hard yards to improve Apple’s image for some time now, Apple Australia has only very recently started on the same task. I think Apple Australia’s problem is that they don’t have the right attitude. They seem to think of themselves as a branch of Apple U.S., rather than saying “to Australians, we *are* Apple, and we need to act up hip!”
From: CooCooCaChoo
For me, I am still trying to make up my mind. I keep my computer for 3-4years. Why should I spend $1899 on a 1Ghz eMac which could be obsolete in 18 months when I can buy a ThinkCentre A50p ($1 750.00), IBM ThinkVision C190 Monitor ($429.00) all for $2 179.00, throw $50 for delivery and you have a pretty good deal.
What makes you think that an eMac might be obsolete in 18 months, but that a ThinkCentre wouldn’t be? There’ll always be something new and better either on the horizon, or here now…
Let’s be honest, Apple can’t do it all at once. They have still allot of things to do, but let’s not forget the things they did the last couple of years.
First of all, the death of Mac OS 9, and the birth of Mac OS X. I for one, would never have bought a mac if they sticked with Mac OS 9. I’m guessing I’m not the only one. Imagine the market share if they never bought NeXT and didn’t develop OSX.
Updates and introduction of new software like iLife, iSync, Jaguar and Panther, Final Cut Pro/Express, Shake, DVD Studio Pro, Soundtrack, Keynote, Safari, Xcode.
Updates and introduction of new hardware like powerbook 12″, 17″, powermac g5, airport extreme,..
They target new markets, increasing their revenue with the introduction of new ipods, the itunes music store, isight and ichat a/v.
Obviously all of the above are expensive to research and develop. And let’s be honest, this thread is going to contain more than 100 comments like always. This “lust” for Apple is because of all those products.
I’m just saying that Apple is not some super company, that can do all of the above *and* introduce yet another whole new hardware line, targeted to the low-end market. Their R&D budget is big, but not that big. Besides, it depends on how fast the switch from Motorola to IBM will take place.
For a company that competes with Microsoft, Dell, Adobe, Sun, Listen.com and Sony, all at the same time, it’s very impressive they are still alive. It’s even more impressive that they had a small market share increase this year, after a continuous drop for years. Maybe they will add Walmart to that list next year, but I doubt that it’s a matter of life or death if they don’t.
Funny thing if the G5 boxes are big sellers IBM might just start making them too. IBM is respectable and isn’t going broke any time soon. Plus who would want the funkadelic tinfoil Apple look if you could get a nice 19″ black rackmount IBM with scsi raid and AIX as a workstation.
I don’t see IBM making PPC desktops running AIX because the demand just isn’t there, however, I do see IBM pushing the PPC further into the domain of the Xeon which is slowly being replaced by the Itanium. The question is, why hasn’t Intel done anything to improve the number of software titles on the Itanium? why haven’t they simply approached these companies and said, “we want your software, how much will it cost to port to Itanium”, and simply cut a cheque. It isn’t as thought Intel can’t afford it.
I suspect that the G5 will show less than stellar performance when realworld testing happens after their commercial release. The G4 performance turned out to be mostly piss and wind after Apples ludicrous ‘supercomputer’ claims were refuted.
Well, IMHO, I don’t see it as a flop, however, they have over hyped its capabilities. IMHO, it is always better to underhype than over hype. If it is under hyped then when people do purchase one, they don’t end up feeling ripped off or let down when the recieve their computer.
As for the pricing, if their machine included as standard 19 Inch trinatron screens with them, then they would be an absolute ripper of a deal in comparison to the price of workstations from other vendors.
What makes you think that an eMac might be obsolete in 18 months, but that a ThinkCentre wouldn’t be? There’ll always be something new and better either on the horizon, or here now…
I just had a look at the Apple PowerMac G4, education price (I am a student), and the price is $2195. If they charged that amount for the general public, that would be a great deal.
I might end up getting a PowerMac G4 as it is 1.25Ghz, decent amount of expansion and the price is right 😉 The only thing I won’t buy is the screen from Apple. Eek, Mitsubishi priced $150 more expensive than the retail store I can get it from.
As Bascule said, there are other factors than marketshare to look at. However, even if it’s a matter of perception, Apple must gain some marketshare. The fact is, Apple has a product that deserves to get 5% marketshare. And this will especially be true with the G5 now.
I think the Switch ad campaign failed. It was negative advertising. You can do that with laundry detergent and bathroom tissue, but when do you see HP, Dell and Gateway bashing each other on TV?
I agree with Eugenia, Apple must get an entry level Mac out there to entice people to try it. This is very clear to me now, as I’ve heard mentioned many time, that the iBook is the one Apple computer that PC users tend to take a chance on. And it must be so inexpensive that Apple will probably lose money on it. They have to bite the bullet.
market share has risen from jan. 2003 till today.
