Mac sales up over 40% year-over-year

Apple later this month is expected to announce fiscal first quarter revenues of nearly $10 billion for the three-month period ending December, fueled largely by the ongoing resurgence of the company's personal computer business, according one Wall Street analyst.

In a research note issued to clients Monday, Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster downplayed concerns surrounding Apple's retail channels, saying he expects the company to announce record first quarter sales of approximately 2.3 million Macs.

He noted that data from market research firm NPD for the first two months of the December quarter indicates that Mac sales growth was up some 60 percent year-over-year. Figuring conservatively, the analyst said sales of 2.3 million Macs would indicate growth of 43 percent year-over-year compared to 28 percent yearly growth during the same quarter last year.

"While there were reports that Apple Taiwanese supplier Catcher missed its quarter due to a cancelled Apple order, we confirmed with Catcher that it did not say the miss was due to Apple," he wrote. "We now expect Apple to report iPod sales of 25 million to 26 million, which is slightly ahead of the Street expectations of 24.7 million units."

View: Full Story @ AppleInsider
Link: Forum Discussion (Thanks Hurmoth)

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Zune 80 goes Red for Valentine's Day

Next Story

EMI faces 2,000 job cuts

31 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

what i never understood about mac's is this, and maybe it's unrelated to the article but it confuses the crap out of me.

OSX is cheaper to buy than windows, we all know that and won't argue with it..
Mac uses basically the same hardware that PC's use, now that they are intel based. so the hardware costs about the same

so why the hell are macs more expensive???

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=758
Apple marketing at its best.

Mac OS X is far ahead of the competition, especially considering that Apple is going to release a major update to Leopard within the next coming days that is going to optimize, stabilize and make Leopard even faster than it is now. Mac OS X is tightly integrated to the Apple hardware because it's built by Apple.

Security wise, it's been said many times that it DOES NOT matter what operating system that you use it is ONLY SECURE if the user knows how to secure it. If you are one of those users who "Click here for free PORN" and then click YES to install free porn then YES you're better off with Mac OSX (the road to a good experience will be rough on Windows 98, 2k, and XP).

Stability, optimization, etc. No **** SHERLOCK HOLMES, if I buy a computer that has its hardware put together by the same company, softwares written by the same company, firmware written by the same company, and QA done by the same company then it better "JUST WORKS." If not, then I'll be ****ed.

The ONLY hardware tide to Apple OSX is their motherboard, you can buy other brands of ram(hopefully compatible), ATI graphics card, DVD BURNER/ROM, Hard Drive and etc to put into your Mac system.

Also consider the peace of mind you get with a Mac: No worries about viruses or spyware. Not one exist for the Macintosh. What about the newly discovered Trojan Horse you say? That requires a user to enter their password and even then it only changes DNS settings, not wipe out your hard drive or steal your personal info which is what you are use to on a PC. This will be quickly patched by Apple before MacWorld 2008 is over! With Windows, Microsoft takes ages to correct exploits and you must have resource hogging antivirus programs.

Where have you been dear friend. FYI, Microsoft releases patches for RECENT exploits the second Tuesday of each month.

Although I do agree with you that less worries when using a Mac OSX and the GUI does look freaking good. The way Apple has put their OS together is very well thought out. Their design of their laptops are very nice, but I'd imagine those things can get incredibly HOT; thinner laptops = smaller/thinner heat sinks (though I believe they made very good use of heat pipes) and high powered devices are closer together.

Hope you don't get offended and hope you don't believe EVERYTHING advertisements/marketting throws at you. That is just your lost their gain.

kouhii00 said,
Security wise, it's been said many times that it DOES NOT matter what operating system that you use

A correction here: The platform do matter. It helps to have a fairly experienced user configuring it and doing it right. Definitely. But accidents can still happen, especially if the computer is connected to the Internet. Reducing the problem to porn ads is oversimplifying the problem. This wasn't exactly how the Sasser worm spread without any user interaction.
Stability, optimization, etc. No **** SHERLOCK HOLMES, if I buy a computer that has its hardware put together by the same company, softwares written by the same company, firmware written by the same company, and QA done by the same company then it better "JUST WORKS." If not, then I'll be ****ed.

