4% market share? Ha! How about 91%

So that's how they posted a 1.23 billion (yes that's with a b) profit last quarter!

Seriously, they probably make 91% of the PCs that cost over $1K so that's not surprising.  A lot of people who are buying a PC in that price range are likely building their own (like I did) and thus aren't counted in that statistic.

Still, there's something to be said about the longevity of their hardware, and it's probably due to both the quality of their components and the differences between OSX and Windows on the hardware. My MBP is turning 3 two months from now, and it's still running like a champ. My friends Windows laptops (which admittedly cost half what mine did) of the same age are dying slow, painful deaths. I'm going to get 5 years easy from this laptop (if I resist the temptation of upgrading when Nehalem makes it to the MBPs) with little degradation in performance.

Why would the average parson need to spend $1,000  or over on a computer? I haven't spent over $600 in years and I just bought 2 lap-tops this year.

Ah, but Mac users are above-average people.

 

Totally different needs. Look, I love my Macbook Pro. But it isn't for everyone. For my girlfriend to replace her laptop this year I got a $700 one from Best Buy. It's nowhere near the power or build quality of my 3 year old MBP, and I will likely be using my then 6-year-old MBP after hers has kicked the bucket. Her old Toshiba laptop (priced at $500 on Black Friday) lasted exactly 2.5 years before the battery kicked it, and another 1 year before the age/quality of the components made the Windows experience unbearable (i.e. slow load times, slow program response, etc.). And yes, I'm a power user and helped her maintain it. It wasn't Windows bloat, it was just the hardware.

Meanwhile, this is all the maintenance I have to do on my MBP, and it's at my option/discretion. I use Carbon Copy Cloner every 5-6 months to create a clone, then boot from the clone and clone back to my HD. That in effect defragments the HD completely (confirmed with iDefrag analysis). It instantly eliminates any slowdowns I may have had due to fragmentation - I create/edit music and home movies, do photography, and transfer/edit thousands of 30MB-2GB files every month which leads to fragmentation. The machine runs like I just unpacked it after one of those clone/clone back cycles.

For someone who doesn't do what I do, who only wants to browse the web, do email, and organize their music library, and use Microsoft Office, doesn't care about the build quality and ergonomics of their machine [i.e. using my GF's laptop is a much different tactile and visual experience than using mine], then a $600 laptop will do just fine.

 Look, I don't know how average I am, but I just spent $2K on a MBP instead of accepting a new Windows laptop for $0.  Why?  Because I want to use TextMate etc. for my Ruby on Rails programming.  It is worth to me that much to be doing my work on a vastly superior tool than what is available under Windows. 

Anyone who thinks that the $600 (or $300) Windows machine can do what a Mac can, aren't a professional filmmaker or programmer, or ... simply doesn't value their time.  To me time is my most precious thing -- and above all, using Mac OS X instead of Windows saves tons of time -- instead of fighting the machine, I get to do my work.

I didn't want to start a war here. I know that high end users usually prefer a Mac especially when working with pictures or videos.Most PC users are ususlly not concerned about the life of a computer because changes in technology far out pace their life time. I don't care that  PC lasts 5 years, it is way outdated by then anyway.

I just think the statistic is a little off being as we are comparing "apples" to oranges.

No war started as far as I'm concerned. I own and build my own PCs as well. They have their own purposes. Of course the built in obsolescence is part of the tech industry. If it wasn't the industry would die as no one would upgrade unless their current machine broke!

However, once I bought my MBP I realized one thing: obsolescence comes faster on the Windows machine than Macs. Part is the hardware difference, but part is definitely OS driven. OSX is just a much smoother, superior platform than Windows because of its limitations (Apple controls the hardware, etc.). As such, the Mac users I've gotten to know use their machines for 5-6 years [except for Ron who seems to be intent on keeping Apple's profit margins up whenever they release a new computer ], whereas Windows users often have to upgrade every 3-4 years and by the end of that lifespan their machines are experiencing anything from slow-down when using basic tasks to flat out dying slow deaths. The only exception to this [laptop wise] was the old IBM Thinkpads before they became Lenovo and catered to the masses. They were priced like Macs and they were built like tanks. The Business School I used to work for mandated those for incoming students and I was always impressed with their specs, performance, and build quality.

I fully acknowledge, and the market bears this out, that a less expensive Windows machine is suitable for the majority of people out there. Macs are really for either specialists [either hobbyists or professionals] in a certain field that Apple excels in (i.e. photography, graphic design, music, film, etc.) or just are sick of the drawbacks that Windows carries with it and want a smoother experience and are willing to pay extra for it. I actually started out the latter and became the former. I suspect I'm not novel in that respect.

