Milestone for the Mac as it reaches 5% global share

The Macintosh line of computers may have been around since 1984, when the Macintosh 128K appeared on the market, but today the brand has reached a milestone of 5% of the global computer market, as AllThingsD reports.

While 5% doesn't sound like a huge amount, the number of computers in the world means that Apple's milestone is still not to be sniffed at. Increasing sales in the Asian Pacific and global enterprise has helped push OS X, and the hardware it runs on, beyond this milestone. Of course, this isn't the first time Apple has managed to pass 5% of the global computer market with their Macs, though it has been quite some time since they last did. In fact, it has been fifteen years. Therefore, the current idea of 5% is much larger than their previously held 5%.

In the September quarter, Macintosh shipments increased by 24.6%; meanwhile, the rest of the PC market grew only 5.3%. The momentum of the Mac could bring it even further along since business acceptance has increased by an astonishing 43.8%. What makes this more impressive was the fact that the iPad was thought to of bit into Apple's own Mac sales, in some demographics.

Analyst Charlie Wolf, of Needham & Co., said that "The iPad is undoubtedly cannibalizing some Mac sales". Cannibalizing may have been a strong word to use; it seems more like a light gnawing, if even that, but it could definitely be helping Apple fight against the sales of PCs.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Nokia Lumia 800 wins Editors Choice at What Mobile awards

Next Story

Nintendo on DLC: games should be "a complete experience"

85 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Well I know last year Toshiba had about 5% of the global share and HP were about 18%.... Why do people keep mentioning Microsoft when they don't compete in this area? This is about HP and Dell and Acer I'd have thought?

FMH said,
This milestone may actually be an embarrassment for Apple! It's minute.

How is it an embarrassment that at least 5% of all the computers worldwide are Apple's?

.Neo said,

How is it an embarrassment that at least 5% of all the computers worldwide are Apple's?
How isn't it an embarrassment, that 95% of them are not?

FMH said,
How isn't it an embarrassment, that 95% of them are not?

You're not making any sense here. Are you saying all computer manufacturers should be ashamed of themselves for not having 100% market share? Because there isn't a single one that does obviously.

The utterly simplistic comments just keep on comin'...

FMH said,
This milestone may actually be an embarrassment for Apple! It's minute.

Apple PR's goal is to keep Apple in the news. If it's good news, SCREAM it out loud as a major change in the world. If it's not good news, spin it into looking like good news.

But Apple's PR spend is its secret weapon. It's the only reason you keep seeing story after story about them every day.

Meanwhile, the stock market is an illusion, perception over reality. With Jobs gone, this is Apple's remaining reality distortion field legacy.

It's really that simple, folks.

.Neo said,

You're not making any sense here. Are you saying all computer manufacturers should be ashamed of themselves for not having 100% market share? Because there isn't a single one that does obviously.

The utterly simplistic comments just keep on comin'...


No, you know I'm not saying that. 5% is just not something to be proud of.

They have been in this game longer than anyone else, much longer than Microsoft and other OEMs. They have not been able to hurt the Windows share, with all that marketing, brand and cash.
Now that's embarrassing!

FMH said,

No, you know I'm not saying that. 5% is just not something to be proud of.

They have been in this game longer than anyone else, much longer than Microsoft and other OEMs. They have not been able to hurt the Windows share, with all that marketing, brand and cash.
Now that's embarrassing!
I don't consider an increase in market share an embarrassment.

FMH said,

No, you know I'm not saying that. 5% is just not something to be proud of.

They have been in this game longer than anyone else, much longer than Microsoft and other OEMs. They have not been able to hurt the Windows share, with all that marketing, brand and cash.
Now that's embarrassing!

At this point the only thing embarrassing is your inability to understand the difference between Apple's and Microsoft's models. It's pretty obvious that Apple isn't after Microsoft's market share, at least not in a way where they want to overturn them. If Apple was interested in doing so they would have licensed Mac OS X for use on generic hardware, but they haven't. In fact they turned companies like DELL down and fought every other company off who tried to open-up Mac OS X to the masses. As a company that controls both hardware and software they'll never get a near-100% market share.

