!
Posted on 07/10/2009 12:53:32 AM PDT by Swordmaker
In the last few weeks numerous technology and mass media web-sites published hundreds of stories about Apple, its products, their availability or their issues. But does that enthusiasm towards the company have any correlation with Apple’s actual market share? It seems that not really.
Apple is a company that has been extensively covered by media, especially in the USA, for many years now without an obvious reason: apart from the iPod, all the products from Apple are hardly used by a lot of people around the globe. But the latest load of rush coverage about Apple on the Internet more resembles hysteria rather than a normal exposure of a popular topic.
The most recent wave of wide-ranging coverage of Apple began with the pending release of the iPhone 3GS: almost all the tech web-sites published rumoured specifications of the device, some were correct, some were wrong. Then, after the 3GS was finally launched and the press released a load of ecstatic articles on the matter despite of the fact that nobody has tried to use the device, the media rejoiced over the return of Steve Jobs, chief exec of Apple, to his position at the company. Virtually all tech and mass media web-sites decided to inform their readers that Mr. Jobs had liver transplant in April and was back in the office on time.
After the state of Mr. Jobs’ health was discussed completely, the press found numerous new topics to talk about: availability of iPhone 3GS, overheating of iPhone and iPod devices, the future of relationship between Apple and Nvidia, demand towards certain Macbook notebooks, the number of applications available for sale in Apple’s store, installation of cameras on next-gen iPod players, unlocking iPhone 3GS (some went as far as advising business users to hack iPhones and use them for business purposes) and numerous other topics.
But does the media coverage correlate to actual usage of Apple’s products? Or is it just a cult inside the heads of a certain group of people? Let’s see the numbers!
Apple Macintosh: 3.33% Global PC Market Share
According to Apple itself, it sold around 9.92 million of Apple Macintosh computers in calendar 2008 across the world. According to IDC market tracking company, worldwide PC shipments totaled 297.24 million units in 2008. Therefore, Apple supplied no more than 3.33% of personal computers last year, definitely not a significant number.
Some may argue that Apple is very popular in the U.S., which is why the enthusiasm towards Macs in the country is so high. Well, if truth be told, Apple was the fourth largest PC vendor in the USA in 2008; but it only had 7.7% market share and is behind Dell (29.5%), HP (24.9%) and Acer (9.1%).
It does not look like the Macintosh systems are truly popular globally. Moreover, they have a number of drawbacks too: notebook batteries that cannot be replaced, rather controversial keyboards, incompatibility with the vast majority of video games, insufficient amount of ports on some Macbook notebooks, inability to configure them in accordance with personal needs before purchase, etc. So, Macs are neither the best, nor the most popular on the market.
Apple iPhone: 1% Global Cell Phone Market Share
Apple iPhone is among the most demanded tech gadgets of our time along with Nintendo Wii and Apple iPod. Nevertheless, its actual popularity seems to be greatly exaggerated. Its actual market share is very low and that points to the fact that iPhone cannot suit everyone, either because of the functionality or because of usability or because of the price.
Apple itself said that it sold 13.675 million of iPhones in 2008. According to Gartner market research firm, Apple’s sold-through figures for the iPhone series were considerably lower: 11.4175 million units.
Total mobile phone sales reached 1.22224 billion units in 2008, claims Gartner. Therefore, depending on whose sales numbers to consider real, Apple’s cell phone market share is either 0.934% or 1.118%.
Since Apple iPhone is a smartphone, it makes sense to consider its potential on that market too. Gartner claims that Apple had rather high market share of 8.2%: of 139.287 million smartphones sold in 2008, 11.417 million were Apple iPhone or iPhone 3G. Still, 8.2% market share means that 91.8% of end-users around the globe preferred non-Apple mobile phones. Indeed, 43.7% acquired Nokia smartphone, 16.6% bought Research in Motion’s Blackberry. Many other preferred phones from companies like HTC (4.2%, Gartner only lists HTC’s own-brand devices under its name and considers HTC-made phones sold under operators’ brands separately) or Sharp (3.8%).
