“By most counts, they’re are a hit. But they were intended to woo new users to the fold, yet Mac market share has only budged — lower,” Alex Salkever writes for BusinessWeek. “When PC maker Gateway announced on Apr. 1 that it planned to shutter its remaining 188 stores, Macheads were quick to gloat that Apple, by contrast, is doing retail right… On the crucial basis of attracting newbies, Apple’s stores have yet to show any notable progress. Despite Jobs & Co.’s claims that 50% of the people buying at its stores are Windows users, Apple’s market share has made no significant advances. So while comparisons to Gateway might seem easy and feel good, they only go so far.”
“Ultimately, Apple stores could successfully become the primary Mac service point and cultural hub for aficionados. Apple already exerts much more control over its marketing message at the grass-roots level,” Salkever writes. “Still, the proof is in the number of new Apple users, and that remains discouraging. In tech tracker International Data Corp.’s latest tally of computer market share, Apple’s piece of the U.S computer pie slid from 3.5% in 2002 to 3.2% in 2003. The decline also speaks volumes about Apple’s campaign to woo switchers — if they were coming over in any significant numbers, then Apple would be growing faster than the broad PC market.”
“Clearly that’s not happening. Sure, IDC numbers are imperfect measures. A huge chunk of PC purchases come from big companies, and Apple doesn’t compete in that market at all. Still, it has to show some improvement in market share to convince Wall Street it has long-term legs,” Salkever writes. “For Apple’s retail experiment to be judged a true success, it would need to see some positive momentum in actual Mac market share from reputable sources, such as IDC. Absent these third-party judgments, Apple’s own claims about switchers lack credibility.”
“Do the retail stores hurt Apple? At this point, probably not. And they’ve certainly helped it to more effectively market its products. The stores have hurt resellers, but these shops presided over declining market share for many years. One can understand Apple’s impatience,” Salkever writes. “All other things being equal, though, until Apple can start posting rising market-share numbers, the final jury on the great retail experiment remains out.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Apple shipped 829,000 Macintosh units during the quarter ending December 27, 2003, up 12 percent from the year-ago quarter. Now where did we read the following excerpt? Oh yeah, we remember, it was in BusinessWeek, January 24, 2004. We’ll use it as our rebuttal. Perhaps Alex should read the magazine for which he writes?
“The Mac is currently enjoying a growth spurt. Sales grew 12% during the quarter. The sleek PowerBook laptops remain hot items. Sales of higher-end PowerMacs — used by publishers, ad agencies, and the like — are getting a lift from the economic rebound. Some evidence even points to Apple turning around its long decline in the education market. In a survey of school districts, market researcher Quality Education Data found that 30% plan to buy Macs this year, up from 21% in 2003. And brisk sales of the latest upgrade of Mac OS X, called Panther, suggest that many Mac customers are planning on sticking around. [Apple CEO Steve Jobs] wouldn’t mind if those analysts would start measuring the Mac by the profits it produces, rather than by its market share. ‘We’ve got 25 million customers that want the best computers in the world. If our market share grows, we’re thrilled. But we’ve held our own, while our rivals were losing hundreds of millions of dollars a year,’ he says. ‘We’re in pretty good shape,'” Peter Burroughs wrote for BusinessWeek.
Years ago, IBM utilized spin to create “The PC” short for personal computer. Since that time, we have been arguing about market share and comparing two machines which were as different as apples and oranges. However, Steve Jobs actually kept his eye on the ball and that is why apple has continued to generate great products for the only “Real Personal Computer”. If you have ever worked with “The PC” and also own a “Real Personal Computer”, you will understand the distinction.
The net result is that everyone who is making a market share comparison is falling into the same trap. Apple doesn’t have 1% or 2% or 3% of the “Real Personal Computer” market. It has 100% of this market.
Lots of good news on lots of fronts for Apple recently. It will take time for all these to have an effect on sales numbers. One other factor in the short term is the introduction of the G5. Laptop sales are approaching 50 percent of total sales for Apple. A LOT of people are waiting for the G5 Laptops to come out (myself included). As stated before, Apples also have a longer usuable life and this makes it possible for users to wait for the new products even if it takes a year or more.
One comment on MDN’s take: Apple may have had 12% year on year growth for the quarter but what was the total growth for entire PC market? Anything over 12% would mean Apple’s market share went down even if they grew sales because the market grew faster than they did.