Beyond that Apple doesn't have to hurt Microsoft's market share and brand, Microsoft is doing that all by themselves.

Edited by .Neo, Nov 20 2011, 11:40am :

.Neo said,

Beyond that Apple doesn't have to hurt Microsoft's market share and brand, Microsoft is doing that all by themselves.


?

You are making assumptions now. Microsoft has sold more Windows 7 licences, than the combined number of iPods, iPhones, iPads, Mac and Apple TVs ever sold.


I recently purchased a Mac Mini 2010 refurbished model for 450$ only because there were no comparable windows products in the marketplace. Dell Zino was scrapped and asus models with DVD Drive were underpowered. So a refurbished Mac Mini turned out to be the only option.

raghavny80 said,
So a refurbished Mac Mini turned out to be the only option.

Self-fulfilling prophecy. You lets Jobs marketing convince you that you needed THAT form factor to accomplish task X. He pitched that form factor knowing only he had a quasi-viable product that was in that form factor. When you couldn't find anything else in the market place JUST LIKE IT (imagine that?), you bought the (used version) of what he had sold you.

The rest of us would have identified what we REALLY needed, looked at ALL the combinations and possibilities (there are literally thousands of superior options to a Mac Mini in every way), and then bought the best bang for buck fit.

And none of us would have found the Mac Mini made it past even the first cursory feature cut.

raghavny80 said,
So a refurbished Mac Mini turned out to be the only option.

There are probably plenty for sale or refurbished lying around if you look.

...and yet there are more people running Windows 7 than all the Macs ever sold since 1984.

(Actually if you add in the total iPhone + iPad + Macs ever sold, and still more Windows 7 computers.)

Good for Apple, but a bit of perspective...

thenetavenger said,
...and yet there are more people running Windows 7 than all the Macs ever sold since 1984.

(Actually if you add in the total iPhone + iPad + Macs ever sold, and still more Windows 7 computers.)

Good for Apple, but a bit of perspective...

And that is where Apple will stay so long as they continue to charge insane prices for locked down items.

Order_66 said,

And that is where Apple will stay so long as they continue to charge insane prices for locked down items.

Which is niche marketing at its finest. With Jobs gone however, Apple will slowly but surely have to rely more and more on the QUALITY of its offerings rather than just the bandwagon. This is the inevitable drawback of the bandwagon approach. Eventually, the band is left playing after the wagon has moved on.

I bought an android because I want customization. I bought a honda because I want customization.
People buy apple for the same reason people buy lexus over a toyota... Because its name and price makes it seem like more than it is. Even though most of the time what lays underneath is the same crap as the cheaper stuff. They want it to have pimp status from the get go. But this had been proven elsewhere... Name brand clothes isn't better than cheap clothes... It just has that pimp status.

The point I'm trying to make here is... People are wiling to pay for pimp status just because the item is "hot".

Which is all good, but completely pointless for anything that truly matter.

SierraSonic said,
I bought an android because I want customization. I bought a honda because I want customization.
People buy apple for the same reason people buy lexus over a toyota... Because its name and price makes it seem like more than it is. Even though most of the time what lays underneath is the same crap as the cheaper stuff. They want it to have pimp status from the get go. But this had been proven elsewhere... Name brand clothes isn't better than cheap clothes... It just has that pimp status.

The point I'm trying to make here is... People are wiling to pay for pimp status just because the item is "hot".

Which is all good, but completely pointless for anything that truly matter.

Thats capitalism, gotta love it.

Rohdekill said,
5% lol.

That's like handing a stripper a nickel. Like she would pay you any attention other than laugh in your face.

lol ?

Apple can buy Microsoft just with the nickles it has.