The reason I'm willing to pay for a Mac has little to do with the actual hardware or, as the Microsoft Laptop Hunters Ad implies the "sexiness". It has to do with exactly that:

The Mac, and its complete user experience (especially in music creation and editing) makes me want to use it and be creative with it artistically, in a way that no Windows experience ever did. That's worth more than its weight in gold.

 

The most expensive gym equipment isn't worth a damn if you aren't motivated to use it to better your health. That's the way I view my Mac.

Reading the article I see this is a very recent trend. I don't keep up with Apple's computer hardware and wondered if anyone could shed some light on why their share might be increasing so much?  

66% in January, 88 in May, 91% in June. Is there a specific machine that's responsible for this, similar to their iPhone penetration?

At first I figured the graphics market would be responsible for a large portion of this, but I find that odd with such short term numbers, as I'm seeing a lot of graphics guys holding off on macs for the time being because so many apps have lengthy delays on their 64-bit mac versions.

Quote: Most Parsons have very demanding Bible and Preaching software; they have to run the entire church's business; and so on. You can see why the average Parson would spend a good sum on a computer.

  Maybe soon they will get the FF spell check working with out pressing ctrl

I think it's simply because if you look at Best Buy's inventory for example, the vast majority of PCs and PC laptops are under $1000. Meanwhile, Apple only makes one notebook build and one desktop build under $1000. So really that number is so high because Apple is quickly becoming (or is already) the largest supplier of over-$1000 computers. One could interpret it as being not really a market share gain, but the market share reflecting the fact that Apple is making the lion's share of that market anyway.

I think it is also because Mac owners spend money on computers and software; PC owners do not. I've read that the typical Mac owner spends much more on software and upgrades than the typical PC owner.

Mac users are people interested and able in spending money for their computer usage. And Apple has focuses on this during Jobs's tenure: profit over marketshare.

I think that's accurate, Dave. I've spent way more on Apple software than I ever did on PC software. And ironically, Mac software doesn't have anywhere near the DRM and encryption that PC software does (and yet is routinely broken and pirated). Most of my fellow Mac users (at least that I know personally) buy legit copies of their software rather than download them illegally. Heck the DRM is so light, you don't even have to put a key or register iWork, for example, so I could share my copy with all of my friends (but I don't, and they buy it themselves).

I also have an "in" though, working for a major university that has a really good relationship with Apple, so much so that the student store sells the software and hardware [only to full time student/staff/faculty with ID required] for even less than standard academic pricing because of the bulk in which they buy the stuff. For example the 4 core new Mac Pro is MSRP $2499, Academic $2299, my student store is selling it for $1999. That's what I bought my $2499 build Macbook Pro for back in 2006 as well. I just placed my order for Logic Studio which my store sells for $199 for the full academic version. Most of the Mac users I know still are working for academic institutions or have an "in" with one, and thus pay much more reasonable prices for their software than MSRP. My student store also has a sweetheart deal with Adobe, I can buy the CS4 Master Collection for $500 (disc only). That's a $2499 retail package!

I currently have 4 laptops and 2 desktop PCs and router that I spent an estimated $3,000 on total. One laptop per family member for internet usage, one weather station PC and the last PC is for "real computer work". I also just sold a 4 year old E-machine for $50.00. There is no way in the world I could spend 4 - 5 times as much for the same computers. My entire network cost is only 20% higher than the MSRP on just 1 Mac Pro. I understand Mac is in a different class than my computers, but then again I just bought a $10k Saturn and not a $40k Cadillac. I never saw the reasoning behind spending more than is needed.

But it's only for spending more than what you need, not what others need. On your entire network of computers can I run Final Cut Studio? Logic Pro? OSX? The iLife suite? Aperture? Sure these may have Windows counterparts, but they don't work nearly as well or as smoothly.

Heck even on cross-platform software the Mac counterparts tend to run smoother on a Mac (i.e. Digidesign Pro Tools, MovieMagic Screenwriter, some of the Adobe Creative Suite programs). About the only thing that runs better on a PC in my experience is Office. And of course Outlook, Entourage on the Mac is garbage. Admittedly, Office and Outlook are what most of the people use their PCs for (along with web surfing, which by the way is safer on a Mac due to the lack of viruses targeting Macs).

