macintosh marketshare

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

news service reports macintosh is now at less than 4% marketshare. but
ipod is keeping the money going at apple.
25 answers Last reply
More about macintosh marketshare
  1. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    iPod isn't a money maker neither is the iTunes music store. It's kind
    of a whack marketing chain. At least this is how my Apple sales rep
    explained it to me. The iTunes music store helps sell iPods which in
    turn helps sell Macintoshes. Their biggest money makers are the desktop
    and powerbook computers. A lot less over head on the computers when
    compared to the mark-up. Where as the iPod they make a few bucks on
    each sale, not to be taken litterally. I'm sure it's more than five
    dollars per sale but far less than 200.

    cheers

    garrett


    On 2004-12-10 16:45:56 -0800, genericaudioperson@hotmail.com said:

    > news service reports macintosh is now at less than 4% marketshare. but
    > ipod is keeping the money going at apple.
  2. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    On 12/10/04 4:45 PM, in article
    1102725956.755990.250060@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com,
    "genericaudioperson@hotmail.com" <genericaudioperson@hotmail.com> wrote:

    > news service reports macintosh is now at less than 4% marketshare. but
    > ipod is keeping the money going at apple.
    >


    Your point? I drive a Range Rover. As far as auto sales, the Range Rover
    is less than 1/10th of 1 percent of the market share. Should I be concerned
    or something? Maybe I should buy a Ford Explorer. I'm sure I would feel
    more comfortable knowing it has a higher market share.
  3. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    4 percent of the marketshare is like 20 million computers a year world
    wide. It is a big enough volume to make good products and make money.
    Had it been 15 years ago than 4 percent might be problematic.
  4. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    --

    Somewhere in Texas, a village is missing its idiot.
    "Stephen Boyke" <sdelsolray@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:BDE0722E.2B93A%sdelsolray@comcast.net...
    > On 12/10/04 4:45 PM, in article
    > 1102725956.755990.250060@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com,
    > "genericaudioperson@hotmail.com" <genericaudioperson@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > > news service reports macintosh is now at less than 4% marketshare. but
    > > ipod is keeping the money going at apple.
    > >
    >
    >
    > Your point? I drive a Range Rover. As far as auto sales, the Range Rover
    > is less than 1/10th of 1 percent of the market share. Should I be
    concerned
    > or something? Maybe I should buy a Ford Explorer. I'm sure I would feel
    > more comfortable knowing it has a higher market share.
    >

    The other thing to remember is that the PC market share is split amongst
    1000 different vendors.
  5. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <1102831128.326582.101240@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
    transmogrifa <mmeprod@mmeproductions.com> wrote:

    > 4 percent of the marketshare is like 20 million computers a year world
    > wide. It is a big enough volume to make good products and make money.
    > Had it been 15 years ago than 4 percent might be problematic.


    I pretty sure Apple shipped a little over 800,000 Macs last quarter.
    And a hair over 2 million ipods.


    David Correia
    Celebration Sound
    Warren, Rhode Island

    CelebrationSound@aol.com
    www.CelebrationSound.com
  6. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    transmogrifa <mmeprod@mmeproductions.com> wrote:
    >4 percent of the marketshare is like 20 million computers a year world
    >wide. It is a big enough volume to make good products and make money.
    >Had it been 15 years ago than 4 percent might be problematic.

    Precisely. It is still sort of depressing to see how Microsoft and Intel
    have taken the industry over.

    The guys making Amiga machines today, though, would drool for 4% of the
    marketplace...
    --scott
    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  7. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    david, your figures are pretty much on,
    but they are for the last quarter only.

    http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/TechNews/TechInvestor/2004/10/13/667793-ap.html
  8. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    The battery of the ipod or the computers? The battery of a Sony laptop
    cost 199 to replace. 100 would be a deal.
    Mike http://www.mmeproductions.com
  9. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    << david, your figures are pretty much on,
    but they are for the last quarter only.

    http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/TechNews/TechInvestor/2004/10/13/667793-ap.html
    >>


    which is pretty much what you said....
    it was early, i thought you meant for the year.....
    i'm awake now....
  10. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    "Digidog27" wrote ...
    > << david, your figures are pretty much on,
    > but they are for the last quarter only.
    >
    > http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/TechNews/TechInvestor/2004/10/13/667793-ap.html
    >
    > which is pretty much what you said....
    > it was early, i thought you meant for the year.....
    > i'm awake now....