JonathanMarston said,
Only 5%? Apple should give up and focus on iOS...

Damn nature, you scary!

Why? When they sit at 5% and are still pwning everyone in terms of money. I have to tip my hat to them

cleverclogs said,

They're at 15 % in Australia.


Not surprising considering the number of Macs and iPhones in use on Ramsay Street!

dbam987 said,
What this article doesn't mention is the number of people who boot-camp Windows on Mac's. My guesstimate is that 3% of the 5% of Mac owners do this (margin of error of +-1%).
That's saying that 60% of all mac owners run windows on their mac, right? Gonna call BS on that.

DARKFiB3R said,
That's saying that 60% of all mac owners run windows on their mac, right? Gonna call BS on that.

I wouldn't doubt it. Some people even wipe the drive altogether and install only Windows. They just buy the Mac for the hardware. This practice will soon change since there are now plenty of attractive-looking ultrabooks coming out.

DARKFiB3R said,
That's saying that 60% of all mac owners run windows on their mac, right? Gonna call BS on that.

Um, I don't have numbers, but if I were betting, 60% of Macs have BootCamp or Parallels running Windows.

Microsoft makes on average almost as much for each Mac sold as Apple does. (Office + Windows) = nice profits.

Sadly, Apple doesn't have the same reverse revenue stream.

DARKFiB3R said,
That's saying that 60% of all mac owners run windows on their mac, right? Gonna call BS on that.

Actually, while this is anecdotal information, I only know 2 people out of 20+ personally who DON'T run Windows on their Mac laptop, for example. Nice design/portability for people who can spend the extra money for obsolete innards.

And in MANY companies the Mac workstation was a good bundle price for a Tyan PC server motherboard, Ram, and Xeon processors, so they bought TONS of Mac workstations, threw out the (always) woefully inadequate bundled graphics card, and installed Windows 7 x64 pro on those bad boys.

But none of them are actually running those Macs on OS X. I only know home freelancers doing work that way. Or FCP editors (lots of those, great software before the X factor).

The real issue is that Apple is moving away from professional markets towards the consumers. The workstations are a loss leader for them, but one day, the numbers won't add up.

sam232 said,
Windows 8 will eat into the miniscule Mac marketshare.

Windows 8 reminds me of Vista. I can't quite think why...

Joey S said,

Windows 8 reminds me of Vista. I can't quite think why...

I don't think its similar to Vista... I mean damn the development time is nowhere near the same haha. Plus I think the changes Microsoft are bringing to Windows 8 are a welcome change!

Joey S said,

Windows 8 reminds me of Vista. I can't quite think why...

Public and Media ignorance levels are proportionally about the same?

Vista brought in a lot of new technologies that make Windows 7 what it is, sadly, most people judged it on the release generation video/audio/network drivers that were severely lacking.

Vista gave the architecture a lot of new technologies and strengthened the NT architecture with cleaned up layering, etc. Vista was only a mistake in the press and the marketing, the technology was and is solid. The video WDM/WDDM technology alone would be given ranking as one of the top technologies of the decade if more people actually understood what it consists of and accomplishes.
*(It is why Win7 can multi-task and schedule GPU threads in the OS kernel and do SMP and other technologies with the GPU that is still impossible on other OSes.)

As this technology is being used more and more and hardware and other technologies are needing this level of technology, it is becoming more apparent to technical minded people.

The first Mac was released in 1984, it took them 27 years to get to 5%. By that count, it will take only 500 more years to have the marketshare of Windows.

And people mock the marketshare of Windows Phone, Zune, etc.

nohone said,
The first Mac was released in 1984, it took them 27 years to get to 5%. By that count, it will take only 500 more years to have the marketshare of Windows.

And people mock the marketshare of Windows Phone, Zune, etc.

