backtop


Print 90 comment(s) - last by Sazar.. on Mar 20 at 2:13 PM


  (Source: Reuters)

Apple's sales plunge: January '08 thru February '09
Apple is stuck in recession purgatory

It’s been a fast paced start to the year for Apple.  The electronics superpower has rolled out a new laptop, new desktops, and even a new iPod Shuffle -- priced for the recession at $79.  However, what would normally make for another record setting start of the year for Apple is fast turning south as fears of the recession has sent customers fleeing from Apple's pricey luxury lineup.

After seeing its sales growth surpassed by PCs for the first time in months in January, the latest figures show that February was far worse for Apple.  The NPD Group has released its sales figures for the month and they are worse than even Piper Jaffray’s Gene Munster's pessimistic forecast.

Both iPod and Mac sales were down 16 percent year-to-year.  The worst predicted by analysts was around a 4 percent drop.  Analysts were somewhat predicting the drop as last February was a particularly good month for Apple, and Apple only released its new desktops and iPod in March.

Munster's new predictions place total iPod sales for the quarter ending in March at around 9 to 10 million units.  He predicts that 2 to 2.2 million Mac computers will ship in the same period.  The Street is predicting 9.5 million iPods.  These figures are not significantly worse than last year, and represent analyst optimism that Apple's new products will lead to a strong March.

Thus, the real test for Apple will be how its sales have fared at the end of March.  While January was a letdown and February was undeniably downward trending for Apple, a strong March could salvage an otherwise rocky quarter.

One potential ace in Apple's sleeve is the announcement of the iPhone OS version 3.0 later today.  No one knows quite when Apple will release the new OS, but many are speculating wildly, including guessing at new hardware (every past x.0 release has been accompanied by new hardware).  Big news could stave off the Wall Street wolves for a little while, even if Apple's sales disappoint.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

maybe, just maybe...
By Gul Westfale on 3/17/2009 10:20:12 AM , Rating: 1
well it was february, when people are still recovering from christmas spending, and the economy is in the toilet... but maybe this is because people are beginning to realise that all apple products are overpriced, underfeatured, and only run 5% of the software that is out there.

nah, people are still i-fall-for-marketing-instead-of-informing-myself retards. i'm going with "it's february/bad economy" as the explanation.




RE: maybe, just maybe...
By michael2k on 3/17/2009 12:49:49 PM , Rating: 1
5% of the software?

Didn't you hear they switched to Intel? That they can/do run Windows, natively and in VM?

More like 99% of the software, and now PCs only run 90% of the software.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By omnicronx on 3/17/09, Rating: 0
RE: maybe, just maybe...
By michael2k on 3/17/2009 7:25:55 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I don't, but you can if you want.

Feel free to eBay your system.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By consumerwhore on 3/17/2009 1:55:52 PM , Rating: 3
Uh... So after buying an overpriced laptop, I have to fork out more money for virtualization software and a (non-OEM) copy Windows?

No thanks.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By afkrotch on 3/17/2009 3:38:58 PM , Rating: 2
Thinking PC owners don't care about that 10% of software. If they did, they wouldn't be PC owners.

Also what's so good about a Mac if you have it running Windows? Wasn't the point of getting a Mac to run OSX? Or you going to tell me the reason you bought a Mac was because it was shiny and pretty? Sure as hell wasn't because of it's price.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By michael2k on 3/17/09, Rating: 0
RE: maybe, just maybe...
By retrospooty on 3/17/2009 7:30:19 PM , Rating: 3
" The choice was always between getting something done, or configuring your system and software to work. With two kids, it's much easier to pay an extra 15% than to eke out an extra 10 hours to get everything working. "

If that is your case, all it means is you dont know much about Windows. Its super easy. I am sure Mac is easier for you, because you are used to it.

Both OS's are just fine, and do almost everything that almost everyone needs them to do. It really comes down to preference. Neither is better or worse. PC is better for Games and Business apps. Mac has some good aspects as well. Both also have bad points.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By michael2k on 3/17/09, Rating: -1
RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Felofasofa on 3/17/2009 9:27:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's not my contention.

You contend that buying a Mac allows for better iparenting, as all us PC guys are mired in problems trying to edit and burn DVD's and neglect our kids.
It's tosh at it's thickest, reeking of ismugness, and insulting to zillions of PC users who get far more out PC's than your light-weight icrap suite allows for. Besides my soon to be teenage son would kill me if I got rid of his PC and got him a Mac. "Play Crysis on this thing son" WTF?