    "Apple officials believe the popularity of the company's music
    products, which also includes the online ITunes Music Store,
    is also creating a "halo effect," translating to more sales for the
    computer business, Oppenheimer said. "

    Wait till they find out that Apple charges $100 to replace the
    battery. The halo may turn out to be a liability.
  11. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    > Wait till they find out that Apple charges $100 to replace the
    > battery. The halo may turn out to be a liability.

    Wait 'till they find out they can buy a newer battery with significantly
    more capacity for $35 and change it out themselves....
  12. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <20041212095507.09653.00001308@mb-m20.aol.com>, Digidog27
    <digidog27@aol.com> wrote:

    > << david, your figures are pretty much on,
    > but they are for the last quarter only.
    >
    > http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/TechNews/TechInvestor/2004/10/13/667793-ap.html
    > >>


    > which is pretty much what you said....
    > it was early, i thought you meant for the year.....
    > i'm awake now....


    I've done the same thing myself.

    I keep close touch cuz I own the stock. It's been breath taking the
    last 2 years.


    David Correia
    Celebration Sound
    Warren, Rhode Island

    CelebrationSound@aol.com
    www.CelebrationSound.com
  13. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <Ke1vd.41823$6q2.9307@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>, Particle
    Salad <mark@particlesalad.com> wrote:

    > > Wait till they find out that Apple charges $100 to replace the
    > > battery. The halo may turn out to be a liability.
    >
    > Wait 'till they find out they can buy a newer battery with significantly
    > more capacity for $35 and change it out themselves...


    One of the unmentioned powers of the iPod is the diverse 3rd party
    business ecosystem that has grown around it. All kinds of products from
    all kinds of companies. From BMW to Bose.

    As Mark mentioned above, replacement iPod batteries are easy to get and
    cheap. e.g.

    http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/ipod/


    David Correia
    Celebration Sound
    Warren, Rhode Island

    CelebrationSound@aol.com
    www.CelebrationSound.com
  14. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    "Garrett Cox" <garrcox@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:2004121017594216807%garrcox@yahoocom...
    > iPod isn't a money maker neither is the iTunes music store. It's kind
    > of a whack marketing chain. At least this is how my Apple sales rep
    > explained it to me. The iTunes music store helps sell iPods which in
    > turn helps sell Macintoshes.

    Well, that's the theory, but most of Apple's significant wad of ready cash
    came from iPods this year, not macs. And only a very tiny bit came from
    iTunes.

    So what's the next rabbit from the hat?

    jb


    >Their biggest money makers are the desktop
    > and powerbook computers. A lot less over head on the computers when
    > compared to the mark-up. Where as the iPod they make a few bucks on
    > each sale, not to be taken litterally. I'm sure it's more than five
    > dollars per sale but far less than 200.
    >
    > cheers
    >
    > garrett
    >
    >
    >
    > On 2004-12-10 16:45:56 -0800, genericaudioperson@hotmail.com said:
    >
    > > news service reports macintosh is now at less than 4% marketshare. but
    > > ipod is keeping the money going at apple.
    >
    >
  15. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    reddred <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote:
    >"Garrett Cox" <garrcox@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >> iPod isn't a money maker neither is the iTunes music store. It's kind
    >> of a whack marketing chain. At least this is how my Apple sales rep
    >> explained it to me. The iTunes music store helps sell iPods which in
    >> turn helps sell Macintoshes.
    >
    >Well, that's the theory, but most of Apple's significant wad of ready cash
    >came from iPods this year, not macs. And only a very tiny bit came from
    >iTunes.
    >
    >So what's the next rabbit from the hat?