I wouldn't count that far back. They were nearly at 0% in 99 before Jobs took over as CEO. I would say that they have risen in the past 12 years to 5%. However, their focus hasn't really been their Mac line this past decade so much as iPod and iOS devices. Although lots of other manufacturer sure have focused on MacBooks....so much so that they have lost sight of originality.

nohone said,
The first Mac was released in 1984, it took them 27 years to get to 5%. By that count, it will take only 500 more years to have the marketshare of Windows.

And people mock the marketshare of Windows Phone, Zune, etc.


Business isn't a popularity contest - it's about making money (and sadly, that's all it's about these days).

Look at the share of the profit Apple is taking in the industries they participate in:
phones > 75% profit with ~15% market. Personal computers? Apple is the biggest game in town when measured by profit. Tablets, if there is a market that you can define as "tablet market" might as well be called "ipad market" because apple dominates both in terms of profit and unit sales.

If the race to the lowest price isn't winning the business game any more - maybe we'll see new strategies from Apple's competitors: a bigger focus on ease of use, build quality, after-sales support: anything that gets us away from the notion that stripping a product to the bare minimum (or loading it up with pointless check-box features) seems like a good thing.

If that trend catches on maybe we'll see Windows-based tablets or music players with iPad/iPod-like battery life, size, and build quality more often. All around that'd be good for everyone. If Apple isn't defaulted the "high end" of the market they'd be forced to compete in more areas than they traditionally have: interoperability or price maybe. Likewise, maybe Dell could toss their business prowess behind tablets and sell them on more than just "it's the cheapest". They make great quality screens: if their customers start to demand more high quality products (and rewarding them with business for them) maybe we'll see a legitimate macbook air competitor.


When MS was making more money, had a higher market cap, it is not a
popularity contest.
When Apple makes more money, Apple is winning the contest.

I don't think anybody would deny Microsoft's (and Dell, HP, etc) strength in the mid-90s through the early part of last decade. People may have considered Macs to be superior to PCs from the other major vendors but that doesn't mean Apple was a particularly compelling investment choice in 1996.

These days Apple is an impressive growth stock and has been for quiet some time. Microsoft has been flat for about a decade.

Dell, HP, Nokia, etc. haven't been exactly great performers either.

Me, I'd rather ship 100 units at $100,000,000 profit than 100,000,000 units at $1 profit. Apple has chosen the former, Dell etc. the later and I don't think Dell's strategy has paid off. Microsoft's success is loosely tied to the success of all major PC vendors but the success of any individual company is determined by units shipped * profit. For the non-Apple PC vendors they sacrificed profit for units shipped and IMO that model hasn't proven viable in the long run.

Edited by the evn show, Nov 19 2011, 9:50pm :

nohone said,
The first Mac was released in 1984, it took them 27 years to get to 5%. By that count, it will take only 500 more years to have the marketshare of Windows.

And people mock the marketshare of Windows Phone, Zune, etc.


Not entirely sure why you people are comparing a company that doesn't make its own hardware and licenses its software to be used on just about everything, to a company that controls both hardware and software.

[quote=nohone said,]

It wasn't - and in terms of which business should have have invested in: Microsoft was a great choice. 10 years later and no growth: they're not such a great option.


Yeah, for exactly the same reason Microsoft was doing well 2001, Apple is doing well today: they've got a portfolio of profitable products that is generating cash hand-over-fist for the stake holders in business.


No, that's completely irrelevant. Apple makes more cash than anybody else because they sell more phones - but also because those phones are sold at a healthy profit. It's easy for Nokia or RIM to ship 100,000,000 phones at 0 profit but that doesn't make for a particularly health business.


Popularity has never matters unless that lead to profitability. That seemed to work well for Microsoft, Dell, etc. through the 90s but eventually they would up chasing market share, primarily by sacrificing profit, and that's lead to marginally successful businesses.

Compare Dell, Motorola, HP, etc. year-over-year growth in 1995-2000: things were pretty awesome for them (and by extension for microsoft). Consider Apple's growth during the same period and it was also pretty solid but they did it by chasing profit margin over volume.