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Pirks on 3/17/09, Rating: -1
RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Felofasofa on 3/17/2009 9:45:05 PM , Rating: 2
He's got an Xbox as well, which he likes, but I'm careful in how much screen based entertainment I allow. Sport is his priority which is good. I find getting him to read novels is the hardest.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/17/2009 10:11:53 PM , Rating: 2
Just Crysis? WTF are you talking about? Crysis wasn't even all that great, and it's over a year old now, so I have no idea why you picked that as your example... Wait, yes I do know why -- it's because you are incapable of presenting a worthwhile argument that is based in reality and supported with factual evidence.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/17/2009 10:14:46 PM , Rating: 2
*meant to say 'sole example'


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Pirks on 3/17/2009 11:06:45 PM , Rating: 1
Crysis was my sole example because it was the last big budget blockbuster PC exclusive FPS in history of gaming.

After Crysis is gone there's not much sense to buy gaming PC - everything major and/or big budget is multiplatform or console-only these days.

Unless you're a WoW-type fan of course and hence don't require flashy graphics, any decent onboard AMD GPU will render WoW-type crappy 3D just like that.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/18/2009 10:10:00 AM , Rating: 2
Who cares if new games are multiplatform as long as they are fun? Your comment about "not much sense" in PC gaming is purely subjective. Maybe for you that is the case, but as you have demonstrated time and again, you are not demonstrative of typical users.

Here's a different perspective. Personally, I can't stand Sony's controller layout, and I greatly prefer Microsoft's gamepad. I also can't stand Sony in general, so I won't be buying one of their consoles any time soon. The Wii has terrible graphics and few games that interest me. That leaves the 360, and though I admittedly do want one, I really don't need it. I mostly play FPS games, and a gamepad is not suited to that genre. PC also has the benefit of better graphics.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By retrospooty on 3/18/2009 11:27:38 AM , Rating: 2
"After Crysis is gone there's not much sense to buy gaming PC - everything major and/or big budget is multiplatform or console-only these days."

Spoken from someone that is obviously not a PC gamer. Games on PC are still the best. Better graphics, better resolution, better mods, better control. Nothing can match a keyboard and mouse for full range motion and pinpoint accuracy in a 3d shooter or FPS.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Whaaambulance on 3/18/2009 11:37:33 AM , Rating: 2
Rest assured, Pirks will always chime in with his biased, opinionated answers backed with zero knowledge. I like how as soon as Pirks makes a post, he is already rated down to -1.

Justice.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Pirks on 3/18/2009 2:40:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I like how as soon as Pirks makes a post, he is already rated down to -1
And I like how Whaaambulance continues lying again and again, his clownish performance entertains me every morning. Thanks Whaaa :P


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Pirks on 3/18/2009 1:45:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Better graphics
Nope, no progress in graphics since Crysis release. Sad but true. Until I see another big budget PC exclusive that pushes rendering ABOVE what the Crysis showed us - I'll stay by my opinion. Where's Crysis 2? Nowhere to be found. Why? Because Crytek is busy porting their stuff to consoles, trying to compensate for their massive losses due to PC piracy. Make your own conclusions out of it, I don't care and I won't persuade you.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/18/2009 2:26:52 PM , Rating: 3
Clearly you either have not looked at image quality comparisons or have chosen to ignore them. Here's one of many:
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6202552/index.htm...

The fact that PC games haven't really surpassed Crysis for image quality yet is irrelevant if consoles haven't even reached that level. You're talking about higher image quality from newer rendering engines and game content, but the problem is that the consoles fall short on antialiasing and various filter and shader effects. That's the cost of having a 3-generation-old GPU.

There's nothing to persuade here. You are wrong, plain and simple.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Pirks on 3/18/2009 3:16:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You're talking about higher image quality from newer rendering engines and game content, but the problem is that the consoles fall short on antialiasing and various filter and shader effects.
Who cares about those few un-antialiased pixels on screen if console is MUCH MUCH cheaper than a gaming PC? For most people it's pretty idiotic affair to pay extra grand just to get a few better looking pixels on screen. NOT. EVEN. FUNNY.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/18/2009 3:37:55 PM , Rating: 2
LOL. How very typical of you: argue one thing, then as soon as you are proven wrong, say that it doesn't matter.

First of all, way to try and minimalize the difference by saying 'just a few pixels.' Some graphical elements, such as the trees in Fallout3, look downright terrible on the consoles, and that comes down to more than just a few pixels. Secondly, Judging by the popularity of 8800/9800 and 4700 series graphics cards, I would say that quite a few people care. Third, you are completely ignoring the fact that a PC does way more things than a console, and if you are going to buy a new PC anyway, why not spend several $100 more to make it a decent gamer? Also, you are inflating the cost of a gaming rig (shame on you). You can build a very solid gamer for $700-$1000, which unless a console costs zero or negative dollars, is not an extra grand.

