One reason why Dell and HP have such a high market share is due to the bargain PC sales. Many, many people who don't really care what their PC looks like or how fast it is as long as it's $300 with monitor and printer and can be used to surf the web and type just buy the cheapest thing they see.

I'm always amazed at the people buying $600 PCs at Wal*Mart that will probably take 15 minutes to boot Vista and be trash in less than a year. For only slightly more they could have a dual core MacBook.

I think some of the reason these numbers seem skewed is PC purchases are often for machines that aren't used as desktops per se. Servers, cash registers, machine controllers, etc. That combined with a typically shorter useful life makes the PC sales seem more impressive. It would be nice if there were a more useful metric that shows how many Macs/PCs are in use as general purpose computers. I think this is one reason the notebook sales for Apple look great. These machines are used by people as general purpose computers and and not bought and hidden in a room or tied to a milling machine somewhere.
Things are much better for Apple than these numbers show.
Also note the industry's growth rate of 7.2% includes Apple's 26.2% increase pulling the average up. The PC industry's growth rate was LOWER than 7.2%.

The vast majority of PCs are headed into cubicle farms and offices, or POS applications. They are bought as a commodity by IT managers (in fact, they are often leased rather than bought). Apple doesn't attempt to compete in this market.

What I'd really like to see is Apple's market %age for computers in the home, or those bought by individuals instead of in bulk.

What's important is not maket share, but market capitalisation ! Apple's far surpasses Dell's, even though Dell dwarves Apple in terms of the number of units shipped. ie. Apple is vastly more profitable per device sold. ∴ Apple has no need to slug it out in these cutthroat bargain basement markets.

As Fake Steve put it - Dell's problem is that it started a race to the bottom (of the market), and won!

The trend is obvious to trend-conscious persons such as the author of this article. Yes, the switch is on, but most people still can't see it, and journalists won't write about it until its become a mainstream idea that people want to hear. Apple is so far ahead of the curve, its amazing that they could pull this off, but in the end, Apple is about the future and Windows is about the past, and in technology, the past can only keep its strangle-hold for so long, then it must fall like a dead dinosaur. And you are also right about the analogy to Bush, another dinosaur that will fall, hopefully, before too much more damage is done to the world.

Most computers in the world are not sold to individuals. They are sold to corporations. That's why the high market percentages for Windows machines.

There are more Macs in use than can be indicated by the "US PC Shipments" statistic, since Macs have longer useful life than IBM PCs. For example my G4 Cube (circa 2000) is still in use and runs Mac OS X 10.4.10 (the latest version of Mac OS X). Can you show an Year 2000 IBM PC that can run Windows Vista?

Further, most of the IBM PC sales are replacements to existing Wintel machines that need to replaced every two to three years to keep up with demands of the increasing power hungry Windows releases.

It hasn't been specifically mentioned, but these numbers may not include sales at Apple stores, or may not accurately reflect sales at Apple stores. Apple doesn't tell anybody its unit sales until its quarterly announcement.

When Apple makes its financial announcement on July 25, THEN we'll know for sure.

The numbers announced today for Apple may be waaaaaaaaaaay below what we hear next week.

The average officer worker or hospital receptionist doesn't have a clue what OS his or her computer is running. I suspect that's why the Windows stickers are slapped on pcs. Otherwise they would never know. These make up the majority of the pcs sold, I'm sure. I'd really like to know the market share for those who actually chose their computer. I'm sure it would be getting on for 50%.

As for the Bush voter question, I talked to an American marine the other day. I've never seen anything quite like it. For this guy, Bush was sitting on God's shoulders, Bush couldn't do a thing wrong. The conversation was amicable, consisting mostly of me asking questions and the jaw dropping further with each robotic answer. I guess these must be the majority that voted for him.

I've just had a thought! Maybe there's a similarity here - Windows users and Bush voters!

John Davis

The average officer worker or hospital receptionist doesn't have a clue what OS his or her computer is running. I suspect that's why the Windows stickers are slapped on pcs. Otherwise they would never know. These make up the majority of the pcs sold, I'm sure. I'd really like to know the market share for those who actually chose their computer. I'm sure it would be getting on for 50%.

As for the Bush voter question, I talked to an American marine the other day. I've never seen anything quite like it. For this guy, Bush was sitting on God's shoulders, Bush couldn't do a thing wrong. The conversation was amicable, consisting mostly of me asking questions and the jaw dropping further with each robotic answer. I guess these must be the majority that voted for him.

I've just had a thought! Maybe there's a similarity here - Windows users and Bush voters!

John Davis

Apple is coming on strong in the education department. A friend at college rooms with five others. They all have MacBooks. A couple of years ago only one had a Mac.

I'm a Bush voter and also a Mac lover. Give up the politics when we could be focusing on our Macs.

I also wonder why people don't make a worthwhile investment in their computers. I mean come on - who would rather spend $600 every two years when they could spend $1000 and have it last them for five . . . or more! It just doesn't make sense.

However, I also don't see the need for Apple to have huge marketshare because that would mean they'd have to start selling $300 bargain trash to Joe computer user who doesn't understand why computers should be an investment. To sell computers like THAT would sacrifice the Mac experience. You can't buy a new Mac that doesn't run the OS and all its apps smoothly. They all have adequate processing power, memory, and storage for their place in the lineup. I love that. If you buy a $400 laptop, is it going to have wireless, bluetooth, a bright, clear display, and dual processors? No. Is it going to be lightweight, beautiful, and have a high-capacity battery? Hell no! If that's what you want, go for it. To have options is a great thing. I would rather save my money and buy the machine that will last; one that does everything it's capable of well. That's what I love about Apple - it's the perfect niche for me. I think that a lot of others would be happy to have it be their niche, too.