Macs- 16% installed base instead of 3% market share

[alfredo]

Could Mac have a much larger share of users than the oft stated appox 3% market share stated?

http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/5933/

According to a statement released earlier this year, Apple Computer reported their 2005 first quarterly revenue and net income as the highest in the history of their company, with 74% revenue growth. Apple shipped 1,046,000 Macintosh units during this quarter, representing a 26% increase in CPU units over the year-ago quarter. According to US News and World Report, Macintosh owners buy 30% more software than their Windows counterparts. Further, Macintosh software comprises over 18% of all software sold, according to the Software and Information Industry Association. In addition, the Software Publishers Association (SPA) estimates that 16 percent of computer users are on Macs.


Could Market Share numbers be skewed because Macs enjoy a longer useful life than PC users? Slashdot http://slashdot.org explains it this way:

"(If for example 2 people are using computers and one replaces his 2x in a 3 year period and the other only does once, market-share dynamics dictate that one demographic has 75% market share while the other has only 25% -- even though install base is still 50/50.)"

[Demit]

1. Doesn't the 3% figure come from comparing Apple to PC hardware mfgers?

It's a misleading comparison, because Apple is unique in that it also has its own proprietary OS. It is not merely a computer manufacturer.

But your point is a good one too--the cost of Macs comes down when you factor in cost of ownership and return on investment. They last longer for so many reasons.

[ET Awful]

2. Also, the differences in the amount of software sales are more likely

attributed to the prevalence of software piracy in the PC world.

Also, there must be some kind of odd adjustment being made for the market shares on the software, for instance, the vast majority of PC's come with software preinstalled, same with Mac. This alone would make those numbers not add up, as by buying a PC, a person also buys software.

I'd be interested to see where the numbers actually came from.

As to Macs lasting longer, I wouldn't go that far, I've got PC's running in my server room that haven't been turned off for over 8 years.

[SpiralHawk]

3. Rowwwwr - Reading this on my Mac Powerbook G4 running Tiger

(the new Mac OS 10.4.1)

Loving it. The smoothest and most sensible computer system I have ever worked with. Rowwwr. This is how computing should be.

[Deja Q]

10. You can get OS X for the PC too...

It's called "FreeBSD".

Mac basically took FreeBSD, made their own GUI, then ramped up the price while maintaining their tradition of charging for service pack upgrades. Nice. </cynic>

[Orangepeel]

4. market share is based on sales.

The answer to the question "Could Market Share numbers be skewed because Macs enjoy a longer useful life than PC users?" is no. Market share is based on sales, not use. If, say, 3% of all new computers sold are Macs, then Mac has a 3% share of the new computer market. If 18% of all software sold is Macintosh software, then Macintosh has an 18% share of the software market. That's what the term means.

Of course that doesn't mean that market share numbers are an accurate reflection of the relative quality of PCs versus Macs. Best selling doesn't necessarily mean best. First time buyers who pick a PC and/or people who choose to replace their old PCs with new PCs rather than switching to Macs might be doing so for a whole host of reasons other than quality, longevity or ease of use. They could feel locked into the decision because of the software they already own, they could choose a PC because PCs are easier to find due to wider distribution, they could be influenced by advertising, etc.

But saying that the market share numbers could be "skewed" is not correct, unless there is some deliberate attempt to distort them, like when the Heritage Foundation buys truckloads of Ann Coulter books to make it into a "best seller".

[Ravenseye]

5. It's way more complicated than pure numbers, but I'd say about 4.5%

If we're talking pure numbers of computers sold we need to figure out also how many computers are used in schools, colleges, and the like. Businesses, and so on.

I know schools using pc's older than imacs. Other schools using newer ones.

Once you factor in the numbers that are bulk buy's you have to figure out how to adjust for that. If a school has 30 macs in the school but nobody uses them, then do they count? If the school has 10 macs and they're constently being used 12 hours a day, how do they count?

So right away it's hard to tell anything.