    A follow-on to the Newton.
    Apple is really good at pulling disconnected rabbits out of hats, and they
    have been doing so since they started. Aside from a couple mistakes, like
    the Apple III and the Mac Portable, they've done surprisingly well at it.
    --scott


    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  16. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <AM2dnTFooO14ICLcRVn-pw@adelphia.com>, reddred
    <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote:

    > "Garrett Cox" <garrcox@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:2004121017594216807%garrcox@yahoocom...
    > > iPod isn't a money maker neither is the iTunes music store. It's kind
    > > of a whack marketing chain. At least this is how my Apple sales rep
    > > explained it to me. The iTunes music store helps sell iPods which in
    > > turn helps sell Macintoshes.
    >
    > Well, that's the theory, but most of Apple's significant wad of ready cash
    > came from iPods this year, not macs. And only a very tiny bit came from
    > iTunes.
    >
    > So what's the next rabbit from the hat?
    >
    > jb


    Yes, the Music Store is part of the iTunes/iPod package and by itself
    makes some but not a ton of dough.

    But separating out the iPod earnings is hard to do, and it something
    the company has not done. What it really is is a bunch of extra
    earnings for the Apple infrastructure. I personally would guess about
    55 - 60% of their profit. There were 835,000 Macs and 2,000,000 iPods
    sold during the last quarter. $106 million in earnings. Don't forget
    that iBook and Powerbook sales have gone up considerably over the past
    year. And the company earns interest on their almost $5 billion nest
    egg. I know I could probably get by on the interest generated by $5
    billion ;>

    As to the next rabbit, Wall St. says it's lots and lots more iPods.
    Apple with sell more in 2005, and supposedly even more in 2006 and even
    more in 2007. Personally, I think that's an easy one.

    And those Apple Retail Stores are boosting their numbers every quarter,
    and the company continues to open more.

    Add to this what Wall St. is calling "a halo effect" - happy iPod
    owners become a source of more Mac sales. And Jobs obviously has a few
    more tricks up his sleeve. A kind of natural iteration imo is a combo
    iPod/Cellphone.

    Given the huge run up in AAPL the past 2 years - trust me, if you owned
    the stock you noticed it ;> - there was a surprising article in the
    Wall St. Journal 2 days ago intimating the stock has considerably more
    upside.

    We shall see.


    David Correia
    Celebration Sound
    Warren, Rhode Island

    CelebrationSound@aol.com
    www.CelebrationSound.com
  17. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    "david" <ihate@spamo.com> wrote in message
    news:151220040442310643%ihate@spamo.com...
    > In article <AM2dnTFooO14ICLcRVn-pw@adelphia.com>, reddred
    > <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    > > "Garrett Cox" <garrcox@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > > news:2004121017594216807%garrcox@yahoocom...
    > > > iPod isn't a money maker neither is the iTunes music store. It's kind
    > > > of a whack marketing chain. At least this is how my Apple sales rep
    > > > explained it to me. The iTunes music store helps sell iPods which in
    > > > turn helps sell Macintoshes.
    > >
    > > Well, that's the theory, but most of Apple's significant wad of ready
    cash
    > > came from iPods this year, not macs. And only a very tiny bit came from
    > > iTunes.
    > >
    > > So what's the next rabbit from the hat?
    > >
    > > jb
    >
    >
    > But separating out the iPod earnings is hard to do, and it something
    > the company has not done.

    We know that Macs represent roughly half of Apple's sales. Sales for macs
    are up marginally this year, like the PC industry, but Apple's operating
    income has gone up roughly 400 percent, and revenues rose 33 percent.

    Parts costs for computer manufacturers have gone up, so the margin on the
    machines is lower, and lower still because of demanding new price points. I
    think it's logical to assume that the margins are pretty big on a box like
    the iPod. There's not much in there, and most of the R&D was in design. That
    huge rollout, a 400 percent increase in income, is not due to macs or logic
    express taking over the world. And the 1/3rd increase in revenue is not due
    to macs being sold, it is due to relatively cheap little boxes being sold
    for $400 apiece.

    >I know I could probably get by on the interest generated by $5
    > billion ;>

    I sure would have a kickass studio.

    >
    > As to the next rabbit, Wall St. says it's lots and lots more iPods.
    > Apple with sell more in 2005, and supposedly even more in 2006 and even
    > more in 2007. Personally, I think that's an easy one.
    >

    The price points are going to come down, they have to. I'm wondering if
    we'll see more of the iPod licensing like Apple and HP have done.