Calm down a bit. This doesn't invalidate what he said, it actually reaffirms it. This IS an advantage of the Mac design.
The ONLY hardware tide to Apple OSX is their motherboard, you can buy other brands of ram(hopefully compatible), ATI graphics card, DVD BURNER/ROM, Hard Drive and etc to put into your Mac system.

This is also true, and another advantage.

Let's not forget they are selling intel based units and many buyers may well have put Windows on the machines....?

trip21 said,
Let's not forget they are selling intel based units and many buyers may well have put Windows on the machines....?

Yes, but this is about Apple Mac sales, not OSX sales, whether its running windows, Linux, OSX or BSD it makes no difference.

LipSmacker said,
'06 sales - 200 units
'07 sales - 280 units
Yippie!!

Since Apple has, at best, 5% of the global market share, they must have only sold 14 systems in 2007.

There's actually an important fact that's missing from this article... While Mac sales may have increased 40%, the rest of the PC market increased at a similar pace. The end result is that Apple's market share has effectively not changed.

evo_spook said,
Do you have the figures for the rest of the PC market?

I do indeed...

According to iSuppli's figures as of November 2007, HP had a (fiscal) year-to-year increase of 32.7%, Dell had a 1.5% increase, Lenevo had a 22.6% increase, Acer had a 68.8% increase, and Toshiba had 18.7%.

Keep in mind these figures end in Q3 2007. Apple's figures include December of last year, so there are an additional 3 months of PC sales not calculated into these numbers.

http://www.isuppli.com/news/default.asp?id...m=11&y=2007

evo_spook said,
Add them up and average them and you get 21% not the 40% you stated

First off, the average of the year-to-year growth for the 5 vendors listed is 24.8%, not 21%. You must have been using an iCalc or something...

Second, these PC sales figures were up to September 2007, whereas the Mac figure is till December 2007. That means the PC figures do not include holiday sales, which is when the majority of Apple's sales growth occurs. There should be an equally large holiday growth for the PC vendors, but again these numbers are not included.

hewitt s. said,

First off, the average of the year-to-year growth for the 5 vendors listed is 24.8%, not 21%. You must have been using an iCalc or something...

Second, these PC sales figures were up to September 2007, whereas the Mac figure is till December 2007. That means the PC figures do not include holiday sales, which is when the majority of Apple's sales growth occurs. There should be an equally large holiday growth for the PC vendors, but again these numbers are not included.

If you care to look, I edited that well before your reply, sorry you must have being using a really slow machine for there to be such a time lapse.

Now on the second point, if you are going to make up your figures on things that may, might have, could have done rather then sticking to factual figures that you yourself have produced makes your posting of the figures originally.

Is it our fault, you produced them rather then ones that included figures for the year end? we can only go what you produced, which is 24%

evo_spook said,
If you care to look, I edited that well before your reply, sorry you must have being using a really slow machine for there to be such a time lapse.

A Mac lover like yourself certainly is familiar with having a slow machine...

evo_spook said,
Now on the second point, if you are going to make up your figures on things that may, might have, could have done rather then sticking to factual figures that you yourself have produced makes your posting of the figures originally.

Is it our fault, you produced them rather then ones that included figures for the year end? we can only go what you produced, which is 24%

I was very clear that these figures did not include the last three months. Feel free to go find these if your so intent on proving me wrong.

markjensen said,
hewitt is pulling "facts" out of his posterior end. ;)
Gartner's analysis (Sept 2007) estimates a 12.3% increase.
IDG's projections (Dec 2007) predicts a 14.6%.

Both are well under the 40% mark.

I'm not pulling anything out of my ass. I have no need. I'm comfortable knowing Apple will always be an inferior product with small market share.

In regards to the numbers, the Gartner and IDG figures are projections. Gartner is from September. The numbers I supplied are actual numbers reported by iSuppli.

Second, if you read the IDG, it says "PC shipments will increase by 16.7% in the fourth quarter of this year". That is an increase for the quarter. The Apple article is a year-to-year growth number. If you want to break that down by quarter, that gives Apple a 10% growth per quarter.

hewitt, I have no idea how you are getting such high numbers, even from isuppli, which clearly shows a total year-to-year increase of 13.8% for the entire segment.

Do you even know how to deal with percentages? You don't just add the quarters together, you use the total sales volumes and calculate your percentage. Or just arbitrarily pick the "top 5" listed suppliers. Use the whole market (total shipments).

