“Apple Computer Inc.’s strategy of getting iPod buyers to also buy Apple desktop computers doesn’t seem to be working, according to an industry research report. The Cupertino computer and consumer electronics maker has seen its share of the personal computer market drop to 2.8 percent, from 4 percent a year earlier, according to IDC, of Framingham, Mass.,” Robert Mullins reports for American City Business Journals.
“Although the iPod portable music player, and its recently released little brother, the iPod Mini, have been strong sellers, that has not seemed to help sales of desktop computers, particularly the recently released G5 desktop computer, said Andrew Neff, an analyst with investment bank Bears Stearns & Co. Inc., of New York City. ‘Our concerns are that the G5 cycle has disappointed, Apple is still ceding PC share, and at some point iPod mini supply will catch up with demand, which could derail the stock’s momentum and temper further earnings per share [growth],’ Neff wrote in a note to investors released Monday. Supplies of the original iPod, the one in the white case, have already caught up with demand, he said,” Mullins reports.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: We weren’t aware there was a time limit for measuring iPod’s halo effect for increasing Mac market share. It seems too early to us to be able to make a valid determination as to whether iPod will translate to Mac market share increases. The G5 sales “disappointed” because Apple CEO Steve Jobs promised 3GHz G5’s “within the year” at the introduction of the 2Ghz Power Mac’s in June 2003. That put a damper on sales to individuals who, we believe, are waiting for the speed bump before buying their new Power Mac G5’s. Some analysts are obsessed with “market share” and cannot see the forest for the trees. What cannot be overlooked is that Apple latest earnings report shows a 5 percent increase in CPU units over the year-ago quarter.
Joe McConnel said “…himself…”
It’s herself, dumbass.
gotcha Macinposh, you are right, I should have known!
Why would you have known? You clearly know very little of anything.
Hey Macinposh, we got off on the wrong foot, mostly because I said “sucks” instead of “poorly aligned” or some such wishy washy drivel, and you got pissed off about that.
I think Apple would sell more computers if they rethought their line.
I think it is important for them that Apple sell more computers, not less on a proportional basis as is now happening.
I think Macs are wonderful machines, and I don’t have to go out and buy one to know that.
I think that some of you are too thin skinned about your macophilia, and should recognise that owning one does not have to turn you into a Steve apologist.
Pretty close to blowhardiness now, I had better stop.
why do people say the G4 is a slow processor. It surfs,does email,converts songs (AAC/mp3) & writes letters fine. You wouldn’t notice the G5 if thats all you do. (yes I have played with dual g5’s) Friend of mine has 2.4ghz Pentium & we both got Photoshop Elements & when he tranforms his Photos (layers & stuff) his computer is not that much faster than my G4, but if you move the pic around when its changing you can wipe the desktop pic clean, with a G4 that never happens. He has a 128MB Nvidia graphics card so don’t tell me the G4 processor is yesterdays news just depends on what you want to do with it. In other words guys be realistic or include why its so slow, also I keep my machine probably optimized which I know a lot of you guys don’t which can slow a machine down.
“Pretty close to blowhardiness now, I had better stop.”
Dude, I hate to break it to you, but you passed that line WAY long ago on almost every previous article you’ve posted on. Time to get over your Mac envy and buy one.
Joe,
Good post. I agree, Apple could enhance their line a bit.
Close?, GOOD ONE.
You are of course mistaking blowing hard for having a contrary opinion based on the facts presented in the article, but I appreciate the feedback.
Really, this has been a wonderful morning. Thanks MDN for this great site!
Ok Macinposh, thanks. Sorry about the dig at you being a female, I couldn’t help myself, a bad habit that is actually not as bad as in the past, BELIEVE IT OR NOT.
My G3 suits my MOST of my needs just fine. If it wasn’t for my desire to play games, I probably wouldn’t be upgrading to an iBook G4 this summer.
way to go G3 Rocks we need more realistic people like you.
What would be a change you would like to see Macinposh?
I have always thought a headless imac would be a good idea. There are plenty of monitors sitting around, perfectly compatable with macs, that would save the low end buyer money.
Also, my thought about renaming the G4 is complete fluff, but that stuff works. As Sara said g4’s work fine, but the name has been around since 1999, I think. Call it the G44 or G4+ or something, spice up the mhz numbers like intel and amd do, and put that show on the road!
Joe, I guess there’s some things you don’t understand. A lot of Mac users wonder about Apple’s advertising and the Macs.
That aside,Apple chooses not to compete with the *cheapo* Wintel market segment. At the same time, they pretty much sell all they make and at times of huge sales, often have supply problems.
Lets suppose they chose to compete at the level you suggest. How to they deal with supply? A corporations usually has three options.
1.Existing production is robust enough to meet demand.
2.If existing production can’t meet demand, company has to build more facilities�bothe expensive and way out in the time line.
3.Raise prices to throttle demand until #1 may or may not happen.
The least preferable option is to be hopelessly unable to meet demand under any circumstances.
As for the current line, Macs are fast enough for most.The “pro” customers will always want the latest. It will happen.
I use a 15″ Sony LCD monitor with my PowerMac G4, so I agree that a headless iMac would be a good thing. Apple displays are ridiculously expensive – and frankly I don’t like their look. If a G5 cube came out I’d buy it today. You’re right that the name does a lot for perception. Calling it a G4X (or something like that) or dropping the “G” line altogether would probably do wonders for the perception of the product as being “old” when it clearly isn’t.