10 years past that and we see Apple's strategy has generally been pretty good - Dell etc. not so much (and by extension Microsoft has suffered too).

Congratulations, Apple! Now... Separate your cases from your PCs, sell your OS separately and you've got a sale.

GreyWolf said,
Congratulations, Apple! Now... Separate your cases from your PCs, sell your OS separately and you've got a sale.
They've done it before and it was a mistake.... could it work now? There's a slim chance.... now that they're not dependent on their hardware sales (most of their profit is from iOS and iPods)

Rudy said,
They've done it before and it was a mistake.... could it work now? There's a slim chance.... now that they're not dependent on their hardware sales (most of their profit is from iOS and iPods)

Apple can definitely venture into this realm again. After all, isn't OS X simply a *nix variant, which in this day and age works on a boatload of hardware?

GreyWolf said,
Congratulations, Apple! Now... Separate your cases from your PCs, sell your OS separately and you've got a sale.

There's already one 'Windows', we don't want another

Joey S said,

There's already one 'Windows', we don't want another

I'm not sure what you're implying? There's absolutely nothing wrong with Windows compatibility if you don't try to load your computer up with crappy $5 hardware. Most people know for a fact that OS X works fine on non-Apple hardware. They simply have to stop limiting PnP DeviceIDs to what they put in their builds and incorporate the other devices that are compatible. I'd even be fine with them limiting it to EFI systems and storing their poem in my NVRAM. They're missing a huge market for their products. They simply cannot compete with the amount of vendors that make generic hardware.

GreyWolf said,
They simply cannot compete with the amount of vendors that make generic hardware.

Last time I checked Apple's competing just fine. Who says the company wants to overtake Windows market share-wise? It's pretty obvious that isn't their goal.

Breach said,
See, there's hope for the Linux desktop community too.

Is desktop Linux marketshare actually rising then?

what said,

Is desktop Linux marketshare actually rising then?

Hard to say due graph scaling. Still looks like Linux flat-lined.

Breach said,
See, there's hope for the Linux desktop community too.

Yes, finally "The Year of Linux will be 2012.". . .oh wait not./s

The significance of this is substantial, and ultimately good for the consumers (even Windows users). There is no denying that healthy competition spurs innovation.

What this article doesn't mention is the number of people who boot-camp Windows on Mac's. My guesstimate is that 3% of the 5% of Mac owners do this (margin of error of +-1%).

dbam987 said,
What this article doesn't mention is the number of people who boot-camp Windows on Mac's. My guesstimate is that 3% of the 5% of Mac owners do this (margin of error of +-1%).

The figures are based on Mac shipments, not browser hits, so Boot Camp doesn't really play into this. OS != hardware

dbam987 said,
What this article doesn't mention is the number of people who boot-camp Windows on Mac's. My guesstimate is that 3% of the 5% of Mac owners do this (margin of error of +-1%).

What about Windows users who dual boot Linux?

bj55555 said,
Uh oh. This is the beginning of the end for Windows.
Yup...even though Microsoft must own like 94% of the other share

bj55555 said,
Uh oh. This is the beginning of the end for Windows.

humm no, why? because Apple gave up their enterprise line... and apple depends on microsoft for enterprise products like exchange server, cloud services, etc...

neufuse said,

humm no, why? because Apple gave up their enterprise line... and apple depends on microsoft for enterprise products like exchange server, cloud services, etc...

I think he forgot /s

Totalaero said,
Yup...even though Microsoft must own like 94% of the other share

94% of a niche market? Impressive... That's where the PC market is headed.

Open Minded said,
...and in just a shade under three decades. Kudos, Apple.

Considering it's one company selling the hardware I'd say that's pretty impressive.

Enron said,
The line must be drawn here! This far, no further!

i would love to see how epic windows 9 would be if they got to around 10 percent..

the only thing i like about this news is it means microsoft puts more into their products like windows 8..