As I said before, Macs are certainly more than most people need (and obviously you fall in this category as well), but for those of us who use it for very specific professional or semi-professional purposes, it is not spending more than is needed. Don't get me wrong, I'd love for Apple to lower their prices, but spending less on a PC solution (or heck, even an equivalent amount) is not an option since I won't be able to do what I do creatively on a Mac.

Quote:
What you're asking appears to be, "Why would anyone ever spend more than I would on anything?"

An honest question gets the honest answer: Some of us do more and need more with our computers than you do. (or cars or houses or cameras or cookware or etc)

The dishonest question gets the simple answer, people have differing priorities and budgets.

I'm a little late to the thread, but this so fits me right now.  My office desktop at home is a Windows XP machine that for a variety of reasons is my main photo editing and printing machine.  It does the job well, but I spend way too much time maintaining it rather than using it.  Virus and spayware scans, registry repairs, software install/uninstall/driver issues, networking issues, etc.  I've wasted so much time and money on it.  Of course at the moment, I have more time than money, so I'm sticking with it rather than moving to a MacPro (and buying new software liscenses---a whole 'nother can of worms).  It's just not a fun or productive way to spend time.

Eh.. I was more refering to how cheap I am. I am still running a 720 projector and I haven.t bought a bluray player yet. I typically buy the cheapest that I can find that will get the job done. The Saturn is actually a step up for me - It has power windows!

I am having troubles communicating in this forum. I should have known better than posting in the Mac section. You guys think differently.


Edited by drobbins - 7/24/2009 at 11:11 am GMT

It's dangerous hanging out in the Mac section...you'll find yourself swayed to our way of thinking, and there goes your frugality! :)

Ugh, speaking of, my Vista [Enterprise] machine (which I just built last October with some pretty sweet parts, pretty much the best possible for a sub-$1200 machine (parts costs) pre-Nehalem at the time) is starting to act up. I'm getting a red startup screen right after the "Welcome" splash screen and that red screen lingers for about a minute before my desktop appears (and even when it does appear it of course takes a long time for all the drivers and virus scan to finish loading). So my startup time on my killer-spec'd 9 month old Vista machine is now about 3-4 minutes.

I've checked the error, event and startup logs and can see no reason why it is doing this (started about 3 weeks ago) and I can't tie it in with any major software or hardware changes. Before that, the machine ran very well, and I've run hardware diagnostics and no component seems to be breaking down.

I'm beta testing the latest RC of Windows 7 and that still starts up fairly quickly, so it looks like once that OS goes retail I'll be updating as soon as possible.

I hope we don't come across the wrong way. I'm a Mac enthusiast but I'm by no means a Mac evangelist (and there are a few out there). I understand that for most people Windows is the most suitable solution. I have many friends and family who own Windows machines and I'm not tempted at all to convert them (partially because I know I'd be signing myself up as the Mac Resource For All Questions if I did).

However if any of them complain about Windows, or start going down a path where Mac software would be a superior alternative for them (such as music creation/editing, graphic design, etc.) then I will make mention of the Mac alternative, and in the few cases this has happened, the result has been a happy first-time Mac purchaser. I am of course careful to explain all of the benefits AND drawbacks of switching to a Mac. Forewarned is forearmed. I haven't lost (or even strained) a friendship with anyone I've recommended a Mac to, and that's a good sign (for both Apple and me!). 

Speaking of high end Mac market share -- Microsoft's earnings came out yesterday and they are not a pretty picture.  Sooner or later it's going start dawning on MS and its hardware partners the the race to the bottom with Netbooks and other cheap computers, was a very, very bad idea.
How much does MS get on a $250~$300 Netbook for the XP license? $20? And how likely is the guy who spent a whopping $250 on a computer to turn around and pay $150 for a Windows 7 license or $xxx for MS Office?  Apple probably makes more than $20 on every pair of replacement earbuds, every charger or every base it sells for the iPod/iPhone.

Also, Apple should be sending flowers to the ad agency doing the Laptop Hunters ads, which have cemented the image of Windows as the OS which runs on cheap PCs.  In other words, the moment you can afford the best, you'll be deciding on which Mac to get.  

Believe me I have no dedicated love for windows either. I like winXP but, Vista is just a pain in the butt. I don't have anything to say about Macs because I have never touched one. (can't touch one in my price range  ) I can't understood the Windows vs. Mac thing anyway. This article is like a Tuxedo shop bragging that it has 91% of the tuxedo business compared to the WalMart next door.