backtop


Print 70 comment(s) - last by Methal.. on Jul 17 at 12:26 PM


Apple has risen to a 10 percent U.S. market share in sales for the first time in years.  (Source: MacLife)

Lenovo posted even bigger international growth.  (Source: Flickr)

  (Source: guardian.co.uk/)
Lenovo wins even bigger in world sales

In a testament to its brilliant marketing, innovative packaging, and strong brand image, Apple, Inc. (AAPL) has reportedly achieved over 10 percent U.S. personal computer market share for the first time since the early 1990s.

Both Gartner, Inc. (IT) and IDC Research, Inc. -- two of the most prestigious market research firms -- have concluded [1][2] that Apple took 10.7 of the U.S. market in calendar quarter 2011.  The researchers used gathered shipment data to draw their conclusions, the most accurate of several market analytics approaches.

While the 10 percent figure represents computers sold in the quarter and not the total percentage of computers in operation, the study shows that consumers are increasingly picking Apple, even as the overall PC market struggles.

Incidentally, Apple's best-selling iPad tablet is cited as a major factor in declining PC sales.  Gartner estimates that sales dropped 5.6 percent year-to-year, while the IDC estimates that sales dipped 4.2 percent.  

Gartner analyst Mikako Kitagawa remarks, "Given the hype around media tablets such as the iPad, retailers were very conservative in placing orders for PCs. Instead, they wanted to secure space for media tablets. Some PC vendors had to lower their inventory through promotions, while others slimmed their product lines at retailers."

But Apple managed to buck the trend it helped create, posting 8.5 percent growth, according to Gartner, or 14.7 percent growth according to the IDC.  Both Gartner and the IDC say Apple is now in third place in PC sales.

Another clear "winner" was Japan's Toshiba Corp. (TYO:6502) who rose 3.3 percent according to Gartner, or 3.7 percent according to the IDC.  Toshiba bumped Taiwanese computer-maker ASUSTEK Computer Inc. (TPE:2357) to sixth place in U.S. sales.

Market-leader Hewlett-Packard Company (HPQ) and the Taiwanese Acer Inc. (TPE:2353) shed market share in the U.S.  In Acer's case, the fall was particularly precipitous, with both Gartner and IDC estimating its drop at over 20 percent.  Acer's fall was precipitated by the mild collapse of the netbook market, a key driver of its sales.

Dell, Inc. (DELL) lost ground to HP, dropping 10.2 percent (according to the IDC) or 9.8 percent (according to Gartner), however it still clung to second place.

Global sales showed anemic 2.3 percent growth (Gartner) or 2.6 percent growth (IDC).  HP and Dell both posted similar world growth and enjoyed the same rankings as in the U.S.  Apple did not rank in global sales.  

In global sales ASUSTEK occupied the fifth spot, with Acer's posting a smaller global lost and dropping to fourth.  Globally the biggest winner was Hong Kong-based Lenovo Group, Ltd. (HKG: 0992) who grew 22.9 percent (IDC) or 22.5 percent (Gartner) to seize third place.  Lenovo's biggest gains were in the U.S. and Japan, markets it has traditionally seen lower sales in.

Apple's rise from obscurity to a solid third place ranking in the U.S. is not without its shortcomings.  Apple has thus far struggled to replicate that growth globally, particularly in markets where price trumps image or where local players have a strong foothold (e.g. Asia).  The rise in market share has also led to a rising number of serious malware attacks on Apple's OS X platform -- a platform that has typically been ignored by hackers, thanks to its small market share.



Comments     Threshold


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

You get what you pay for
By MartyLK on 7/14/2011 2:34:30 PM , Rating: 0
In the case of Mac OS, you get higher quality and reliability. They cost more because they are better.




RE: You get what you pay for
By macdevdude on 7/14/11, Rating: -1
RE: You get what you pay for
By kleinma on 7/14/2011 3:15:55 PM , Rating: 5
Yes, and they don't get viruses, but even if they do, they still don't, because Apple will say they don't, which means they don't, even when they do.

There is also no chance that a mac's hard drive can fail, even though they use the same ones as PC laptops, they still can't fail, even though they can, but they won't, because Apple will say they don't, even when they do.

Then there is security. Mac has the best security, because Apple says it does, so it must, even though it doesn't.

Apple did not take top honors for the most insecure software in the world, even though they did, but they didn't, because Apple will not acknowledge that they have totally insecure hackable in 30 second software. Microsoft makes 2-3x the amount of software Apple does, and they still don't even come in second place for most software flaws.

http://www.techeye.net/security/apple-has-the-most...

Keep living in your dream world devdude, and hopefully you are an actual mac dev, so stevie can stick it to you good sucking up 30% of anything you might want to sell on his platform...


RE: You get what you pay for
By RjBass on 7/14/2011 2:50:31 PM , Rating: 5
Lol, wow, I see somebody really partakes in the kool-aid.


RE: You get what you pay for
By W00dmann on 7/14/2011 3:10:11 PM , Rating: 4
He's only expressing his opinion.