Then looking at personal users. I think Mac users tend to buy more software for different reasons. People who 'just want a computer' seem to tend to just go into Best Buy and purchase a PC. Then they use it to surf the internet, and do email. Maybe play a game or two. Most people who buy Mac's though tend to do it for more specific reasons. To edit their digital pictures, or movies usually. So the Mac user is more likely to purchase more initial software.

I think the best estimates of Market Share that are the easiest to come by are web tracking statistics. I run a number of sites and just looking over the May numbers for a few sites Mac runs at about 4.5% of web users. I'd say that's probably the quickest way to get an accurate number rather than numbers of comuters sold.

[Karmakaze]

6. The real question is - Who cares?

Who cares if Macs are more popular or PC's are more popular? You like Mac? Buy a damn Mac! It's no skin off my nose.

The only reason I can see for posts like this is fear of "buyer's remorse". Somone bought a Mac and is worried that they may just have made a bad decision, so have decided to go fishing for a little positive reinforcement.

You know what? If you bought a Mac and enjoy it, then good for you. Just don't expect me to give a damn about it or Macs in general.

I like my PC, and have never had even the slightest inclination to switch to Mac. I'm sure you don't care about that either.

[alfredo]

7. It's not just about Macs, it is how numbers are used to

skew our perceptions.

Getting back to units sold. If the average PC user replaces their computer ever 3 years and the average Mac user replaces their Mac every four years, then the units sold would be skewed by customer behavior.

Japanese cars have longer useful life span than US made cars, that could skew the numbers in favor of US car manufacturers.





You look at computer choice based on whether you are left or right-handed. 13% of the population are left handed, but 24% of Mac users are left handed.

[Karmakaze]

8. What perceptions?

Does it matter how many of each one is sold? Is worthiness dependent on popularity? If the Mac suits you, do you care if only three in a hundred computer users use it? Does having that number be thirty in a hundred make your Mac better?

For all I care I could be the only PC user and I would still be happy so long as I can use it. So why bother worrying about numbers like this?

Unless you own stock in Apple, or some major PC manufacturer, or are responsible for making decisions such as which platform to create software or hardware for, then what do you care how many people use it?

You look at computer choice based on whether you are left or right-handed. 13% of the population are left handed, but 24% of Mac users are left handed.

If those are real figures, I am simply dumbfounded that anyone cared enough to compile such figures! I mean really, this is just about the most useless statistic EVER.

So what??

Does the fact that left handed people appear to prefer Mac make a blind bit of difference as to which is the better technology? If more left handed people preferred self flagellation, would that mean that buying a whip is a good idea?

Did you know that silver is the most popular colour for cars? Does that mean that silver cars are better than red ones?

I just don't get it.

Now if you wanna compare features, at least that makes sense. There surely has to be a realistic and fair measurement of computer usefulness, but the popularity of that computer is NOT part of it.

[alfredo]

13. How many PC's are in land fills and how many are still in use.

How many 10 year old Chevy's are still on the road, and how many Hondas are still on the road. Are Chevy's replaced at a faster rate than Honda's? Would that skew the market share in favor of Chevy's?

What if there were an equal number of Honda and Chevy owners? Now lets say that Chevy's wear out or are traded every 4 years and Honda users trade or sell every 10 years. Who has the highest market share based on sales?

I am just saying that using market share is misleading. We also don't know how many of those PC have had Windows removed and Linux installed? That is not figured into market share numbers because it is assumed that if it is a PC it is running Windows.

[Karmakaze]

16. First of all, Windows was never mentioned.

Secondly who cares if Chevy's have a higher "market share" or lower "user base" does that make the Chevy a better car?

If not, who cares?

If you buy stuff becuase it's popular then that is YOUR problem - personally I buy stuff because I want it and think it fits my needs. Its popularity doesn't even enter the equation.

"I am just saying that using market share is misleading."

Misleading to who? Market share is calculated for finacial purposes - if Chevy sells more cars than Honda, then they are going to have higher profits - that is ALL market share can tell you. If you spot an article that suggests market share determines quality, then don't even bother to read it, because it is flawed right from the word go.

Personally, I believe if you are stupid enough to fall for such a tactic, you deserve everything you get.