Your link shows a lower year-over-year gain than the projections I linked to. Since you apparently still have a gun, why not just reply and shoot yourself in your only remaining good foot, since you shot a large hole in one already!

markjensen said,
hewitt, I have no idea how you are getting such high numbers, even from isuppli, which clearly shows a total year-to-year increase of 13.8% for the entire segment.

The 24.8% number referenced earlier was an average of the top 5 vendors. The total growth number, as reported in the iSuppli link, does indeed show 13.8%. Please find where I dispute this number.

markjensen said,
Do you even know how to deal with percentages? You don't just add the quarters together, you use the total sales volumes and calculate your percentage. Or just arbitrarily pick the "top 5" listed suppliers. Use the whole market (total shipments).

I never said the per-quarter breakdown was an even split. Please find where I state this. I was mearly pointing out that if you use 16.7% as a quarter growth rate for the PC, then you could average the alleged Apple year-to-year growth to being 10% per quarter. Please find where I said that Apple growth was exactly 10% per quarter. By the way, your buddy evo was the one who first averaged the top 5, I was just correcting has incorrect average (which he corrected).

If you compare year-to-year growth with a specific vendor, since Apple is just one vendor, you'll see Acer is in the lead at 68.8%. HP had a 32.7% year-to-year growth. Again, those numbers are only 9 months of the same term that Apple reported 40%.

markjensen said,
Your link shows a lower year-over-year gain than the projections I linked to. Since you apparently still have a gun, why not just reply and shoot yourself in your only remaining good foot, since you shot a large hole in one already! :laugh:

Again, as stated earlier in this response, please find where I dispute the 13.8% figure reported by iSuppli.

Pointing out an average of the "top 5" is nonsense. It is not a valid statistic to apply to the market. It would be the equivalent to pointing out the average color of their mousepads. Likewise, per-quarter stats are interesting, but do not directly apply to the year-over-year numbers. Finally, I never said you disputed the number. You certainly avoided it and tried some smoke-and-mirrors to artificially provide inflated numbers.

Again, I question your ability to deal with these percentages, given the light in which you distort them to support your position that the non-Apple market had equivalent gains. It didn't. End of story.

It is ok to disagree with me. But calling people a moron three times is no way to win in any discussion.

EDIT: I see you decided to finally cool down and remove your insults.

markjensen said,
Pointing out an average of the "top 5" is nonsense. It is not a valid statistic to apply to the market. It would be the equivalent to pointing out the average color of their mousepads. Likewise, per-quarter stats are interesting, but do not directly apply to the year-over-year numbers. Finally, I never said you disputed the number. You certainly avoided it and tried some smoke-and-mirrors to artificially provide inflated numbers.

I never used an average of the top 5% as a figure to support my argument. I was mearly correcting evo's math, as he was the one who initially averaged it to get a figure. I don't recall you commenting to evo that this was not an accurate measure.

markjensen said,
Again, I question your ability to deal with these percentages, given the light in which you distort them to support your position that the non-Apple market had equivalent gains. It didn't. End of story.

Perhaps comparing the whole PC market to Apple's growth was a mistake, but I'm not incorrect that the PC market saw similar growth. If you look at year-to-year growth of individual vendors, you'll see HP has similar growth to Apple and that Acer has exceeded their growth. Apple is after all one vendor of computer hardware, so comparing it to other vendors is a better measure.

How they pulled off a 40% growth is a mystery.

Microsoft should only be pleased by this. Remember, the fact that Macs can actually run Windows and Office are 2 of the best (and highly advertised) selling points of a Mac. Every time a Mac gets sold there's a good chance Microsoft will also sell a copy of Office or Windows.

C_Guy said,
Microsoft should only be pleased by this. Remember, the fact that Macs can actually run Windows and Office are 2 of the best (and highly advertised) selling points of a Mac. Every time a Mac gets sold there's a good chance Microsoft will also sell a copy of Office or Windows.

don't know anyone who bought windows just cause they got a mac, a few of use have both already thou

evo_spook said,

don't know anyone who bought windows just cause they got a mac, a few of use have both already thou

I know of a government organisation with quite a few machines that actually bought mac minis and made Apple put bootcamp on them (before it was mainstream, like in the beta days, they were actually one of the first to have bootcamp) specifically to run windows, becasue they liked the form factor...