In summary, you fail.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Pirks on 3/18/2009 3:49:55 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
the trees in Fallout3 look downright terrible on the consoles
Didn't notice that on those screenshots from your link.
quote:
Judging by the popularity of 8800/9800 and 4700 series graphics cards...
...people prefer to invest their money in expensive GPUs instead of games, hence the piracy and exodus of gaming studios to the console or cross platform side due to this piracy. No amount of marketing money from AMD or nVidia will change that, unfortunately.
quote:
why not spend several $100 more to make it a decent gamer?
Why not spend less than that and get more great big budget games like GeoW 2 or Uncharted by buying a console?

In summary, you're blind.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/18/2009 4:05:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Didn't notice that on those screenshots from your link.

You can call me blind (metaphorically) all you want, but if this is true then you literally do have vision problems. Your right to judge aesthetics (ahem, Apple) is hereby revoked.

quote:
...people prefer to invest their money in expensive GPUs instead of games, hence the piracy and exodus of gaming studios to the console or cross platform side due to this piracy. No amount of marketing money from AMD or nVidia will change that, unfortunately.

Shifting the argument away from you failure again, lovely.

quote:
Why not spend less than that and get more great big budget games like GeoW 2 or Uncharted by buying a console?

You missed the point, as usual. If you are in the market for a new computer and you don't own a console, then the cost to boost your purchase to a decent gaming rig is the same as what it would cost to get a console in addition to the computer. And again, you're ignoring the fact that there are lots of great games for PC. You're also ignoring the fact that games are frequently discounted on Steam, while consolse games are generally more expensive because they have to make back their losses on the hardware.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Pirks on 3/18/2009 4:30:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you are in the market for a new computer and you don't own a console, then the cost to boost your purchase to a decent gaming rig is the same as what it would cost to get a console in addition to the computer.
That's only if you hand build your computer which is very rare case in general. So your arguments are not applicable to the general public. Unfortunately far from all games are on Steam (where's new Riddick game, Assault on Dark Athena? not on Steam! oh nooooeesss, Ronald Hubbs just told me it MUST be on Steam!) so this is moot too. And you are ignoring the fact that almost all these great games on PC are multiplatform so they exist on consoles, which negates a reason to buy a gaming PC.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/18/2009 4:51:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's only if you hand build your computer which is very rare case in general. So your arguments are not applicable to the general public. Unfortunately far from all games are on Steam (where's new Riddick game, Assault on Dark Athena? not on Steam! oh nooooeesss, Ronald Hubbs just told me it MUST be on Steam!) so this is moot too. And you are ignoring the fact that almost all these great games on PC are multiplatform so they exist on consoles, which negates a reason to buy a gaming PC.

You continue to fumble around the issue (I almost said dance around, but then realized that it would imply a level of gracefulness, of which you have seem to have none). I never said that Steam has all games, I simply said that the games it does have are frequently discounted. The fact that digital distribution is growing means that sales will become more common as competitors to Steam inevitably arise. Also, while you get the best deal by hand-building, it is not required in order to get a gaming rig for under $1K. Perhaps you should look into these things before you comment.

By the way, have you given Scientology any serious thought? You seem like prime candidate.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Pirks on 3/18/2009 5:17:14 PM , Rating: 2
Gaming rig "for under $1k" is still significantly more expensive than Xbox 360 or a Wii, so this changes nothing.

When and only when digital distribution is everywhere you start telling me your fairy tales about Steam, but not now.

Now the situation is pretty different - I can't find some games I want in digital form, they're sold as packaged goods only.

Why should I care about your Steam argument about "old PC games being discounted" when the old console games are also discounted? You miss the basic logic here.

quote:
have you given Scientology any serious thought?
Ah, this is where your nick comes from ;)))


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/19/2009 12:08:48 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Gaming rig "for under $1k" is still significantly more expensive than Xbox 360 or a Wii, so this changes nothing.

Changes nothing? You claimed that a gaming PC was a grand more expensive than a console. You were wrong, as usual.

quote:
When and only when digital distribution is everywhere you start telling me your fairy tales about Steam, but not now.

Steam isn't a fairy tale. It exists now, and has existed for several years. And Steam isn't the only game download service.

quote:
Now the situation is pretty different - I can't find some games I want in digital form, they're sold as packaged goods only.

