Mac OS X Market share, falling?


Recommended Posts

I was browsing today and found this, http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-daily-20080701-20090413. It shows Mac OS X's market share at 6.13% in July 2008 but by April it had halved to around 3.74%. Taking in account a margin of area on both figures there is a very clear picture been painted by Stat Counter. Macs market share is falling. Knowing what forum I've posted this in I have a hunch what reception this is going to get.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/759180-mac-os-x-market-share-falling/
Share on other sites

These tracking website stats I take with a grain of salt because they aren't verifiable and are based on web browsing habits. NetApps which is skewed towards North American websites indicates differently and they say OSX is up to 9.8% in March. The only true measure of "market-share" is by unit sales. The flood of Netbooks and the economy could be assignable causes for their downturn.

Btw, I love that avatar. Brings back memories.

Btw, I love that avatar. Brings back memories.

Thanks, I look forward to the day AOL brings it back.

Also I heard a good quote from someone talking about a MacBook, they'd been shown one of good specs about ?2000. They said it's like buying your first car you have to get a small loan to get it. Apple bringing us back to past when families would have to scrimp together to buy their first computer.

A very rough estimate from a big website I know gives me an increase from about 4.5% to 5.5% over the same period. The site is almost entirely independent of OS platform. So, I wouldn't take the above results as gospel.

No link = poor argument.

Apple Market share failing? in what World does anyone live to believe in that crap? Apple is growing slowly, but stronger!

You seem to be living in a fantasy world, your argument is built on people's perceptions, you think Apple is completely immune to anything. I think that this 3% drop in market share is slighty exaggerated but it certainly a drop. This can be the MacBook's price is very vulnerable during a recession and people just buy cheap PCs instead, this is why MacBook sales have stalled.

You seem to be living in a fantasy world, your argument is built on people's perceptions, you think Apple is completely immune to anything. I think that this 3% drop in market share is slighty exaggerated but it certainly a drop. This can be the MacBook's price is very vulnerable during a recession and people just buy cheap PCs instead, this is why MacBook sales have stalled.

But who the hell said that Apple market share drop 3%? What a crap is that? here is the truth Mr. Smart?

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-...re.aspx?qprid=8

But who the hell said that Apple market share drop 3%? What a crap is that? here is the truth Mr. Smart?

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-...re.aspx?qprid=8

By unit sales Mac's are around ~3.2% global market share according to their last reported figures. It's of course higher if you narrow the sample to North America which is in line with the Net Apps' data you cited. (2.5millions macs sold out of 77million units sold worldwide).

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2339029,00.asp

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/01/21results.html

I wouldn't believe that website :p

The market share is at least 6%, it wouldn't fall like that.

And how come "some days in a month", the market share goes at like 6%, and other days it drops to 3%? Such variation is impossible.

In economic crisis. the worst that could happen is that the market share stays, it would never go down. People selling Macs during an economic crisis to buy a brand new PC? Nope.

But who the hell said that Apple market share drop 3%? What a crap is that? here is the truth Mr. Smart?

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-...re.aspx?qprid=8

A 3% drop may not be accurate, but if you pull yourself from the RDF and look at your reality, you will see the simple fact that Expensive computers (when there are cheaper and equally functional ones on the market) plus a recession = bad.

If apple don't think smart like everyone else, they will suffer. They actually INCREASED the prices of most of their computers recently, not a clever move.

A 3% drop may not be accurate, but if you pull yourself from the RDF and look at your reality, you will see the simple fact that Expensive computers (when there are cheaper and equally functional ones on the market) plus a recession = bad.

If apple don't think smart like everyone else, they will suffer. They actually INCREASED the prices of most of their computers recently, not a clever move.

They are more expensive because they provide quality and give you more for the buck than a garbage PC with Windows can provide.

They are more expensive because they provide quality and give you more for the buck than a garbage PC with Windows can provide.

That's a BS statement. For the love. Look at all the Apple products that have been taken apart and priced. WAAAYYYY overcharging the customer. Apple uses some of the same parts that a PC does as well.