Perception of "value" can be subjective based upon the individual's needs and wants. In the case of laptops, if you want a solidly built laptop with superb battery life and access to Apple's app store, you pay extra and you buy the Mac. In exchange, you forgo being able to use a wide range of PC software and you "lock" yourself in to Apple's way of doing things. Conversely, if you want a less expensive laptop built from (typically) flimsier materials, but one that offers higher-spec'd components and compatibility with almost every application written on the planet, you buy a PC. PC's typically offer better "bang for buck" in the hardware / component department, but people may or may not value that over and above the Macbook's strengths. So you buy what you think works best for you.


RE: You get what you pay for
By Pirks on 7/14/2011 3:19:46 PM , Rating: 3
best post ever, I couldn't have put it better than you

*thumbs up*


RE: You get what you pay for
By macdevdude on 7/14/11, Rating: -1
RE: You get what you pay for
By Pirks on 7/14/2011 3:44:48 PM , Rating: 3
Correction: only the wealthy are picking Apple, majority is still picking Windows 'cause it's much cheaper and much more flexible and compatible solution


RE: You get what you pay for
By Methal on 7/17/2011 12:26:57 PM , Rating: 2
Apple is an Idiot company building crap for idiots who think if they spend a ton more they are getting better.


RE: You get what you pay for
By ApfDaMan on 7/14/2011 3:47:25 PM , Rating: 1
The free market isnt buying products based on w00dmans approach. they are completely blind to apples shortcomings, just as the average consumer has no idea about the limitations of a windows system. they are buying them because of their blind love for apple. very few people buy apple because they have legitimate reasons for thinking it is better for them.


RE: You get what you pay for
By Pirks on 7/14/2011 3:52:56 PM , Rating: 4
Even then, if you assume that only blind Apple followers get Apple products, the ever expanding number of such followers must give you a hint Apple is onto something that others don't know and/or don't have. Any kind of the cult can't grow without its leader giving them something. So, Apple thus is giving someting important to people, and this is why its cult is growing.

Uh, I'm basically saying here that there are some solid reasons for the number of Apple followers to grow. You should keep this in mind, it's important.


By snakeInTheGrass on 7/14/2011 10:16:51 PM , Rating: 1
Not thinking, knowing, but we get your point.


RE: You get what you pay for
By lukarak on 7/15/2011 12:43:28 AM , Rating: 2
That's simply not true. It's no fluke that apple sells almost 3/4 of their computers as laptops. There is no blind love for apple. People just don't care about price/performance ratio in this category, especially in the 13'' form factor, that is the most sold one for apple. Design is pretty important, mobility, build quality, and apple is either tied with the competition, or light years ahead in these areas.

Plus, here in Croatia, i can sell my old macbook, almost 4 years old, for around 3000 kunas, which is around $500. My HP 15'', i can't sell for 1500, so around $250, although it was just 7% cheaper when i bought it. I think it would go for $200.


RE: You get what you pay for
By amanojaku on 7/14/2011 3:42:51 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
He's only expressing his opinion.
Does this sound like an opinion to you?
quote:
In the case of Mac OS, you get higher quality and reliability. They cost more because they are better.
He stated an opinion as fact.
quote:
In the case of laptops, if you want a solidly built laptop with superb battery life and access to Apple's app store, you pay extra and you buy the Mac.
More opinion stated as fact.
quote:
Conversely, if you want a less expensive laptop built from (typically) flimsier materials, but one that offers higher-spec'd components and compatibility with almost every application written on the planet, you buy a PC.
More opinion stated as fact.

Apple makes three notebooks. Dell, HP, and Lenovo make around 20 between them. I won't bother naming all the other vendors. Quality runs the gamut, but it has been MY experience that Apple is among the worst. All of my MacBook friends need repairs every year, starting with the DVD drive, then hard drive, motherboard, and finally the screen.

Even my crappy Dells made out of tissue paper have lasted at least two years without a repair. The most solid laptop I have ever used is an HP workstation, but Lenovo has models, even thin and light ones smaller than a MacBook, that come close to its level of sturdiness. Most of these systems are cheaper than a similarly spec'd MacBook, too. My OPINION.


RE: You get what you pay for
By W00dmann on 7/14/11, Rating: 0
RE: You get what you pay for
By mircea on 7/15/2011 3:25:58 AM , Rating: 2
I know why this is:
quote:
the absurdly high customer satisfaction levels with Apple products, highest in the industry by a wide margin


Most Apple buyers are so in love (or protective/wanting to prove they payed more for getting more) with their Apple products, that they put in this survey as a plus that "I can just drop my laptop at the Apple store when it brakes and come back 3 day later and pick it up all fixed".

This wile most PC users complain and put as minus on survey every time they do something stupid and have to manually restart the computer (no real repairs needed).


By inperfectdarkness on 7/14/2011 3:27:05 PM , Rating: 2
let's be fair. the jonestown cult drank flavor-aid, not kool-aid. :)

i'll thank you to stop despoiling the kool-aid name, or else be prepared to reap the whirlwind the next time somebody shouts "OH YEAH!"