Again, I never claimed that Steam has everything. But let's look at some packaged goods prices. What do you suppose is the going rate for some recent games on each platform?
http://www.ebgames.com/browse/search.aspx?N=0&Ntk=...
http://www.ebgames.com/browse/search.aspx?N=0&Ntk=...
http://www.ebgames.com/browse/search.aspx?N=0&Ntk=...
http://www.ebgames.com/browse/search.aspx?N=0&Ntk=...
You can feel free to look up other games, but the overall result is the same. Console games cost more than PC games because they need to make up for their losses on the hardware.

quote:
Why should I care about your Steam argument about "old PC games being discounted" when the old console games are also discounted? You miss the basic logic here.

No, you fail at reading. Where did you get the word "old" from? It isn't from any of my comments, so next time you use quotes, how about actually copying what I said into them. But we can talk about 'old' games too if you want. How cheap can you find a new copy of Bioshock for the PS3 or 360? I got it for $5 on Steam a couple months ago.

Clearly you don't use Steam or you would know that games often launch at a discounted prices and that every few weeks they put large portions of the their catalog on sale. This isn't just for old games, it also includes new ones.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Sazar on 3/20/2009 2:10:31 PM , Rating: 2
Not really.

You can't do anything with a gaming console.

You will likely need to buy or own a display, so that has to be factored into the cost and also will likely have to buy or own a decent sound system.

Not a necessity but it is part of the total cost of ownership of a console. A self-contained gaming system for a PC is cheaper than a self-contained gaming console. It's actually common sense.

With regards to the Steam Distribution system, this is a lot like Xbox Live is attempting to be, but Steam is far more useful in what it offers, all around and has a very large reach and massive installed user base. And, it is FREE, unlike Xbox Live.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By retrospooty on 3/18/2009 6:09:22 PM , Rating: 2
"For most people it's pretty idiotic affair to pay extra grand just to get a few better looking pixels on screen. NOT. EVEN. FUNNY. "

You are clueless on this. Just because a game isn't PC only, doesnt mean its not a great PC game. Most games today are written for all platforms - this doesn't make PC any better or worse. Just because You aren't a PC gamer doesn't mean its not a great platform... Just like because I don't personally like the Mac OS, doesn't make it a bad platform.

And a gaming PC is more than just a game cosole - its also a PC. You purchase a low and PC and a console. For the same price, I have both in one, and faster. It's not any more expensive... Clueless.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Pirks on 3/18/2009 6:57:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
For the same price, I have both in one, and faster
But with less games :P
quote:
Most games today are written for all platforms - this doesn't make PC any better or worse.
No, I didn't mean PC is better or worse, I meant just this: gaming PC is just too expensive for most people for very little return on investment. It wasn't true when big budget blockbuster PC exclusives like Crysis were developed regularly, but since these are gone forever, gaming PC lost its status and became a niche machine. Doesn't mean it's worse of course.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By retrospooty on 3/18/2009 7:23:49 PM , Rating: 2
"gaming PC is just too expensive for most people "

Like I said - the cost of a low end PC + a console is about the same as a good gaming PC

" gaming PC lost its status and became a niche machine."

Right... This is why Nvidia is filthy rich and ATI is keeping AMD afloat. In a world of cheap computers with built in video cards, they sure sell an aweful lot of video cards - even in this tight economy.

Again, clueless. Just stop - your embarrasing yourself.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Pirks on 3/18/2009 7:41:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Like I said - the cost of a low end PC + a console is about the same as a good gaming PC
Like I said - you're gonna miss a lot of great games if you go the PC only route. That's plain stupid path for most people, i.e. all those who aren't tech literate. From their point of view missing great big budget games while not saving any money is _dumb_.
quote:
This is why Nvidia is filthy rich and ATI is keeping AMD afloat. In a world of cheap computers with built in video cards, they sure sell an aweful lot of video cards - even in this tight economy
By the way Apple is filthy rich for EXACTLY the same reason - niche "elite" high margin goods for a little group of buyers with lotsa extra dough are goood for bottom line, ya know ;-) Apple's and nVidia's experience proves this point, now doesn't it?


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/19/2009 12:11:19 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Again, clueless. Just stop - your embarrasing yourself.

I hope to hell that he's just a troll, because if he is serious about any of the things he posts then he is one of the most horrifically obtuse individuals I have ever encountered.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Pirks on 3/18/2009 3:22:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6202552/index.htm...

"I really need a console though, as I can't afford a high-end pc. I don't get everything handed to me by my parents so that is in the future. That is where consoles beat it out, with its dirt cheap price."