Perhaps, it is Mac OS operating system that attracts attention to the iPhone? Well, based on the research from Gartner, Apple’s Mac OS X with its 8.2% market share is considerably behind Symbian (52.4%), RIM Blackberry (16.6%) and Microsoft Windows Mobile (11.8%). In fact, Linux-based phones rival Mac OS X with 8.1% market share.
Maybe Apple iPhone is the best (smart)phone on the market right now? Well, it may be rather trendy, but there are devices like Nokia 8800-series that are, subjectively, more stylish and that attract much more attention. Apple iPhone also does not have long battery life: almost any business-oriented (smart)phone is a far cry from the iPhone when it comes to battery life. Moreover, maximum operating temperature of 35°C limitation practically cuts off the iPhone from hot countries and from people who travel to those destinations. Obviously, it is more comfortable to surf the Internet or watch videos on iPhone than on other (smart)phones thanks to large screen, but these are basically the only clear advantages the iPhone series has over rivals.
Apple iPod: Walkman of Our Days
The actual popularity of Macintosh computers and iPhone cell phones is clearly low. But Apple iPod family is definitely the Walkman of our time.
In calendar 2008 Apple sold 55.434 million iPod music players. Sales of iPhones are not driven by product launches: in Q1, Q2 and Q3 the company sold roughly 11 million devices per quarter, whereas in Q4 the number doubled to 22.727 million, probably because a lot of people acquired iPods as gifts for Christmas or New Year.
Unfortunately, there are no credible reports concerning the global market of portable digital media players (PDMP), hence, it is hard to estimate the actual market share of Apple iPod. Still, according to predictions from iSuppli back in 2007, total available market for PDMP would total about 240 million units in 2008. Therefore, Apple probably commanded about 23% of the PDMP market last year, a very high figure that may mean that the iPod is the most popular personal digital media player in the world.
The popularity does not automatically mean that those players are much better than the rivals: they are tied to iTunes software, their batteries cannot be replaced and some customers complain about firmware-related problems. Nevertheless, the iPod ignited the Apple cult in the computer and consumer electronics world.
Apple TV, Apple Time Capsule, AirPort Extreme, Xserve: Gadgets Not from the Cult Obviously, Macintosh, iPod and iPhone are not the only products offered by Apple. The company also offers TV set-top-box, external hard disk drive, a router and even a server! However, popularity of those products is rather low, which can be explained easily: they are not a part of the cult and do not have a chance to become as popular as the “headline devices”.
The Apple cult supposes devices that one can show in public to attract attention (Macbook, iPhone, iMac) or be like the others (iPod). Meanwhile, set-top-boxes, servers or external storage devices are not supposed to be demonstrated publicly since they are just made to provide certain functionality and not meant to be eye-candy. In fact, the lack of popularity of Mac Pro and Mac mini desktops points to the same conclusion since neither of those desktops are supposed to catch anyone’s attention.
The Passion, or a Simulation of a Cult?
To sum up, the only Apple product that seems to be truly popular on the market remains iPod. Of course, sales of iPhones, Macintosh systems and other products contribute to Apple’s revenue and profitability. But while they may be admired and discussed in the press, but they are rather rarely bought, as it can be seen in various market researches.
So, when it comes to the extensive coverage of Apple on the Internet, is it a passion for unpopular gadgets, or is it a type of a simulated cult created by rather vocal PR specialists, end-users and journalists?
You must be blind to the irony you are spouting. You are the only one on here attacing the persons, us. If you noticed, I already mentioned that the author appears not to be an English as a native language writer and cut him some slack. We were commenting on his lack of a grammar editor who, doing an editor's job, could have helped.
No irony at all. I saw more comments on things from you on how it was said rather than what was said.Of course your comment on mobile OS’s which you called FUD was material related.
Where is the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt in my rhetorical question about Android? Please tell me how that spreads FUD about any product?
You expressed doubt of his numbers by claiming that Linux is not equal in numbers to the iPhone(which you called FUD) which in turn spreads uncertainty about the veracity of his claims which is all about the fear his column created in your defensive mechanism.