[alfredo]

20. If you don't care, why are you posting in this topic?

All that I am saying is that market share may not translate to one for one when it comes to user base. And it doesn't just pertain to the PC market.

[Karmakaze]

23. I don't care about their market share...

I just find it interesting that Mac users are the ones that keep posting this sort of stuff. So, I wondered, if I actually pointed out how ridiculous it is, what would the reaction from Mac users be?

Like I said in a couple of other posts - it seems to me that Mac users are constantly looking for positive reinforcement of their purchasing decisions by attempting to convert others to the same decision.

It's very much like religion, perhaps even cult-like, and I find that fascinating.

[alfredo]

29. The Mac appeals to the underdogs. The loyalty comes from

the fact that it catered to the content creators, the artist and writers. Capitalist don't care
for things like design, but a good portion of us do. They do things that other companies can't seem to do with the same elegance. That much maligned one button mouse is beautiful. You should see how a graphics pro just flies with on of them.

Their design team is the best in the industry. Open up a G5 and look at it. It's beautiful. Why can't Dell or IBM do something like that?

Is there any other computer company that is doing anything that is pushing the boundaries in so many areas. The Motley Fool spoke of Apple as a rule maker in the industry. There are other reasons too. Jobs. If you understood what he was really doing, you'd be paying attention. When Jobs returned to Apple he put a grand strategy together. I was given a general idea by a person who worked on the Micro Kernel. So far the plan seems to be working. He has learned from his early mistake. I think his years at NeXt and Pixar has quite a bit to do with where Apple is now and where it is going.

Apple is a compelling story, and that is why we post what is going on. Has HP generated any real excitement in the industry lately?

[cestpaspossible]

9. IOW, if you are dumb enough to buy something because

other people are buying it, instead of because it is the best product, you are screwing yourself.

[Deja Q]

11. Do you or did you ever own a Betamax VCR?

I agree with your POV, though.

[cestpaspossible]

14. No.

But weighing the 'best product' is a complicated choice, which involves more than just whether the technology is superior.

[carrowsboy]

12. possible excuse for skewering

The majority of PC sellers (ex. Dell) contribute heavily to Republicans whereas Apple is purely Democratic.

Tell people that "everyone" only buys PCs and consumers will believe that they are more reliable, better built (lol), and more popular.

"Everybody who is anybody buys PC". Or something along those lines.

I've had my iMac for nearly 18 months now and love it. I had initially purchased a Dell, "cause everybody loves Dell," and the piece of shit broke within 24 hours! Spent the next 3 months struggling to get my $$$ back and when I did, followed my friends advice and bought Mac.

It was tough at first to get use to, but it was worth it. Best damned computer I have ever used. Fits my needs, is fast and easy and actually was CHEAPER than the PC. There is also an Apple Store right around the corner from work, so whenever i have an issue I get fast and proper service. The helplines are also based out of California and Wisconsin, not Calcutta like Dell. So that helps keep jobs in this country.

[Karmakaze]

18. A few issues...

Tell people that "everyone" only buys PCs and consumers will believe that they are more reliable, better built (lol), and more popular.

Well my experience is that when more people buy something that means it is "more popular". In fact I do believe "more people" is the very dfinition of "more popular". But hey, what do I know, I'm a PC user.

As for your experience with Dell, that has NOTHING to do with PC's and EVERYTHING to do with Dell. Just because Dell ripped you off does not mean the PC in general is bad. But, I'm happy you like your Mac. Now tell me, why should I care?

Mac users are like Christians - once they convert they feel this deep seated need to convert others. Personally I couldn't care less whether your Mac was cheaper or whatever, because when I made MY purchasing decision, it wasn't based on what other people think about it, it was based on the fact that this PC met my needs better than any alternative.

Considering how customisable PC's are, it's no surprise.

[earth mom]

19. I'm a Mac user-funny how I often get the superior attitude by PC users

that I bought a piece of crap. :crazy:

There is definitely a competition of sorts going.