See, it never hurts to read your own links, eh? ;)
*LOLzzz* :))))


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/18/2009 3:46:24 PM , Rating: 2
Using anonymous user comments as supposed backing for your argument? That's pretty lame, even for you.

And by the way, it's called a job. If you work hard and get one that pays well, then you can afford to pay a bit extra for better quality. For someone who continually defends Apple's overpriced garbage, you of all people should be able to understand that (though in this case you actually get something for the cost premium). And the comment about parents buying things for you is just stupid because most gamers are adults, if you bother to check recent gaming statistics.

And what was that line of yours, something about: "who are you to judge how someone spends their money? let's see your credentials please." Hypocrite.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Pirks on 3/18/2009 3:58:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And by the way, it's called a job. If you work hard and get one that pays well, then you can afford to pay a bit extra for better quality.
That's a good argument, and it explains why PCs are relegated to a niche status of expensive "elite" gaming machines with the ocean of cheapo consoles surrounding them these days. A few people who can afford expensive gaming PC buy it, the rest, the masses - they just buy cheapo consoles like Xbox 360.
quote:
who are you to judge how someone spends their money?
I'm not judging how someone spends their money, idiot. I'm just saying that gaming PCs have moved to the expensive "elite" niche, leaving "cheapo machine for masses" status to Xbox 360 and Wii. I DON'T CARE HOW PEOPLE SPEND THEIR MONEY. Is that clear?


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/18/2009 4:09:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Pirks: For most people it's pretty idiotic affair to pay extra grand just to get a few better looking pixels on screen. NOT. EVEN. FUNNY.

quote:
Pirks: I'm not judging how someone spends their money

You lie, as usual. Fail.

quote:
A few people who can afford expensive gaming PC buy it, the rest, the masses - they just buy cheapo consoles like Xbox 360.

Fail. This has already been addressed and you are still spewing the same BS.

quote:
I DON'T CARE HOW PEOPLE SPEND THEIR MONEY. Is that clear?

No, it isn't clear at all. You flop around more than John Kerry.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By michael2k on 3/18/2009 12:38:54 AM , Rating: 2
What are you talking about?

I'm not insulting you for buying a PC. I'm saying the time it takes to learn a PC vs learn a Mac I would rather spend taking my kid to the playground or something. Are you trying to argue that using PC software is as easy as using equivalent Mac software? I use PC software at work, and it definitely isn't as easy!

I don't know why you even bring up zillions of PC users. My tech support emails tells me zillions of PC users don't actually know how to use their PCs and should probably use a Mac instead.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Felofasofa on 3/18/2009 5:33:22 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
where do I have the time to figure out how to bend Picasa (a free app even) to my Will?

Seriously if you can't figure out a basic Image editor like Picasso then sterilization would be best for you.
quote:
Or figure out how to use Google Pages or Sites?
You can't figure out Google? See above.

Learning a real app like Maya is almost identical on both platforms as would almost anything beyond utility software.
quote:
My tech support emails

You're involved in Tech support? God help us


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By michael2k on 3/18/2009 11:35:44 AM , Rating: 2
I figured it out, you can't read. I say "Google Sites" and you see "Google Search". I say "bend to my will", and you "figure out".

I use more than "basic" stuff. The difference between Apple and other software is that most software makes basic things easy. Apple makes hard things easy.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/18/2009 9:25:12 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Are you trying to argue that using PC software is as easy as using equivalent Mac software? I use PC software at work, and it definitely isn't as easy!

Your claim is worthless without specific examples.

I can just as easily say "I had to use Macs at school from grades 1-12 and they suck." That statement, while true to my experience, is just as worthless as the statement that you have given.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By retrospooty on 3/17/2009 6:55:34 PM , Rating: 3
"Didn't you hear they switched to Intel? That they can/do run Windows, natively and in VM?"

Yes, we all know the superior Mac OS. Its so superior that it needed to be made to allow you to run Windows on it so you can have a full featured machine.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By gabacus on 3/17/09, Rating: 0
RE: maybe, just maybe...
By retrospooty on 3/18/2009 10:04:37 AM , Rating: 2
OK, take your Mac to work at your average company, and try to run business apps on it and see your massive failure... Then take it home and try to run any of the latest games released in the past 4 years... You cant - it cant.

it's not that Mac OS isnt capable, it is, but business apps and games arent written for it, and wont ever be. it will never get much more than the current 9% marketshare... and therefore games and business apps will never be developed for it. It is now, and will always be a niche market.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By gabacus on 3/18/2009 7:11:43 PM , Rating: 2
i agree with what you are saying there. mac just doesnt fit in the corporate world. the software just isnt written for it and you are right, it never will be. as a personal computer however it is a gem. for doing stuff at home like managing your music, photos and family movies, mac offers a very simple integrated solution that is a pleasure to use. sure a win pc is capable of doing the same thing, but it just doesnt.