That said, I agree that saying Apple is only 3 percent is a skewed number because of all the dumb terminals included in the total market.
Finally Apple stores are great and I expect their effect on the market to be felt over time.
Stealthy wrote:
>’Hundreds’? yeah – you wish you were so popular . . .
You don’t know hundreds of people, yourself?
I think the average person knows at least a couple of hundred people. I’m barely 30 and I know hundreds of people – a few close friends, business associates, fellow musicians, fellow visual artists, relatives, neighbors, etc.
A handful of them strictly use Macs (maybe 3). The rest of the Mac users (5 or so) use a combination of Mac & Windows (as do I), and the much greater majority don’t have anything to do with the Mac.
If I including business use, the numbers would favor Windows PCs even more!
—
Seahawk wrote:
>Only blinds or Apple-haters pundits or Windows users too
>busy to play their lates FPS game are still to realize
>that Apple has dramatically “improved price:performance”
>already and that it is a Unix platform.
I’m not blind or an Apple hater. The dramitic improvements seem more like having caught up rather than having taken the lead back.
—
Jump wrote:
>I guess this depends on whether you are talking about up
>front costs or total cost of ownership doesn’t it?
For typical uses, Windows leads by a huge margain. The box you can run XP on costs so much more less than anything Apple has put out yet.
Windows security sure is lacking though! Too bad that’s not gonna help Apple sell many units!
>And what performance issues are there for an average home user?
Internet, word processing, digital photography (video is growing as well)… XP & OS-X are both very capable. OS-X systems just cost more.
>”Personally, I’d define it as the ability to get things
>done which is what matters in the real world.”
That’s how I see things as well. I use both Macs AND PCs.
—-
—-
Contrary to the tone of this post, I actually prefer Macs and use them more often than Windows. I just don’t buy into most of the general pro-Mac arguments.
Good design. More stable OS. Better functionality.
Bleh… so hard to stick to your guns when the other side is blazingly fast and is just as functional!
I’m glad Apple has in its organization people that can tell-it-like-it-is. At least it seems so with the release of OS-X and the G5. I hope this recent trend continues!
Stealthy wrote:
>’Hundreds’? yeah – you wish you were so popular . . .
You don’t know hundreds of people, yourself?
I think the average person knows at least a couple of hundred people. I’m barely 30 and I know hundreds of people – a few close friends, business associates, fellow musicians, fellow visual artists, relatives, neighbors, etc.
A handful of them strictly use Macs (maybe 3). The rest of the Mac users (5 or so) use a combination of Mac & Windows (as do I), and the much greater majority don’t have anything to do with the Mac.
If I including business use, the numbers would favor Windows PCs even more!
—
Seahawk wrote:
>Only blinds or Apple-haters pundits or Windows users too
>busy to play their lates FPS game are still to realize
>that Apple has dramatically “improved price:performance”
>already and that it is a Unix platform.
I’m not blind or an Apple hater. The dramitic improvements seem more like having caught up rather than having taken the lead back.
—
Jump wrote:
>I guess this depends on whether you are talking about up
>front costs or total cost of ownership doesn’t it?
For typical uses, Windows leads by a huge margain. The box you can run XP on costs so much more less than anything Apple has put out yet.
Windows security sure is lacking though! Too bad that’s not gonna help Apple sell many units!
>And what performance issues are there for an average home user?
Internet, word processing, digital photography (video is growing as well)… XP & OS-X are both very capable. OS-X systems just cost more.
>”Personally, I’d define it as the ability to get things
>done which is what matters in the real world.”
That’s how I see things as well. I use both Macs AND PCs.
—-
—-
Contrary to the tone of this post, I actually prefer Macs and use them more often than Windows. I just don’t buy into most of the general pro-Mac arguments.
Good design. More stable OS. Better functionality.
Bleh… so hard to stick to your guns when the other side is blazingly fast and is just as functional!
I’m glad Apple has in its organization people that can tell-it-like-it-is. At least it seems so with the release of OS-X and the G5. I hope this recent trend continues!
Jack A: I completely agree with you… and share your wait for a Powerbook G5!
Although… I have a AST Bravo 486DX2 that still runs (win 3.11.. probably 12 years old now), a Gateway Pentium II 350 that still runs (XP… about 7 years old), and a dual PIII 650 rig that still runs very well. Hmmm… haven’t powered up the Apple IIGS in a couple of years, but there’s a good chance that runs too.