Statistics are like benchmarks…
Apple is actually doing VERY well in the pro software department, Final Cut Pro and Shake kick Premiere and After Effect up and down the stairs, and if, if only, they’d release Windows versions, Adobe would have to shut down its digital video dev teams.
I honestly agree with everything you said except the last paragraph:
>>It’s even more impressive that they had a small market share increase this year, after a continuous drop for years.
>>
Logic failing here. Shall we read it again?
“Apple captured 2.3 percent of the worldwide market share in the second quarter of 2003, down from 2.7 percent a year ago, but slightly up from the 2 percent it had in the first quarter, according to research firm IDC.”
In other words, “after a continuous drop for years” (as you said), *Apple has dropped further this year* (you implied the contrary). An increase in the second quarter doesn’t equate to “a small market share increase this year”, it equates to an increase over the first quarter. It dare you to show that all quarters up to now have had a diminishing rate (not). It is not the quarters, it’s the year, and dropping…
From: Anonymous (IP: —.tpgi.com.au)
Funny thing if the G5 boxes are big sellers IBM might just start making them too.
IBM has already made several annoucements regarding the PowerPC 970 to be used in future workstation and blade server products. Presumably this will expand into other areas as time passes.
From: Anonymous (IP: —.tpgi.com.au)
Plus who would want the funkadelic tinfoil Apple look if you could get a nice 19″ black rackmount IBM with scsi raid and AIX as a workstation.
You can, of course, use a rackmount as a workstation. Most wouldn’t consider it, though. If nothing else, the noise would put me off.
From: Anonymous (IP: —.tpgi.com.au)
I suspect that the G5 will show less than stellar performance when realworld testing happens after their commercial release. The G4 performance turned out to be mostly piss and wind after Apples ludicrous ‘supercomputer’ claims were refuted.
A new product will have bad performance because an older product using different components from different vendors under different specs had bad performance. Hmm.
Apple has a poor record in benchmarking, yes, but you are perhaps passing judgement a tad quickly. I’ll bag on the computer when I have concrete evidence to show it can’t do the speed.
Apple made a HUGE mistake when they kill the clones. they had proven that they know what market wanted better than Apple.
A quick scan of the comments thus far haven’t brought up one important point (the last of these four).
Apple is profitable
Apple is focused on niche markets
Apple has a modern operating system, and is leveraging open source well.
Apple still has great applications, and it’s unix base ensures that even if developers move to Linux, OSX won’t be left out.
So, for the well-educated buyer, it’s obvious that Apple will do fine for years to come, barring any go-for-broke moves by Stevie.
I came in late to this party. Certain individuals stand out and say that marketshare doesn’t matter “who cares about marketshare if it works for you.”
Some people might not care, but then again they’re just *users*. You don’t have a paycheck riding on it so of couse you don’t care. Apple wants to stay in business and expand even so of course they’ll care about marketshare, and if you really do support Apple I think you should care too. Unless you’re like me and love & hate all operating systems and computer companies at the same time.
* I use the word “you” a lot in this post, I’m not talking to anyone in particular, just a generalize “you”.
“What makes you think that an eMac might be obsolete in 18 months, but that a ThinkCentre wouldn’t be? There’ll always be something new and better either on the horizon, or here now…”
The 800MHz eMac is already totally obsolete and is in fact an average machine by Mid 2001 standards.
This is what $749 gets you in PC land (add a $100 for a 17″ CRT) total $850
Specifications http://www.emachines.com/products/products.html?prod=eMachines_T262…
CPU: AMD Athlon™ XP 2600+ Processor (2.13 GHz) with QuantiSpeed™ architecture
Chipset: VIA KM 266
Memory: 512 MB DDR (PC 2100)
Hard Drive: 120 GB HDD
Optical Drives: DVD +/- RW Drive (Write max: 4x DVD+/-R, 2.4x DVD+RW, 2x DVD-RW, 16x CD-R and 10x CD-RW disks, reads 12x max. DVD-ROM disks, reads 40x max. CD-ROM disks); 16x Max. DVD Drive; 3.5″ 1.44MB FDD
Video: S3 ProSavage8™ integrated (1 AGP slot available for upgrade)
Sound: AC ’97 Audio
Modem: 56K* ITU v.92 ready Fax/Modem
Network: 10/100Mbps built-in Ethernet
Peripherals: Premium Multimedia Keyboard, 2-Button Wheel Mouse, Amplified Stereo Speakers
Dimensions: 7.25″w x 14.125″h x 16″d
Internet: AOL membership included, click here for details
Ports/Other: 6 USB 2.0 ports (2 on front), 1 Serial, 1 Parallel, 2 PS/2, Microphone-In & Head Phone jack on front, Audio-In & Out, 3 PCI slots (2 available)
Pre-Installed Software: Microsoft® Windows® XP Home Edition, Microsoft Works 7.0, Microsoft Money 2003, Encarta Online, Roxio Easy CD Creator, Adobe® Acrobat® Reader™, Microsoft Media Player, Real Player, Power DVD, Internet Explorer, Netscape® Navigator, MSN®, CompuServe®, AOL (with 3 months membership included**), Norton AntiVirus 2003 (90 day complimentary subscription)
Ok a some of it is freeware but it is still installed.