mac do fall short on gaming. this is something apple has tried to deal with but failed. halo was originally a mac game that was taken over by ms and given to the xbox. and while i agree that real gaming can only be enjoyed on a pc, a console offers an simple solution for the average person.

oh, and i think the 9% marketshare will grow for apple. it will never get to equal footing with pc's but there is still a lot of potential for growth. there are people out there that are starting to realise there is another option. a windows computer is not the only computer available and the move to mac isnt as scary as people think. i have seen people who have made the transition and they will not go back.


RE: maybe, just maybe...
By Smilin on 3/18/2009 1:27:26 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah people are recovering from Christmas spending in February but they were last February as well.

The time of year doesn't really count in a year-over-year comparison :P


Umm
By Whaaambulance on 3/17/2009 11:22:50 AM , Rating: 5
Why is it always Jason Mick reporting on Apple news? Is there a less biased editor that can possibly do this every now and then? Just thought I would throw that out there...

:)




RE: Umm
By Boze on 3/17/2009 1:16:05 PM , Rating: 1
I don't think Jason Mick is biased to the point of his reporting being unreliable or overly agenda-based. He tends to report the good along with the bad, which is the hallmark of a good reporter, although I will say that DailyTech as a whole needs less (ideally, "no") opinion and just stick to the facts.

The public is intelligent enough to discern a situation and most companies and organizations already have spin doctors, no need for a news outlet or reporter to be an unpaid one (unless you're Fox News).


RE: Umm
By TomZ on 3/17/2009 1:55:46 PM , Rating: 5
Opinionated, slightly biased, controvertial, and/or overblown stories generate far more page clicks than simple statements of the facts.


RE: Umm
By Whaaambulance on 3/17/2009 2:37:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Opinionated, slightly biased, controvertial, and/or overblown stories


Speaking of which... where is Pirks?


RE: Umm
By TomZ on 3/17/2009 3:01:01 PM , Rating: 4
Pirks just denied less than a week ago that Apple's sales were on the decline. He's probably too ashamed to post here today.


RE: Umm
By afkrotch on 3/17/2009 3:30:35 PM , Rating: 2
Probably crying on his Alienware's keyboard. lol


RE: Umm
By Pirks on 3/17/2009 7:28:44 PM , Rating: 1
Yep, crying about declining sales of the WinPCs.
Boohooo :~~-(


RE: Umm
By MamiyaOtaru on 3/18/2009 4:46:12 AM , Rating: 2
How can you, with a straight face, say this in an article referencing higher growth rates for PCs than Macs in January, followed by an out and out decline in Mac sales compared to last February?

I mean yeah, Apple's sales grew faster last year, but that hasn't been true this year. PCs are growing faster this year, and are actually growing, unlike Apple at the moment.

Your post is a stunning example of why no one can take you seriously. You've just got your fingers in your ears while you yell "lalala I'm not listening"


RE: Umm
By Pirks on 3/18/2009 5:48:42 AM , Rating: 2
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=904412

"The PC industry will experience its sharpest unit decline in history, with PC shipments totaling 257 million units in 2009, an 11.9 percent decline from 2008"

Keep dreaming about "rising" PC sales, buddy. Whatever makes you sleep better ;)


RE: Umm
By Whaaambulance on 3/18/2009 11:45:27 AM , Rating: 2
It's called a shrinking economy. It doesn't mean that people are less interested in buying PC's. Let us take a look at the declining sales for Apple:

http://www.dailytech.com/Mac+iPod+Sales+Drop+16+Pe...

I think I have figured out what makes you tick. You defend Apple, yet you claim you don't own one. You bash PC's as well. You just like to argue for the sake of argument. You really have no ultimate point. And when someone proves you wrong (which is the majority of the time), you resort to copying what they say... pretty much 2nd grade stuff.


RE: Umm
By Pirks on 3/18/2009 1:54:10 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
It's called a shrinking economy
Yeah, this is why I was crying about decreasing sales of WinPCs. Because of the shrinking economy. Thanks Captain Obvious :)))
quote:
I think I have figured out what makes you tick
Figuring out what makes you tick is pretty easy too - being a clown and entertaining me must be your secret hobby ;-)


RE: Umm
By Pirks on 3/17/09, Rating: 0
RE: Umm
By jjmcubed on 3/17/2009 2:35:22 PM , Rating: 3
Is Whaaambulance complaining about Jason? How ironic..