But back to agreeing with you… I can’t wait for the Powerbook G5s to come out. But becuase FCP is so much fun… I might even step up to a revved Powerbook G4 and then dump it for a G5 version when that comes out.
Jack A: I completely agree with you… and share your wait for a Powerbook G5!
Although… I have a AST Bravo 486DX2 that still runs (win 3.11.. probably 12 years old now), a Gateway Pentium II 350 that still runs (XP… about 7 years old), and a dual PIII 650 rig that still runs very well. Hmmm… haven’t powered up the Apple IIGS in a couple of years, but there’s a good chance that runs too.
But back to agreeing with you… I can’t wait for the Powerbook G5s to come out. But becuase FCP is so much fun… I might even step up to a revved Powerbook G4 and then dump it for a G5 version when that comes out.
I have understood that Apple’s failure to gain market share first began with the dismal failure of Apple III. This computer had a nearly 100% defect rate which caused number actual and potential buyers to switch to other competitors� devices. Because of the ubiquity of non-Apple devices after the Apple III fiasco there has persisted this trend in personal computer buying.
It is reasonable that people who buy one type of machine are most likely to continue with it using compatible software and hardware. This I think explains in part why Apple�s market share is lower than the competition. I still consider the Mac the best personal computer today, but Apple needs to maintain its lead in innovation and design to differentiate it from the other manufacturers to ensure profitability.
“I’m not blind or an Apple hater. The dramitic improvements seem more like having caught up rather than having taken the lead back.”
Fine but that is a 180 turn from your previous words:
“If they could improve the price:performance ratio, I think their numbers would grow tremendously.
Either they are unable, unwilling, or unknowing… or maybe it’s both. Hehhe.”
And what “taking the lead back” means? Pundits compare Apple agaist ALL other vendors. Comparing Apple 1 on 1 it has already the lead over a plethora of other PC manufacturers.
Again, changes do not happen in a short time. Jobs toob the helm of Apple at a dramatic situation and he had done a tremenduos job in that the *bleeding* slowed down, then stopped and only now it is starting to catch up. Doing this in few years time is just short of a miracle: saying anything less is a lack objectivity: “…they are unable, unwilling, or unknowing” or just trolling around.
As an aside note: PC can be cheaper but if you go for quality and configure your PC on a big brand… well, I know people who got a Mac because it was cheaper and the *standard* PC laptop over here costs some $110 MORE than a Powerbook 15′.
It stands to reason that the “economic rebound” that BusinessWeek credits for increased Apple sales would benefit business sales of generic Wintel units to an even greater degree, thus diluting Apple’s overall marketshare despite increased Mac volume.
I am optimistic for the future and I do expect gradual marketshare increases as a result of the popularity of the iPod and iTMS. But I am most interested in two areas at this point: maintenance of Mac usage in K-12 education and the core entertainment/graphics industries, and increased penetration of Macs into the home, higher education and engineering/scientific areas. I am also avidly watching the growth of the Xserve because it is an interesting fit with IBM’s enterprise servers in the overall scheme of Power/PowerPC and UNIX.
Seahawk wrote:
>Fine but that is a 180 turn from your previous words:
Okay… so maybe Apple hasn’t caught up. 🙁 I was trying to be nice to the Apple fan in me. Speed is almost there, but OS-X definitely rocks! Price… still a bit higher than a PC equivilent.
>Comparing Apple 1 on 1 it has already the lead over a plethora of other PC manufacturers.
Singling out one manufacturer doesn’t proclaim it a leader. C’mon now… weak argument.
>Doing this in few years time is just short of a miracle: saying anything
>less is a lack objectivity:… or just trolling around.
Why should consumers feel like they owe something to Apple because they made some terrible moves in the past, had to bring in someone to save their company, and then forgive their slow progress because of their past blunders?
The market doesn’t behave that way… hence the title of this column:
“BusinessWeek: So far, Apple retail stores fail to produce market share gains for Mac”
We’re discussing the factors keeping Apple’s market share down.
>PC can be cheaper but if you go for quality and configure your PC on a big brand…$110 MORE than a Powerbook 15′
And your point is? This amounts to “Yeah, but I bet I can configure a PC to cost more than a Mac… so there!”