I think you struck a nerve - what I don’t understand is this. I love my BMW (used to be BMWs - now it’s just BMW). But if people don’t like BMW’s or don’t like the fact that I like BMWs or just don’t give a sh*t one way or another, I could care less. Go figure.
No, yes, donut know. lol
!
Or ... put another way: you don't have to be ex-gay to hate macs, but it helps.
Yup, you're right:
The irony is that YOU are using ad hominem attacks on people discussing the article. We are not. We've been discussing the article and its presentation. Re-read my comment you are referencing on mobile OS's... you will find I did NOT call it FUD. I said:
"Did you catch the claim that Linux cell phones were 8.1% of the market? Did Android suddenly gain more phones?"
Do you see the word FUD there? I had not seen that percentage of Linux OSes reported for Cell phone before... and the latest one being hyped is Android.
Do you really think those on here making comments alluding to the sexual perversities of Mac users are really discussing the content of the article? Strange, I don't recall sex being in the article at all. No, I think those comments are intended to marginalize Mac users and are exactly what ad hominem argument is about.
SO the entire article EXCEPT that part is FUD then to you? I mean you simply can’t start off with a post on your pinglist calling the thing FUD and then claim a small part of it isn’t FUD in another post. Or can you? Meh I don’t know.
As for that poster calling Apple users gay. Call him out on it, take him down, do what you do best. I don’t care.
You impute some kind of a "fear" to me and imply I am responding because of a "defense mechanism." These are loaded words which ARE ad hominem attacks against me, intended to marginalize me to other readers by implying a pathological condition. If we are going to psychoanalyze me, perhaps we should also consider your knee jerk reactions when you enter Mac threads and start spreading your ad hominem attacks. Perhaps the "fear" and "defense mechanism" references toward me are projection because you fear Apple's incursions into the Market and its phenomenal growth?
Getting back to legitimate debate, questioning the veracity of the author's data is NOT ad hominem attack... it is discussing the weight one should give the data that is being presented.
I can, for example, challenge the author on his implied accusation of dishonesty on Apple's part when he says:
"Apple itself said that it sold 13.675 million of iPhones in 2008. According to Gartner market research firm, Apple’s sold-through figures for the iPhone series were considerably lower: 11.4175 million units.
Total mobile phone sales reached 1.22224 billion units in 2008, claims Gartner. Therefore, depending on whose sales numbers to consider real, Apple’s cell phone market share is either 0.934% or 1.118%."
In this section the author implies that the actual, audited numbers of iPhones sold by Apple and reported in their annual report (where if you present false information, stockholders can sue the management, and the Feds can bring criminal charges of fraud) are somehow not accurate and further implies that Gartner's ESTIMATED numbers—provided by an organization that has limited information, mostly garnered by counting people in lines at stores in statistical samples... and which don't include sales on the Internet nor from Apple's own retail stores—are more accurate. Bah! That is FUD. It is perfectly proper to question his other "statistics."
Let's assume Gartner's estimate of 11.4 million sold through the channels they CAN sample, AT&T stores, Best Buy, and WalMart, etc., is accurate. To meet Apple's reported number of 13.7 million iPhones sold you'd have to account for 2.3 million phones not accounted for in Gartner's estimates. Apple sells iPhones on the Internet and through it's 250 Apple Retail Stores, neither of which provide figures to Gartner. Just ignoring the Internet sales and concentrating on the retail stores, doing simple math we find that Apple could sell ~2.3 million iPhones just through the Apple Retail stores if each store sold only 25 per day. Last November I took a friend with her iMac to an appointment at the Sacramento CA Apple Store's Genius Bar. We got there late because of an accident on the freeway so wound up having to wait for about 45 minutes for the next available opening... during that time I saw at least 12 iPhones sold. I think it is perfectly do-able and that Apple's audited count of iPhones sold is accurate and SHOULD have been used in this article instead of bringing up the FUD question of their veracity. So yeah, I will challenge the author's facts. Challenging his facts is not ad hominem.