RE: Umm
By Whaaambulance on 3/17/2009 2:49:35 PM , Rating: 2
I wasn't complaining as much as I was suggesting that they open the Apple stories to other writers, Douchebag.


RE: Umm
By 306maxi on 3/17/2009 2:51:26 PM , Rating: 2
Perhaps the others just don't care. Personally I think Jason was a bit too pro-Apple for my liking a couple of years ago but I really like his stuff these days as it seems to be a lot more balanced now.


RE: Umm
By jjmcubed on 3/17/2009 10:49:51 PM , Rating: 2
It was a joke over your screen name... Why insult me when all I did was make a small joke?


No kidding!
By Bender 123 on 3/17/2009 9:22:11 AM , Rating: 5
In a terrible financial climate, where your entire business model (at this point) is incremental upgrades to get people to buy the latest and greatest, what did we expect?

I love my 1st gen Touch, but the 2.0 features were not enough to make me give up $200+ to upgrade. I also have my 80 Gig Zune, which I find better than the iPod Classic, sound quality wise and upgradability wise...There just has not been enough innovation in the last few rounds of upgrades to get me to throw down cash.




RE: No kidding!
By msheredy on 3/17/09, Rating: -1
RE: No kidding!
By phazers on 3/17/2009 4:29:20 PM , Rating: 3
Actually quite a few here have 80GB Zunes. Mine works perfectly fine, and came with the free bonus of pissing off Mac fanbois :)


RE: No kidding!
By afkrotch on 3/17/2009 4:35:34 PM , Rating: 2
I own an 8 gig and an 80 gig (upgraded to 120 gig) Zune. Both work well and are cheaper than an iPod.

Might try out the newer iRivers though. I dislike not having an equalizer.


RE: No kidding!
By omnicronx on 3/17/2009 5:39:55 PM , Rating: 2
I love my Zune.. too bad all the accessories are overpriced and cost almost as much as the player itself.

Now it just sits because I am not willing to buy an $90 car adaptor.

Meanwhile I bought my girlfriend a car adapter, and a mini ipod stereo for under 100. You have to admit, buying an ipod does makes sense, unless you only use for an mp3 is player is solely a portable device.. i.e you don't plan on buying any accessories.

I like the interface and wireless sync of the zune, but the countless amounts of ipod accessories trumps both of those.


RE: No kidding!
By Sazar on 3/20/2009 2:13:10 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, the accessories suck. That was my biggest regret with my Zune. I loved the device but the licensing agreements Microsoft has are so stupid. I couldn't even get a decent car kit when I had my 80GB.

Eventually sold it and got me an iPhone. Now I just listen to Pandora all day long :)


I thought that
By nah on 3/17/2009 9:46:04 AM , Rating: 2
Apple's products were Veblen Goods http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_goods
--however, I now realise that they're only normal goods http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_good

how disappointing




RE: I thought that
By michael2k on 3/17/2009 12:31:52 PM , Rating: 2
Huh. You're disappointed that Apple made the transition from luxury to normal? Doesn't that make you a snob?

I'm glad they moved to normal; it makes their products more accessible.


RE: I thought that
By nah on 3/17/2009 1:29:31 PM , Rating: 2
I have bought no Apple products--that isn't to say that I haven't owned them----and I intend to keep it that way--although I do think that their after sales service is excellent and partially compensates for their outrageous pricing


RE: I thought that
By quiksilvr on 3/17/2009 1:42:30 PM , Rating: 1
Ditto. Plus their highly questionable business practices keep me away even more. The iPhone was an amazing hardware bogged down by fascist software.


RE: I thought that
By michael2k on 3/17/2009 7:43:41 PM , Rating: 2
Huh, again. I thought the iPhone was decent hardware with amazing software.

Anyone can put together a 480x320 screen; some have gone up to 640x480 or 800x600.
Anyone can bundle bluetooth, WiFi, and EDGE; some have already done so.
Anyone can add GPS; again, some have done so.
Anyone can add a touch-screen; some have done so.

HTC has some incredible hardware itself.

But it's the software that is special because you only have four choices:
WinMo6
Android
Symbian
Roll your own

Apple rolled their own, and that way no one can borrow it.
WinMo 6 is atrocious, 6.5 is a little better, and 7 is over a year away.
Android is great, but still behind OS X mobile
Symbian is rock solid, but behind OS X mobile
No one else really has the chops to "roll your own" except RIM.