That's a BS statement. For the love. Look at all the Apple products that have been taken apart and priced. WAAAYYYY overcharging the customer. Apple uses some of the same parts that a PC does as well.

Blasphemy! Don't you know that every Apple product is birthed in Steve Jobs' private chambers hidden away in Guangdong Province, PRC.

I remember that same load of crap being preached before they switched to the Windows model and went with Intel x86. Some of my favorites were along the lines of "PowerPC proc's are generations ahead of that POS garbage commodity Wintel crap". :p

They are more expensive because they provide quality and give you more for the buck than a garbage PC with Windows can provide.

Haha more stupid, garbage posts from cabron. Suprise, suprise.

My MADE IN JAPAN Sony VAIO with WINDOWS on it surely must be inferior to a beautiful piece of Apple machinery built in the fine province of Guangdong, China (hey, that's where my $400 ASUS netbook is built too!).

The perfect Apple customer right here folks.

Tracking websites' accuracy is poor.

I love my iMAC, the tech support department is a little nutty. I swear by Apple

Only issue I have is Steve Jobs, et al, wants Apple to be a premium brand, the software and hardware prices need to come down. The simcity money cheat still dont work on my debit cards and no lottery winnings.

Dell can go up or down 5% of global market share in as little as 3 months (they account for 25-30%). It's easy to dream up a situation where year-over-year market share drops by 50% when you're dealing with a company of Apple's size.

I'm less convinced that a year-over-year install-base could drop that much that quickly and it'd be a pretty strange set of circumstances:

  • Half of all mac users toss out their computers and never return to the web (was 60m mac users of 1b computer users, no only 30m mac users)
  • Mac users remain unchanged but the number of non-mac users doubles (was 60m mac users of 1b computer users. Now 2b computer users).

Simple migration of mac users to non-macs even at a rate of 1 in 4 wouldn't account for that sort of change (unless the number of computer users increased 50% during the same time frame).

All of this is assuming that assuming that any given computer user will own a system for longer than 1 year.

We have reasonably accurate market share numbers which contradict your graph. I'm more inclined to think you've got a sampling error, poor methodology (or method change) or some other issue with this specific site than either of the above outlandish scenarios have happened.

It's also worth pointing out that other sources (see link earlier in the thread) that use a similar method don't report nearly the decrease this one does. Inconsistent stats should be viewed with suspicion.

If apple don't think smart like everyone else, they will suffer. They actually INCREASED the prices of most of their computers recently, not a clever move.

Quarter ending December was up year-over-year. Next set of numbers are due in a few weeks.

If profits are up it was the right move. Unit sales and market share may be down but that's going to be true of most firms (well unit-sales anyway) and that wouldn't be enough data to mark a trend anyway.

If Apple's unit sales are down by more than their nearest competitors (IBM & Acer) there's reason to take notice but not really cause for concern. If that happens again for another 3-6 months we'd have a trend and I'd be very interested about the state of Apple's consumer gismo business when making stock-purchasing decisions because you'd know the computer-bits business is in decline. Ultimately the question would be "Is the computer business viable for Apple" and I think so long as they can claim 30%+ margins even a 1% market share would be worth chasing.

But who the hell said that Apple market share drop 3%? What a crap is that? here is the truth Mr. Smart?

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-...re.aspx?qprid=8

Well we've both posted a website how are we to know yours is the correct one. Answer, we don't. Once again people that are scared at the first sign of something bad been said about Apple.

Apple hardly had any market share to drop in the first place.

Does it really even matter to you? I seriously doubt you'd able to somehow separate 3% from 6%... People who honestly believed that Mac OS X would ever make even a serious dent in Windows market share are heavily blinded by RDF...

They are more expensive because they provide quality and give you more for the buck than a garbage PC with Windows can provide.

Uh... no.

Why is it that obvious fanboys always have to regurgitate direct lines from Apple's marketing?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!