    > And those Apple Retail Stores are boosting their numbers every quarter,
    > and the company continues to open more.
    >

    I don't know if those are making money or not yet.

    > Add to this what Wall St. is calling "a halo effect" - happy iPod
    > owners become a source of more Mac sales. And Jobs obviously has a few
    > more tricks up his sleeve. A kind of natural iteration imo is a combo
    > iPod/Cellphone.

    You can go anywhere with it, I'm guessing a larger screen and some kind of
    expansion port for wifi. That would fit in with a cell, but they might have
    to partner with someone to make it work right.


    >
    > Given the huge run up in AAPL the past 2 years - trust me, if you owned
    > the stock you noticed it ;> - there was a surprising article in the
    > Wall St. Journal 2 days ago intimating the stock has considerably more
    > upside.

    I think there's a lot more growth, but nothing like this year. They need to
    make another great big fat rabbit, or they need to buy someone.

    jb
  18. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    "Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
    news:cppgur$8ks$1@panix2.panix.com...
    > reddred <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote:
    > >"Garrett Cox" <garrcox@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > >> iPod isn't a money maker neither is the iTunes music store. It's kind
    > >> of a whack marketing chain. At least this is how my Apple sales rep
    > >> explained it to me. The iTunes music store helps sell iPods which in
    > >> turn helps sell Macintoshes.
    > >
    > >Well, that's the theory, but most of Apple's significant wad of ready
    cash
    > >came from iPods this year, not macs. And only a very tiny bit came from
    > >iTunes.
    > >
    > >So what's the next rabbit from the hat?
    >
    > A follow-on to the Newton.

    That's like what I was thinking, or in the short term partner with Sirius to
    compete with XM's portable players. But yeah, I don't see any reason not to
    have a pc inside an iPod.


    > Apple is really good at pulling disconnected rabbits out of hats, and they
    > have been doing so since they started. Aside from a couple mistakes, like
    > the Apple III

    I don't think they supported that much. Things like the Newton were just too
    weird at the time for people to embrace. I kind of like what they're doing
    now, coming at it from the entertainment gadget angle.

    jb
  19. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    reddred <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote:
    >"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
    >
    >> Apple is really good at pulling disconnected rabbits out of hats, and they
    >> have been doing so since they started. Aside from a couple mistakes, like
    >> the Apple III
    >
    >I don't think they supported that much. Things like the Newton were just too
    >weird at the time for people to embrace. I kind of like what they're doing
    >now, coming at it from the entertainment gadget angle.

    They didn't support the III at all, as far as I could tell, which is why
    nobody bought it. It could do everything the Apple II could do, for a
    whole lot more money. That's not a good marketing plan.

    Apple does not seem to really do careful investigation of the market before
    making products; they make products that are neat and some of them find a
    market share and some of them tank. And _some_ of them, like the Newton
    and like Hypercard, start out poorly, build momentum, and then get discontinued
    just as they are starting to develop a market. The Ipod caught on, but if
    it hadn't, I am sure Apple has plenty more things waiting in the wings.
    Some will be great and some will be useless.
    --scott
    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  20. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    "Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
    news:cpqeuq$s2q$1@panix2.panix.com...
    > reddred <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote:
    > >"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
    > >
    > >> Apple is really good at pulling disconnected rabbits out of hats, and
    they
    > >> have been doing so since they started. Aside from a couple mistakes,
    like
    > >> the Apple III
    > >
    > >I don't think they supported that much. Things like the Newton were just
    too
    > >weird at the time for people to embrace. I kind of like what they're
    doing
    > >now, coming at it from the entertainment gadget angle.
    >
    > They didn't support the III at all, as far as I could tell, which is why
    > nobody bought it. It could do everything the Apple II could do, for a
    > whole lot more money. That's not a good marketing plan.
    >

    The emulation mode was a dumb idea, too. I think a IIe was basically what
    the III should have been.


    > Apple does not seem to really do careful investigation of the market
    before
    > making products; they make products that are neat and some of them find a
    > market share and some of them tank.