I’d really like to see a more diverse notebook line. Bring back some color and shapes. Add an ultra-portable. How about a 13″ 16×9 widescreen? Apple should think out of the box!
And whats a Pentium4 but a Pentium3 with cache plus a few crappy bits. Thats why per clock speed a pentium3 will beat a pentium4. what a great advance in technology (sarcasm). Besides Intell are ditching their numbers now seeing as they cannot get it passed 3.5ghz now what a piece of crap. Thats for you Joe.
The issue of market share is far more complicated than these analysts give it credit for. Apple is in a very unique position that makes it difficult to get any useful analysis by looking at the numbers. People look at their quarterly market share and complain that it’s so low, but they’re comparing it the Windows market share, not Dell, HP, or Gateway. Given, they all have higher market share than Apple, but no one even looks to see what that is. It almost doesn’t make sense to count Apple in the same group.
I appreciate Joe’s comments on this site. It’s interesting to have a little insight on how Apple is viewed from the outside. I will say though, that I’m glad you don’t run Apple, because you clearly don’t get it. They’ve made a lot of mistakes in the past, and right now I think they’re making a huge mistake in their marketing (no ads running for the Mac at all right now, lousy ads before that – SHOW OS X!!!!!!), but there’s nothing wrong with their hardware lineup. The G5 is a great chip and even at 2 gigs it competes evenly with the Pentium/AMD stuff running at 3ghz (they aren’t making great strides in speed right now either). The G4 is still a good chip. My 667mhz G4 PowerBook is fine for everything I do, print design, multimedia design, web design, (although newer games are becoming a problem). The iMac line is due for an upgrade and I’m sure we’ll see it soon.
It’s very easy to sit in your arm chair (or pnuematic chair, or whatever the case maybe) and second guess everything that all the execs at Apple decide about thier line. Any idiot can do that with ANY company, not just Apple. (What could Dell have done to sell more computers? What could Toyota have done to sell more cars? Yada yada yada.)
With the exception of the bottom line sales margin people at Apple, who in the world WOULDN’T like MORE features, speed, etc.. for LESS money? The bottom line is that whoever the descision makers are, and no matter what you think of thier descisions, computer sales INCREASED 5% over the year ago quarter.
Another interesting thing I’ve seen is that market share numbers seem to be repeated all the time. I always read about how Apple’s market share went down from about 5% to about 2%. I’ve been reading the same numbers for many months now, if not years. How can any company’s market ALWAYS be going down from 5% to 2%? You’d think that eventually, Apple’s marketshare would dwindle down to nothing, but it’s always from about 5% to about 2%, Very odd.
Sara, that dig doesn’t hurt, I know all about Intel’s sleight of hand with numbers. Owning pc’s makes me a customer, not a family member as some Mac owners seem to be.
DigitalC, that is perfect analysis. However, I read that emac sales were down 25% from a year ago. Certainly there is some demand to be generated there.
ndelc, my theory, stated before on other threads, is that Steve promises not to advertise osX as an alternative to windows as long as Bill keeps producing officeX. It’s a little grassy knollish, but might be true.
“my theory, stated before on other threads, is that Steve promises not to advertise osX as an alternative to windows as long as Bill keeps producing officeX. It’s a little grassy knollish, but might be true.”
The simple solution to that is to show OfficeX running on OSX. Grassy Knollish? More like WE-NEVER-LANDED-ON-THE-MOONish.
“my theory, stated before on other threads, is that Steve promises not to advertise osX as an alternative to windows as long as Bill keeps producing officeX. It’s a little grassy knollish, but might be true.”
The simple solution to that is to show OfficeX running on OSX. Grassy Knollish? More like WE-NEVER-LANDED-ON-THE-MOONish.
Joe is right. Why can’t Apple make a 2 piece system for around $800.00 USD that is more than good enough? Why can’t they market it as secure, problem free computing for the masses? OS X 10.3, iLife, AppleWorks with the ability to export Word and Excel documents, Safari with the ability to fake being IE, a DVD RW drive, enough ram to work properly, cheap speakers, a scroll wheel 2 button mouse and the ability to upgrade the monitor to an LCD for extra $$$. What more do the Joe and Jane Sixpacks need? Throw in a couple of games and sell them at every discount computer emporium on the planet. Give the wintel centric salespeople found at these places cash incentives to sell them. The sky is the limit.
Headless low end mac. Couldn’t agree more.
Al – apart from mentioning Appleworks (shudder!), I think you’re completely right.
Also about stocking them at discount stores and supermarkets. A few years back Tesco (a UK supermarket) got hold of some stock of iMacs. They put them on their when-it’s-gone-it’s-gone shelves and they practically flew out of the shop. I think the same would happen with eMacs today if the price was right – they just have to be discounted very slightly, maybe to education prices or with FREE! 256MB extra RAM or something).
I really don’t see a problem with selling a small number of machines in this way. But just with the entry level model and not all the time. People see somthing on a bargain shelf and they think it’s a bargain no matter what the price is.
Agree with all about the headless low end mac. It will probably come fairly soon.
I’ve always said, the effect of iPods on Mac sales comes when a PC user is buying their next computer–or the one after that, or the one after that. However much time it takes them to get over their misconceptions AND need a new computer.
That can’t happen when people just assume “nobody buys Apple, and I don’t know why but I won’t either.” The iPod breaks that first barrier. The rest follows. Instantly? Of course not.