And Yes! My Mac is better than your PC ! :P

[Karmakaze]

24. Link?

Have you got a link to a post on DU, started by a PC user, that said soemthing like the original post? Cause I have sure never seen a thread where a PC user out of the blue started quoting sales figures of Mac's vs PC's as though they meant anything.

I agree there is a competition going on, but it is a competition intiitated by Mac users who seemingly need posotive reinforcement of their purchaising decisions.

And no, I don't give a damn whether your Mac is better than my PC! :P

[earth mom]

30. I'm talking about my personal experience out in the world

and I'd say that the competition is equal on both sides.

:hi:

[The Revolution]

15. Do the market share numbers include custom PCs?

Just wondering if those market share numbers only include PCs shipped by major manufacturers (such as Dell). The first computer I bought was a Dell, but since then I've been building my own PCs. Most of my friends also have custom made PCs.

On a somewhat related note, I saw this article that says Apple is planning on switching to Intel chips, although it hasn't been officially announced yet:

Apple has used IBM's PowerPC processors since 1994, but will begin a phased transition to Intel's chips, sources familiar with the situation said. Apple plans to move lower-end computers such as the Mac Mini to Intel chips in mid-2006 and higher-end models such as the Power Mac in mid-2007, sources said.

...

The Wall Street Journal reported last month that Apple was considering switching to Intel, but many analysts were skeptical citing the difficulty and risk to Apple.

That skepticism remains. "If they actually do that, I will be surprised, amazed and concerned," said Insight 64 analyst Nathan Brookwood. "I don't know that Apple's market share can survive another architecture shift. Every time they do this, they lose more customers" and more software partners, he said.

http://news.com.com/Apple+to+ditch+IBM%2C+switch+to+Intel+chips/2100-1006_3-5731398.html?tag=nefd.lede

[charlie]

17. There's a poster in the Slashdot thread

about the Apple switch (don't have a link to his comment, sorry) who says Intel will be manufacturing PPC chips. If he's right, there'll be no architecture shift, just a move to a possibly more reliable and innovative vendor than IBM. Sounds like a win to me.

[Llewlladdwr]

21. I can't imagine that this would be true.

Why in the world would Intel want to tool up a plant to produce chips using a completely different architecture than they're using now? The cost would be enormous and there's just no way they're going to produce enough volume to make it economically feasible. I think this is just wishful thinking on someone's part. Face it MacHeads, starting in 2006 you'll be just another bunch of PC users! :)

[WLKjr]

22. I am one of many that went out and purchase thier first mac

when the mini came out. I was a big mac fan before then but couldn't afford the thousand + dollar machines they made.


I love my mac, it's my primary computer now (not for gaming though)

[Redstone]

25. It is true that Mac users tend not to throw old Macs out;

I have (best guess) eight to ten old Macs around, from a May 1985 Mac 128K to a PowerBook 520C that I drag out when I need to read a floppy, to the 7100/80 under my office desk, to... man, I need to do some housecleaning.

Redstone

[Glenda]

28. True, you may not need all of those :)

I have a mac screen from 1989, that goes with a 98 powermac now. Also an emac from a few years ago. It is true they are sturdy. Even the apple personal laserwriter lasted me many years...

I have 2 PCs as well. It is true, they break down more.

[yurbud]

26. When I buy a new Mac, I give my old one to someone deprived

a friend is still using the first Mac I bought in 1996.

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[yurbud]

27. Macs are like Japanese cars, PCs like American

The American car may have more horsepower and chrome doodads, but it will be in the junkyard a good decade before it's Japanese counterparts. My mom bought Ford Escort that was just a couple of years old, and my dad bought a baby Blazer and both had cracked engine blocks--they were worthless. By contrast, my mom gave me her '77 Toyota Corona wagon in the mid-90s, and I drove it for a couple of years. The chances of seeing a Ford Pinto or Chevy Vega still tooling around of the same vintage was near zero.

Same thing with PCs and Macs. Macs can have more than one owner, and I've only gotten rid of mine because of changes in how newer peripherals connect or hitting the upper limits of expansion of memory. By contrast, when a friend bought a Dell PC the salesman TOLD him it would last about 2-3 years.