    That's one of the things I like about them. It's more like media companies
    used to be, it's very odd for a technology company to be like that once they
    are any size at all. It seems to work for them, though.

    jb
  21. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    > > > iPod isn't a money maker neither is the iTunes music store.
    > > Well, that's the theory, but most of Apple's significant wad of ready cash
    > > came from iPods this year, not macs.
    > But separating out the iPod earnings is hard to do, and it something
    > the company has not done.

    Err, they just did it.

    Quote :

    Of the $8.279 billion in net sales reported for FY04, Apple's Macintosh
    line -- Power Macs, PowerBooks, iMacs, eMacs and iBooks -- brought in
    $4.923 billion. The iPod brought in another $1.3 billion for the company
    in FY04. Its iTunes Music Store and other iPod-related accessories and
    services brought in another $278 million. The remainder came from sales
    of peripherals, software and services.

    End of quote.

    From http://www.macworld.com/news/2004/12/03/10k/index.php

    Regards,
    --
    Eric (Dero) Desrochers
    http://homepage.mac.com/dero72

    Hiroshima 45, Tchernobyl 86, Windows 95
  22. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <cppgur$8ks$1@panix2.panix.com>, Scott Dorsey
    <kludge@panix.com> wrote:

    > >So what's the next rabbit from the hat?
    >
    > A follow-on to the Newton.

    > --scott


    No chance for a Newton like device anytime soon, accord to Jobs on
    multiple occasions over the past few years. And when you look at the
    marketplace, you gotta tip your hat for the Steve-ing the Newton,
    Scully's baby.

    One of the things Apple's been doing is keeping the iPod "pure" by not
    filling it with a whole bunch of other functions. 3rd parties are
    hacking little programs into it but not yet Apple.

    Supposedly they are watching to see how the new photo iPod does before
    mucking the waters further. I always thought it obvious that they add
    an am/fm tuner to the thing.


    David Correia
    Celebration Sound
    Warren, Rhode Island

    CelebrationSound@aol.com
    www.CelebrationSound.com
  23. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    reddred wrote:
    > I don't think they supported that much. Things like the Newton were just too
    > weird at the time for people to embrace.

    If by "weird" you mean "expensive and falling far short of its promise
    of recognizing handwriting", then I agree. ;-)

    And yeah, I know they released some update where the handwriting
    recognitiong was much-improved, but by that time it already had
    a reputation for being an impractical gadget that was desirable
    only to hard-core gadget freaks.

    - Logan
  24. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <1goulx8.rrhfgjywycdcN%deromax@hotmail.com>, Eric Desrochers
    <deromax@hotmail.com> wrote:

    > > > > iPod isn't a money maker neither is the iTunes music store.
    > > > Well, that's the theory, but most of Apple's significant wad of ready cash
    > > > came from iPods this year, not macs.
    > > But separating out the iPod earnings is hard to do, and it something
    > > the company has not done.
    >
    > Err, they just did it.
    >
    > Quote :
    >
    > Of the $8.279 billion in net sales reported for FY04, Apple's Macintosh
    > line -- Power Macs, PowerBooks, iMacs, eMacs and iBooks -- brought in
    > $4.923 billion. The iPod brought in another $1.3 billion for the company
    > in FY04. Its iTunes Music Store and other iPod-related accessories and
    > services brought in another $278 million. The remainder came from sales
    > of peripherals, software and services.
    >
    > End of quote.
    >
    > From http://www.macworld.com/news/2004/12/03/10k/index.php
    >
    > Regards,
    > --
    > Eric (Dero) Desrochers
    > http://homepage.mac.com/dero72


    By earnings, we weren't speaking gross numbers, but actual percent of
    Apple's net.


    David Correia
    Celebration Sound
    Warren, Rhode Island

    CelebrationSound@aol.com
    www.CelebrationSound.com
  25. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    reddred wrote:

    > >I know I could probably get by on the interest generated by $5
    > > billion ;>

    > I sure would have a kickass studio.

    While the money lasted...

    --
    ha
Ask a new question

Read More

Pro Audio Audio Macintosh