SO the entire article EXCEPT that part is FUD then to you? I mean you simply can’t start off with a post on your pinglist calling the thing FUD and then claim a small part of it isn’t FUD in another post. Or can you? Meh I don’t know.
No, the article in its entirety IS FUD... small portions of it may not be FUD but are used to create FUD.
Fear, Undertainty, and Doubt do not need to be untruthful to be FUD. In fact, it is much more useful if you use facts to spread the FUD. It's the way the facts are presented... what is said... and what is not said.... that makes FUD. The choice of what to present, what is not presented, and how its couched are what makes it FUD.
Much of what this author claims is irrelevant to the quality, the design, the usability, the computing experience, or even the popularity, of the integrated computer and peripheral systems that Apple has put together to offer to the public in the markets it has chosen to compete in. His entire thrust is that Apple and its products must be unpopular because they occupy a minority position in their overall markets... ignoring other salient facts such as the market share growth Apple has been demonstrating in ALL of those markets and that Apple often does not compete in all sectors of those markets. For example, iPhones are sold in only 70 of the World's 195 countries. He doesn't qualify his data that iPhones were not even available in two of the World's largest cellular phone markets, India and Japan, until this year and that iPhones are still not available in the World's largest cellular market, China. Mac computers are actively marketed in even fewer countries. It also does not present the fact that 60% of Apple's market is in just ONE of those 195 countries. yet he chooses to compare Apple's (single company) products' numbers to the entire multi-thousand company competitions' products that are sold in all 195. That distorts the market share data to no purpose except FUD.
The basic argument here is akin to the classial logic fallacy's claim "Fifty Million Frenchmen can't be wrong." Reframe that: "One billion computer/cell phone/mp3/etc., users who selected Windows PCs/other Cell Phones/mp3 players/etc., (everything that was not made by Apple) can't be wrong." It then inverts that to conclude they must be right, and, ergo, anyone who chooses Apple has to be wrong... or a cult member... or deluded.
The fallacy in that claim is the assumption that those Frenchmen or non-Apple consumers, just because of their sheer numbers, have somehow imbued the things they believe or selected with truth or greater value. Nothing could be further from the truth. The fact is that they certainly can be wrong about the truth of what they believe or the value of what they have selected.
Consensus proves nothing factual except that large numbers of people could be either wrong or right or neither... the only fact is their large number. There are probably 200 million Americans who believe that Anthropogenic Global Warming is real... but their numbers do not make that a fact or a not fact. To me it means large numbers of people can be deluded by people writing FUD. . . like Al Gore's seminal work. Their large numbers, just like the numbers of people who have never looked at or used a Mac and chose a Windows computer, do not validate their beliefs in the superiority of their choice, or their error of their choice or their ignorance about something they have not been exposed to. 54% (another large number) of the American Electorate thought that Barack Obama was the right person to be President of the United States... if the logic of this article is correct, then we have to accept that they "can't be wrong" so therefore they must be right!
The author of FUD just needs to spin the data presented in a way to establish FEAR in the potential customer of the company or product that there's something wrong about the company or product he wishes to disparage; He has to instill a certain amount of UNCERTAINTY in the potential customer that perhaps his thinking about the topic is somehow wrong. He also needs to establish DOUBT in the potential customer about what he thinks he knows about the company or product. Doubt that his choice to choose the company or item
That IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS ARTICLE IS ABOUT... it is spreading FUD. This article is a compendium of FUD about Apple and its products. I stand by that judgement call.
Oops, sorry TC. Didn’t mean to offend. Just returning fire. Won’t happen again.
Is English this guys second language?
But that is the point of his article Sword, a case that has completely escaped your gaze or purposely ignored. He is not attacking the quality of Apple products but the disproportionate amount of media coverage and the disproportionate zealotry of it’s fanbase. He is simply stating that Apples worldwide share for all but one of it’s products is miniscule yet the reception by the Media is akin to an Obama visit in Ghana.
I think so. That's why he would benefit from an editor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.