Hesseldahl reports, “In the first quarter of 2010, the iPhone accounted for 40 percent of sales, vs. 28 percent for the Mac. In the same period a year ago, it was 27 percent for the iPhone and 33 percent for the Mac. ‘It’s a different company than it used to be,’ says Gene Munster, an analyst at Piper Jaffray (PJC). ‘It’s not a traditional computer company. It’s a mobile devices company.'”
MacDailyNews Take: The percentages may have changed, but the Mac mades more money and sold more units year-over-year.
Hesseldahl reports, “In fiscal 2004, Apple sold 3.29 million Macs for the whole year. It sold slightly more than that—3.36 million—in the first quarter of fiscal 2010 alone. Charles Wolf, an analyst with Needham & Co. in New York, estimates that Apple will sell nearly 13 million Macs in 2010. ‘It’s a real testimony to the power of the Mac brand that Apple sells these machines for nearly twice what the Windows competitors charge, and yet the sales keep growing faster than the rest of the industry,’ Wolf says.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Similarly-spec’ed Windows PCs are not half the cost of Macs and, with Windows, you’re still stuck with a machine that can only run a subset of the world’s software, along with a frustrating, inferior OS, and ugly, commodity, cheap hardware festooned with garish stickers. Anyone who buys a Windows PC without investigating Apple’s Macintosh lineup doesn’t know how to buy a personal computer.
“nearly twice what Windows charges”…
Really tired of this “argument”. They of course always foget the lack of iLife, virus/security software needed on the PC, MUCH better OS, and the big ones…total cost of ownership and resale value. Plus the even kore important fact that your time is spent being productive. Driving a car is much more enjoyable then being a mechanic. Journalism today just sucks!
Apple does not sell Macs for twice what competitors charge. If you configure the competitors’ machines to meet the Mac’s specs, the price disparity typically evaporates.
Apple only charges twice as much as a much lower specification machine that is half the price.
Guys, outside of the USA Apple do indeed charge twice as much as similarly specced Windows machines in many territories.
However much more an average Mac sold costs versus an average Windows PC sold, it is worth every penny.
Maybe people are getting better at looking at the big picture and doing the real TCO math.
Zuno the Clown said “Apple does not sell Macs for twice what competitors charge. If you configure the competitors’ machines to meet the Mac’s specs, the price disparity typically evaporates.”
That is exactly right! Saying Macs cost twice as much gets very old. Even many Mac users believe it. My company ran both Mac and Dell notebooks. Similarly configured they cost about the same, not even counting the extra software, superior quality, far superior OS, lower admin cost and much better resale value.
Don’t forget all those consultant fees you have to pay somebody to bail you out of PC dead ends that happen regularly while owning a PC. The PC winds up costing more.
While the Mac “is still a rock star”, another day goes by and there is still no refresh to the Mac Pro line!
Windows-based computers are a VERY poor value. It’s only taken 26 years for some people to figure that out.
@ WindozeBloze
It was last updated in March 2009. The Mac Pro line does not receive updates as frequently. Since its debut in August 2006, there have only been two major revisions (including the one in March 2009). So I think there will be one in the next three months, but the time between new models so far is not unusual for the Mac Pro.
It’s still true that the Mac lineup has issues. The all-in-one concept is seriously flawed – to upgrade your computer you have to ditch your monitor as well (I’ve had the same display for over 10 years now – one of the first cinema displays). And there’s a hole in the non-monitor desktop line-up you could drive a truck through – the over-priced, somewhat underpowered (considering the age of the hardware) and not-very-upgradeable new mini to the over-priced and seriously outdated Mac Pros. And the 24″ LCD display is significantly over-priced as well, compared to competitors with similar specs and more features. Other computer manufacturers fill that gap nicely (if you are a computer-buyer with no real understanding of the OS difference).
And while you can argue (somewhat) about computer value parity, you still have to acknowledge that any accessory you buy from Apple (from memory to hard drives to cables and other peripherals) will cost you more than if you got it somewhere else.
FWIW, I’ve been Apple since the Apple II (except at work, where Windows is still required by the software), and can’t imagine not having one.