RE: I thought that
By afkrotch on 3/17/2009 3:33:28 PM , Rating: 2
Doesn't their need to be some kind of demand for veblen goods first? Think that's why they're just normal goods now. Apple found out they can't just up and make a veblen good.

Now you can say that Apple products create a snob effect.


The Month Right Before A New Product Launch
By ViRGE on 3/17/2009 10:05:38 AM , Rating: 4
Given that February was the month before Apple's big desktop refresh (that just about everyone and their mother was expecting) I wouldn't be shocked if these are abnormally low numbers. Apple has always had a problem moving stuff when people think new units are on the way, since said buyers don't want to buy something that is literally going out of date.

March and April will be better months to look at. March will likely be abnormally high due to held-off purchases, and April would be the first "normal" month by that metric. Apple's sales are going to be lower regardless because even they are not immune to a slower economy, but I doubt they're nearly as bad as February's.




RE: The Month Right Before A New Product Launch
By omnicronx on 3/17/2009 10:59:50 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
March will likely be abnormally high due to held-off purchases, and April would be the first "normal" month by that metric. Apple's sales are going to be lower regardless because even they are not immune to a slower economy, but I doubt they're nearly as bad as February's.
And I bet they will still be down next month year over year. Last year was their best March revenue in the history of Apple, no way in hell they are going to come anywhere close to last years numbers. They probably won't be bad as February, but this is not going to be a good quarter for Apple compared to previous years, that's for sure.


By Oregonian2 on 3/17/2009 2:44:04 PM , Rating: 3
Well, it's also been in reports today that breast implants are down 15%, which matches remarkably well to the Apple downturn. Not sure about the relationship, but it's interesting to think about.

:-)


So what?
By frobizzle on 3/17/2009 10:03:36 AM , Rating: 2
Apple products have historically been overpriced. With the current economic recession, people tend to be more careful where their cash outlays go. If one can get a non-Apple product that is equivalent or superior to the Apple offering for less (often substantially less) money, Apple stays on the shelf to gather dust.




RE: So what?
By michael2k on 3/17/09, Rating: -1
RE: So what?
By omnicronx on 3/17/2009 1:34:06 PM , Rating: 2
1) Except this is not true, they are more expensive with comparable products than all of these companies.

2) This is a ridiculous statement, buying less implies they are being more careful with their cash. Unless of course everyone lost their jobs, but this is obviously not the case for the vast majority as unemployment has gone up less than 3%.

3) Agree with you here, Apple still has no real competition in the mp3 player market, although iTunes plays a huge role in this.


RE: So what?
By michael2k on 3/17/2009 7:38:27 PM , Rating: 2
So a 20" Dell XPS One vs an 20" iMac, where you get better video, storage, and CPU speed, $799+software vs $1,199.
But24" Dell XPS One is the same price as a 24" iMac, where you get 4 cores at 2.33GHz vs 2 cores at 2.66GHz, 640GB HDD on the iMac, you would need the equivalent software package ($99) on the Dell, and you still get better graphics on the Mac (9400M vs X4500HD

So that one data point disproves your assertion that (all) Macs are more expensive with comparable products than all these companies. Dell may have a cheaper entry level, but the "comparable" to a 24" iMac costs just as much.

2) It isn't, if you looked at it critically. People AREN'T smarter just because they have less money. They are still just as stupid as before, they just happen to buy cheaper things.

Does that make sense? Instead of buying $20 worth of steak, they buy $10 worth of steak, the difference in this case is that Apple doesn't provide a $10 steak, you either buy $20 or nothing.


The real question on my mind:
By talozin on 3/17/2009 12:32:35 PM , Rating: 2
How does this compare to sales figures for other major PC (and/or MP3 player) makers?

Not to suggest, you know, journalism or anything radical like that, but it would sort of be useful to know if these figures are dramatically worse, about the same, or dramatically better than other tier-1 hardware vendors, e.g., Dell, HP, Lenovo, et al.




Gettin' close...
By nixoofta on 3/17/2009 11:40:03 PM , Rating: 2
If things get just a little worse,...marketing should get bonuses. WooHoo!




excellent
By mfed3 on 3/17/09, Rating: 0
Check this
By anonymousk104 on 3/17/09, Rating: -1
RE: Check this
By Whaaambulance on 3/17/09, Rating: -1
RE: Check this
By mindless1 on 3/17/09, Rating: 0
RE: Check this
By mindless1 on 3/19/2009 4:39:01 AM , Rating: 2
I take this low rating as proof the spammer has too many accounts here. Funny that this spammer doesn't realize, we don't click random links so it was all wasted stupidity!


"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki