We’ve always known that Apple’s marketshare figures are skewed by enterprise sales of servers, terminals and word processing PCs, and new research from NPD confirms this, revealing that two-thirds of laptops costing $1,000 or more and sold across US retail chains are Macs.
Macs? That’s right. New figures from the research group as reported by eWeek reveal that 66 per cent of laptops sold in US retail stores that cost $1,000 or more are Macs. And while that share slides to just 14 per cent for computers costing under $1,000, the news still confirms Apple’s growing footprint in retail Mac sales.
NPD vice president Stephen Baker told eWeek that Apple’s notebook marketshare is growing at twice the market rate, with Windows notebooks “pretty flat right now”.
It’s not just notebooks. Apple’s retail desktop sales have climbed 45 per cent, against industry patterns for desktop sales (down 20 per cent) and far outweighing Windows’ Vista’s continuing decline - sales of desktop PCs running that OS are down 25 per cent, eWeek reveals.
"iMacs are growing and the Windows desktop ain't. No matter how you look at it, Apple is outperforming Windows,” Baker said.
"Apple has got better distribution than it's had in the last 15 years," he adds. "They're in the right spot right now. There's the iPod advantage. But the big thing is the stores."
It’s an inflection point for Apple, alright - don’t forget the company recently surpassed Dell to become the biggest laptop vendor in the US education market.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Comments
It doesn't matter how you
It doesn't matter how you load the numbers, Macs just rule.
All that proves is Apple
All that proves is Apple computers are expensive.
You're an idiot. It proves
You're an idiot. It proves that people are fed up with windows and want a better alternative.
ya! that is a lot of Mac
ya! that is a lot of Mac Minis !
"You're an idiot." ++ How
"You're an idiot."
++
How the hell can you call a $1000 computer expensive. Any Windows laptop you buy below that is going to be a piece of shit, so the correct way to view this is that $1000+ laptops are moderately priced, and sub-$1000 laptops are the cheap pieces of shit PC companies try to convince people will be great.
No, Apple computers are not expensive. Sub-$1000 Windows laptops are just the very bottom of the heap of cheap. PC vendors have put the populace under the delusion that laptops should only cost $800. I don't even want to think about anything below that price -- too scary.
I'm about to spend $2000 on a MacBook Pro, and I'm worried it won't be powerful enough. And all I do is graphics in Photoshop (occasionally Illustrator) and development in Coda.
No, Macs are not expensive. PCs are cheap.
+1
haaa I 100% follow you on that, people don't know macs and PCs either, they are just looking at the big picture, the price, the processor speed, and they get scam with shitty cheap pcs...
++1
"We've always known" not
"We've always known" not "We've always know"
Always good to know you
Always good to know you professional writers read 9 to 5 Mac. Now could you put some links our way, please?
less than $1000 : no model
Well, with 14% of the US market for computers costing under $1,000 while the cheapest MacBook is at $1,099, this is some kind of miracle :)
The 14% figure is for ALL
The 14% figure is for ALL computers, not just the ones under $1000.
Read the article again ....
Sorry, but the 14% is not for ALL computers ... the article clearly states that it is for those under $1000.00. As for how Apple can have any market share in this space when its entry level unit is priced at $1099; don't forget that refurbished models and EOL models are discounted and at the entry level, this would bring them into the sub $1000 category. Regardless, the fact that Mac OS systems are outselling all other units combined in any market segment is astounding. Considering the number of times that Apple's obituary has been written - this seems to be proof that perseverance and superior product development usually (can't ignore betamax loosing out to inferior VHS) win out. Of course the giant stink bomb known as Vista didn't hurt the Mac Market. Just MOHO.
Notice it says Computers
Notice it says Computers under $1000, not Laptops under $1000.....
The article in eWeek, which
The article in eWeek, which is the source for 9 - 5, clearly states: "News Analysis. Consider this: Apple's retail market share is 14 percent, and two-thirds for PCs costing $1,000 or more." and "Apple's retail market share is 14 percent, and two-thirds for PCs costing $1,000 or more," Joe Wilcox reports for eWeek. So the total market share for all types of computers is 14%. Seems my reading skills are still intact, but in any case nothing to be "Sorry" about.
VHS was not inferior to
VHS was not inferior to Betamax. At the time 99% of people couldn't tell the difference between Betamax and VHS tapes in terms of visual quality, and VHS won because the tapes had more capacity. You can actually make a strong argument that VHS was superior to Betamax due to the tape length issues with Betamax that were solved too late to save Betamax.
Do some research before spouting "conventional wisdom".