May be more Macs will be sold if the geniuses at the apple store steered the iPad drawn
Customers to it.
I’m typing this on my Dell laptop. Its a pretty good computer–once I took windows off of it. I work in a scientific field, and there is absolutely no need to pay for either mac or windows here. Almost all software that I use is written for Unix, and the various linux distributions have user interfaces that are really worth checking out (where do you think OSX has been getting all of its ideas for the past several years?). I am all for paying for quality rather than paying a bit less for junk, but when it comes to computers I really think you can usually get the very best software for absolutely no money at all.
They announced well ahead of time that this WWDC would be about mobile. They just released new Mac’s and a whole new OS. How soon we forget.
@ Grrrilla
> The all-in-one concept is seriously flawed
So you’re saying that laptop computers are “seriously flawed.”
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” /> Seems like there are quite a few flawed “all-in-one” computers being sold these days, by all computer makers…
Apple sells more laptops than desktops. So think of an iMac as a laptop with a display that is too large and power-consuming to be “portable” and run off a battery. Other than the iMac line, Apple’s other Macs are either MacBooks or desktops that use separate displays. So what were you saying again…?
@face:
> when it comes to computers I really
> think you can usually get the very
> best software for absolutely no mone
> at all.
Lightroom?
Aperture?
Final Cut?
Omni Graffle?
Software for tethered shooting with DSLRs and digital backs ?
…
There are no serious free alternatives for these programs.
— Eta
Hey, if you want Windows Home Standard with 3 months of A-V protection, a screen with low pixel count and poor, low angle resolution, a CPU that was cutting edge 4 years ago, slow RAM, small capacity, slow hard drives, tonnes of preloaded crapware, 1.5 hour battery life and 6 to 8 lbs of plastic, battery and obsolete hardware, you can get a laptop for half the price of a Mac. Windows desktops are even crappier than Windows laptops.
Compare equal quality hardware and you fine almost equal prices and a lot lower total cost of ownership.
@Eta
Looks like you’re a photographer. Your point is well taken, as I would not even try to argue that something along the lines of “GIMP” comes even close to performing the job of those programs. I suppose what you need varies by field, but I still believe that for many, if not most, computer users free software would be more than adequate–probably superior to what Apple, Microsoft, or anybody else can offer.
I agree with MDNs synopsis. In fact, my Windows OS (which I rarely use anymore) runs better on my Mac PC than on any other [IBM clone] PC which I’ve owned, including the one it came with. As a result, even if I were to return to [the clumsier, less effective] Windows OS, I would still be running it on an Apple Macintosh. Additionally, when you buy an IBM clone, rarely is your initial cost the complete cost of your system. You must be prepared to spend money on peripherals–already included with the Mac–and software whose price is more often than not double that of comparable software for the Mac.
I’m a very satisfied mac user and I gladly pay a premium for it.
But the wait for the new Mac Pros is starting to get ridiculous.
You can not expect an informed computer user to pay the same price today as 16 months ago for the same hardware.
The other “fact” these articles always fail to mention is the “longevity” of a typical Macintosh machine as compared to a simalarly configured PC.
I have Macs here that are over 10 years old and are still viable computers that I use 24/7 to run automated tasks on our network. Find me a 10 year old PC that is still useable and able to run all the contemporary software available today.
The longevity difference is a sadly overlooked fact when anyone attempts to compare a Mac to a PC. Whatever the price difference was 10 years ago is easily negated by the fact that the PCs that were being sold 10 years ago when I purchsed these old Macs new are now in landfills.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
@face
where do you think OSX has been getting all of its ideas for the past several years?
NextStep?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Not considering Gnome’s Mac OS 9 appearance circa 2002, Beryl/Compiz’s Exposé-like features post-Panther, the Windows-ish look of KDE (with Win95 being that cracked mirror of Mac OS), you have a point…
How about a more balanced view on Apple in general. I’m about to stop reading your opinions because you cannot be anything other than rabid Apple/Mac fanboys.
Stop with the “Mac Daily news Take” –pleeease. Your comebacks are so blatently biased and are not worth reading so don’t bother ! Makes me want to stop reading – like Bertha !