Monitor:
Specifications
Size: 17 inches
Screen Size: Flat 16″ viewable
Dot Pitch: 0.25mm
Resolution: 1280 x 1024 @ 60 Hz
Features: Non-glare, Plug & Play, Energy Star compliant
Dimensions: 16.5″w x 16″h x 17.25″d
Weight: 39 lbs.
Color: Platinum/Graphite
Tech. Specs.: 30~72 KHz (horizontal)
50~160 Hz (vertical)
AC 110~240V 60/50 Hz
So for $749 you have something at least as fast as a dual 1.25 GHz G4.
By Xmas this will be probably a $400 machine.
How can Apple compete?
The facts are apple’s market share has increased in every single market except for professional desktops. It’s no wonder… their professional desktops were in a bad need of an update. It was Apple’s desktops which dragged Apple market share down. Thankfully, Apple’s newest desktops are poised to gain market sahre too. So no, Apple doesn’t have to become a reseller of comodity PCs, and no, they don’t have to sell computers at a loss and no they don’t need to compete in the bare bones comidity market and no they don’t need to allow clones.
As we’ve seen with every one of their other computers… people aren’t so concerned about lowest possible price because Apple’s computers offer so much more for the same price as other PCs… and those bare bones PCs don’t offer much. What this proves is that consumers will buy your products if you can create such significant added benefit that it compells them to buy.
Price is NOT the be all end all in selling computers.
Eugenia, this topic was already covered and this was already proven. Why would you need to start the flame wars all over again, unless that is your intention to begin with?
I’ve actually had a look at:
http://www.edgar-online.com/bin/edgardoc/finSys_main.asp?dcn=000110…
For the 9 months ending June 2003, they actually made a loss on their core operations. If it weren’t for the interest and other income, they would have been in the red.
As for the over all price, I guess you need to move to Australia and New Zealand to see how disfunctional Apple is then you will understand why every man and his dog owns a PC and not a Mac.
RE: Anonymous (IP: —.tpgi.com.au)
Don’t compare a Mac to a crap eMachine. Compare it to something like an IBM or Dell, something of some quality, not cheap shit which eMachines sells.
If you are a home user, and all you do is read email and listen to mp3s. Then any OS will serve your purposes. Unless you are a serious gamer, then you need windows.
In the business world. It is *very* different. There are thousands of special purpose application which only run on Windows. So: MacOS, Linux, FreeBSD, etc, are out the question.
You only need one “must have” windows application, to eliminate any OS option other than windows.
Oh, reminds me: Munich chose Linux, seems noone ever bothered with OS X. Quite telling. They can’t get their foot in the door as far as the average office space is concerned although the Switcher stuff attempted to market Macs as being usable in that segment.
one more regarding reality distortion:
DMN: Now, you’re saying it’s the first 64-bit desktop machine. But isn’t there an Opteron dual-processor machine? It shipped on June 4th. BOXX Technologies shipped it. It has an Opteron 244 in it.
Rubinstein: Uh…
Akrout: It’s not a desktop.
DMN: That’s a desktop unit.
Akrout: It depends on what you call a desktop, now. These… From a full desktop per se, this is the first one. I don’t know how you really distinguish the other one as a desktop.
DMN: Well, it’s a dual processor desktop machine, just like that one.
Akrout: It’s not 64, then.
DMN: Yes, it’s a 64-bit machine with two Opteron chips in it. It started shipping June 4th.
Akrout: That we’ll double check, but in my mind, it wasn’t.
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2003/06_jun/features/cw_macg5_in…
Don’t compare a Mac to a crap eMachine. Compare it to something like an IBM or Dell, something of some quality, not cheap shit which eMachines sells.
Uhh, why? The emachine will certainly have the same quality of components as a Mac. There’s nothing inherently worse about its particular athlon processor, or VIA chipset, or RAM, or whatever. It will last just as long as any other computer. You can’t exclude an entire class of PCs because they are “too cheap” and so not a fiar comparison. That’s the whole point – they are cheap and cheerful, and Apple has nothing to compare. Hell, my computer is even cheaper, being a homebuilt affair with bottom of the range components that’s three years old. And you know what? it still runs the latest games just fine, it still runs office suites and consumer apps perfectly well, thank you. It is all the computer I need, and it cost about 1/4 that of a “low end” Macintosh that has nothing going for it other than looking like this: http://images.jlist.com/c3/shredder.gif&x=500&y=500“ rel=”nofollow”>http://www.jlist.com/cgi-bin/disp.cgi?img=