Conventional wisdom
And here I thought it was because VHS had more porn. B-)
This proves that people who
This proves that people who can afford a Mac are buying them. Why pay $2500 for a Winblows box when you can get one for $645? Quality sells.
It Proves.......
That the Mac is the best computing platform for people who want to actually get work done.. If you want to spend your time cleaning viruses, bugs and spyware..get a Windoze PC... Otherwise higher life forms use the Mac... It is so because I sayeth!!!
Market share
Apple has two Macs under $1000. Both are Mac Mini models. Both are very limited in their options, with slow video and slow hard drives being their main weaknesses.
Imagine what would happen if Apple were to build just a slightly larger box with easy-open access to the drives, the memory, the video card, and a couple of slots? They could price it at $899 (BYOKDM, same as the mini) and it would be a HUGE draw. Heck, I'd buy two of them tomorrow to replace my 1999 G4's!
macs
Well...perhaps it's time to start pressing them on releasing their os to be usable on less proprietary hardware. Those numbers are eeking on anti trust in more than just a few minds.
Incompatibility....
The article shows that only suckers or Mac-zealots buy Macs. Maybe they enjoy the limited choices in hardware due to incompatibility and lack of supported Mac drivers. Just read the forums and your bound to hear some sucker say, "Do they make this for Mac?"... LOL!
PC, on the other hand, has many manufacturers of laptops which keeps the prices down and has wonderful upgrades included just to stay competitive. Mac, on the other hand, will be constantly playing "catch up" on staying compatible with today's computers.
Now Windows Vista users are
Now Windows Vista users are asking, "Do they make this for Vista?"
Dell sells a $649 laptop. 14" screen, 80GB hard drive, Core2Duo processor. Not bad on paper, huh? Read between the lines: It comes with 512MB RAM and has SHARED VIDEO MEMORY. That means about 384MB available.
A friend of mine bought one of these "cheap" laptops and, out of the box, it literally took 3 minutes to bring up the Control Panel in Vista Home Basic.
On the other hand, I just bought my wife a MacBook. It is $1299 with a 13" screen, 160GB hard drive, and a Core2Duo processor. The primary difference? RAM. It comes with 2GB.
Does the difference in price justify the RAM? Not alone. Add in a built-in webcam, Firewire ports (required for our digital camcorders), DVD burner (only a combo drive in the Dell), analog and digital audio inputs and outputs, not to mention the great iLife software.
Add it up and, to get a similar experience in the Vista world, costs as much if not more than the Mac.
There is a reason we don't all drive Yugos.
On the other OTHER hand
How many hands do you have? Must be useful for surfing porn.
Fanboys
I work for an electronics retailer that features PCs and Macs. We probably sell one mac for every 10 PCs we sell. They are too expensive for most typical users. Also, for the guy complaining about the low memory. 60% of PCs under $1000 come with 1GB RAM standard and about 20% come with 2GB.
I don't think mac sucks, I just think they are too expensive for general users.
No offense, but your
No offense, but your knowledge on the subject is about equal to the average kid working for an electronics retailer, for example, Best Buy, where I have never found anyone who could explain why the Macs are "more expensive" even though they of all people should know that a spec-for-spec pc costs more (have to look at the graphics card etc)
Then again, they can't explain the difference between the mens and ladies bathroom either.
Unbiased Opinion
The Mac OS is great. It always has been. I have used Macs for over 15 years. Power macs, imacs, G3's, G4's, G5's - all great. For graphic arts and video editing, macs are superb. The OS is very user friendly for unskilled and inexperienced users as well as advanced enthusiasts.
HOWEVER, there is a large price jump for those features. Macs ARE expensive. The deny that is just plain stupid. I recently built a PC for about half the price that I would have paid for a mac with similar features. Liquid cooled, quad core, 4gb memory, awesome graphics cards (yes plural cardS in SLI). Raid HD's, 800w power. This (and more) was under $2k. Don't get me wrong. I WOULD rather have a mac. I just can't justify the EXTREME price hike for a system like this. For mid-range systems, yeah go with a mac. For a high performance machine? No way to justify it.
vista
The problem may be that it's easier to run windows apps on Macs than on vista.
That has to be the dumbest
That has to be the dumbest stat ever posted by a fanboy. How many Macs are there below a thousand dollars? The mini? What percentage PC's would you say are sub 1000? Nearly all of them would be a good guess. So what does that say about Apple? We have the same hardware but rob you blind better than anyone else in the business? I'm as stoked as anyone about Apple's success but this is really grasping at straws here. Stupid.