RE: You get what you pay for
By sabbede on 7/14/2011 3:06:55 PM , Rating: 2
Not really. The only quality difference I have seen in Macs is in hardware design. They are quite elegant and often lovely.
However, the components themselves are nothing special and a PC can be assembled with the exact same components (different case obviously) for far less.
As for the OS, its really nothing special. For my own needs/purposes, it would be a serious disadvantage. The locked in nature of the software (including the draconian guidelines of the new app store), and the general lack of openness and configuration is just plain wrong.
Truly, a terrible lack of flexibility. A lack of freedom.
It is the openness and flexibility of the PC that permits the instabilities one may encounter. A trade-off I consider more than worthwhile.
Besides, if you're a gamer (like me) then buying a Mac is just a waste of money. Of all the games I play (and there are many) only one is available for the Mac.

Of course, there are certain applications that remain heavily Mac-centric or are available only on the Mac. So, if you need them, you need a Mac.
Or, perhaps all you want to do is check your email and browse the web while showing off the fact that you have money to waste.
Or, you just might not be capable of handling anything more complicated then the striped-down, oversimplified Mac OS. Nobody's fault of course. Some people just aren't that bright.


RE: You get what you pay for
By TakinYourPoints on 7/14/2011 8:57:26 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
However, the components themselves are nothing special and a PC can be assembled with the exact same components (different case obviously) for far less.


The keyboard, trackpad, and displays are why I have the Macs that I have. Internals are only one part of the equation. It is the price:horsepower:size:weight:interface:battery life ratio that MBPs balance so well. If you want to spend less then one or more of these things will be compromised. That's totally cool btw, everyone should be aware of their budget.

quote:
As for the OS, its really nothing special. For my own needs/purposes, it would be a serious disadvantage. The locked in nature of the software (including the draconian guidelines of the new app store), and the general lack of openness and configuration is just plain wrong.


I don't understand this argument. The App Store is completely optional, nothing is stopping you from buying software from other sources. It is also far less draconian than Steam in that it isn't nearly as restrictive a piece of DRM, and I LOVE Steam. All my games except for Starcraft 2 and League Of Legends are bought on Steam. If I can't complain about Steam then I sure as hell am not going to complain about the App Store.

As for the operating system, it is as configurable as Windows, and you actually get more control if you know your way around a Unix command line terminal. Now if you want to talk about unnecessary complexity then yes, Windows has that over OS X. There is no reason why something as simple as changing file permissions takes 5-6 steps in Windows 7 (if you know EXACTLY what you're doing) as opposed to two logical steps in OS X. The submenus and preference panes are my only real complaints about Windows 7 at this point, and hopefully they address them in Windows 8.

quote:
Besides, if you're a gamer (like me) then buying a Mac is just a waste of money. Of all the games I play (and there are many) only one is available for the Mac.


I agree, but it also depends on the games. Most of what I play is available on both operating systems (Valve/Blizzard games and League Of Legends), but if you want everything and gaming is a prime focus then you'll obviously want a Windows PC, both for OS support and faster GPUs. I've built my own uber-PCs since 97 and I'm not stopping anytime soon. :)

quote:
Of course, there are certain applications that remain heavily Mac-centric or are available only on the Mac. So, if you need them, you need a Mac.


Yup, Final Cut Studio here. My Mac is for work while my PC is for games. Works out fine here. Its actually great since my 27" iMac functions as the main display for my PC, its like I got a $1000+ monitor with a fast Mac built into it.

quote:
Or, perhaps all you want to do is check your email and browse the web while showing off the fact that you have money to waste.


Or maybe things like good displays, multitouch trackpads with full OS and application integration, good keyboards, magsafe connectors, excellent customer service, and battery life are important to you. If someone wants to spend the cash on a MBP then it isn't always because they are deluded, there are several practical and logical reasons why they are desirable over other brands. Most notebooks outside of Macs and Lenovos just aren't very good.


RE: You get what you pay for
By Pirks on 7/14/11, Rating: 0
RE: You get what you pay for
By maven81 on 7/15/2011 12:02:51 PM , Rating: 2
"As for the operating system, it is as configurable as Windows, and you actually get more control if you know your way around a Unix command line terminal."

Are you serious? You can't even change the appearance of the OS without downloading iffy 3rd party applications, and I'm talking about simple things here like fonts and colors. The fact that you need to get into the terminal to get to the guts of the OS is a failure, not a feature. I shouldn't need to use the command line to perform basic tasks. And sometimes you don't even have a choice. You mentioned file permissions. I've had many instances where doing it through the GUI kept failing, and only doing it through the terminal finally did it correctly.
But aside from that, the OS is incredibly slow (basic things like redrawing windows and opening applications. Even on a mac pro I experience the dreaded beachball). It's got awful memory management (tries to keep everything running, which eats up your ram very quickly and starts paging to disk. Or assigns half a gig of ram just to firefox!) I'm sorry but it's a fisher price OS and I say that as someone that has to use it the whole day every day at work.


"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot














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