—
—
I guess I’m just a different sort of Macintosh fan. 😀
Roll out the Powerbook G5!
Roll out the Powermac G5/G6 3.0 Ghz!
With so many choices out there, Apple is not going anywhere by sitting on the POS-G4 proc and a fat price tag. You lead in design, lead-by-a-nose in OS, lose in pricing, but can you bring the muscle?
Get moving Apple!!!
Seahawk wrote:
>Fine but that is a 180 turn from your previous words:
Okay… so maybe Apple hasn’t caught up. 🙁 I was trying to be nice to the Apple fan in me. Speed is almost there, but OS-X definitely rocks! Price… still a bit higher than a PC equivilent.
>Comparing Apple 1 on 1 it has already the lead over a plethora of other PC manufacturers.
Singling out one manufacturer doesn’t proclaim it a leader. C’mon now… weak argument.
>Doing this in few years time is just short of a miracle: saying anything
>less is a lack objectivity:… or just trolling around.
Why should consumers feel like they owe something to Apple because they made some terrible moves in the past, had to bring in someone to save their company, and then forgive their slow progress because of their past blunders?
The market doesn’t behave that way… hence the title of this column:
“BusinessWeek: So far, Apple retail stores fail to produce market share gains for Mac”
We’re discussing the factors keeping Apple’s market share down.
>PC can be cheaper but if you go for quality and configure your PC on a big brand…$110 MORE than a Powerbook 15′
And your point is? This amounts to “Yeah, but I bet I can configure a PC to cost more than a Mac… so there!”
—
—
I guess I’m just a different sort of Macintosh fan. 😀
Roll out the Powerbook G5!
Roll out the Powermac G5/G6 3.0 Ghz!
With so many choices out there, Apple is not going anywhere by sitting on the POS-G4 proc and a fat price tag. You lead in design, lead-by-a-nose in OS, lose in pricing, but can you bring the muscle?
Get moving Apple!!!
Apple shipped 829,000 Macintosh units
How many wintels did Dell ship
How many did HP ship
How many did gateway ship
How many did toshiba ship
how many did Walmart ship
How many did Compusa ship
How many did Bestbuy ship
How many did Evesham ship
how many did Fry’s ship
how many did Sony Ship
Even if all these other companies shipped the same amount as Apple, Apple would still be selling one Apple mac for every 10 pc’s sold. How is their marketshare going to rise? Oh yes, thats it, sell more than the combined PC industry for the year. Unpossible even if they wanted to.
Lets also take into account the number of PCs bought for business from local as well as national vendors. Remove those. When the system is purchased, is it for business or home use. For example take out the 2000 systems my company has bought last year, and the 3000+ they plan to buy this year, and see how many of the emplloyees buy a new computer. I can pretty much guarantee most will buy Windows PCs, but it brings the market share to a much more level plaing field. Also lets survey those buying new systems for home, and ask how long they owned their last system. If we add all of this in and then tally the scores, I bet you would find a much higher market share for the Mac.
I work for a small design & marketing firm and every client who comes in is completely blown away by our Mac network and OS X 10.3.
All we need to do is show them a few goodies such as Expos� and Genie shrinking and they’re sold. These are not designers that we show, these are members of BNI, a massive business network. They’re amazed you can get Office for the Mac and even more amazed that there are NO VIRUSES.
I reckon I’ve made about 30 people switch, they tell their friends and family, and so it goes on.
Apple make a profit (who cares if it’s small), they aren’t in debt and they have salesmen like me who promote their machines for free. What’s the problem?
Angels on the head of a pin time, eh?
The guy is writing about wall street. Wall street cares about market share, and does not look at the fanciful figures that crackedbutter and Lokiz would derive. They like a nice published number like IDC’s, which, if the study’s parameters remain the same, are accurate. Mac stores have grown in number and market share hasn’t. Maybe Apple doesn’t care. Unless you own aapl, and buy the theory of fundamentals, probably you shouldn’t either.
SEahawk says: “It is less of a financial risk to buy a $800 PC than a perceived better $799 eMac equivalent.”, right?
Yeah, right, how many eMacs do you own???
If it is so great why is this old retread iMac in a 17-inch body such a dog of a seller? Sales just continue to drop, drop, drop with the eMac.
I’m guessing all those marketshare counting naysayers here would be clapping their hands with glee if suddenly the surveys showed even the slightest uptick in market share for Apple…suddenly the same surveys would be used to say “See Apple is selling more!!!” But when marketshare for Apple goes down, its “The marketshare bean counters are idiots”.
Bottom line at the current time, the PC sellers are selling more windows computers, Apple is not keeping up with the increase in PC sales of its own computer product, hence it is losing market share.
With the lack of new computers for such a long time, I am guessing Apple�s market share will drop even further next time stats are released.
GoKart: eMac was the answer to the “We do not buy Mac because it is expensive” which Mac users alwayis replied BS. Mac users do not buy eMac, they get iBooks, Powerbooks and G5s.
Windows users – which should now shut up in that there is a machine that is cheaper and better then the equivalent low priced PC keeps buying PCs and the reason is they don’t buy Mac because it is a Mac.
Last year when the lease for our Dell laptops expired, our small company offered us the option of getting new mac or PC laptops. 2 of us opted for Mac laptops, and the ther 5 people in the company bought Dells. At the time, they laughed at us because slightly less money, they got a laptop, plus a nice docking station and extra power supplies. A year later, we’re the one’s laughing because out of 5 laptops … 5 of them have had to be repaired at least twice. Only 1 of them still has a working DVD-ROM drive.. and all those extra power supplies are dead. (The docking station seems to be the once piece of reliable hardware..) When the next upgrade cycle comes around… there will be 5 new macs in the office.
Mac & PC guy: you are getting all wrong. Each post of yours is a 180 degree spin.
Apple HAS improved price:performance ratio AND is selling more. You seem to deny this and then agree with this at every turn of a post. Make up your mind.
I do not want to single out manufactures in Apple vs PC, just pointing out that the comparison of Apple vs ALL manufacturers is silly and it is the only argument pundits use to say Apple is doomed: It amounts to compare BMW sales againts all brands including trucks and golf carts just because they have wheels. AND I was commenting on the lack of meaning of your comment about Apple unable of “taking the lead back”.
The major and maybe only factor for Apple global market share decline is NOT – as pundits put – that Apple is failing, only it is growint at a smaller rate then the rest of the market: Apple does not sell nor makes computers that fit all sectors. Sector by sector, where Apple competes, its share is growing.
If BMW sells 5Mil sport cars more then the year before but Volvo sell 50Mil trucks(!) more then the year before does that entitles anyone saying people like Volvo cars better then a BMW? It is what pundits do regularly with Apple Computers.
You don’t owe anything to Apple, that *someone* is *just* Steve Jobs who has saved the company and make for Apple having the today’s afterburner.
The point concerning price is that BEFORE you could not configure a PC equivalent to a Mac and be more expensive then the Mac itself. The Mac was always coming up at least 10~15% more expensive.
Today it is not true anymore. It is not “I Bet I can configure a PC to be more expensive” it is TODAY to configure a PC to be equivalent to a Mac configuration usually you pay MORE: and this is totally new, so new that I have to show people figures and demonstrate that if they buy a Powerbook they get a better configuration at a CHEAPER price.
And you need to do yourself your shopping as your comment shows you do not buy into it.
forgot to add your comment: “Price… still a bit higher than a PC equivilent.”
BZZZZ! Not true, which is my point.
Joe, since we talk about Market, AAPL has double its price since I started buying, then maybe the Market knows better then pundits mumbling about declining market share.
The article is not from a market analyst: if you read those you will see that AAPL has been upgraded almost everywhere, hence the Market does not gobble up the crap about the declining global market share either. They know better there.
Steve Jobs should use Billy Boys example in all his interviews. This is the perfect explanation I have been waiting for in my stupid arguments with PC status quo bandwagon users.
Sure he is a market analyist Seahawk. Anyone with a byline can be. Market analysis isn’t cut and dried, he has an opinion (which your point about aapl price certainly disputes). Will the fact that Apple’s market share is declining despite opening more retail outlets make a difference someday? Who knows?
You are all wet you know about price and performance. Equating the $800 emac to what Dell etc. can put on your porch for the same amount is ludicrous. 3x the speed, twice the ram, better graphics etc. etc. all of which means truely better multitasking and multimedia performance. Until you get to laptops and g5’s, which, of course is where apple’s increased sales are coming from, there is no comparison. Hence the need for the headless g5 imac, still mysteriously absent.