Login:
Password:

NPD: Apple dominates the high-end PC market

By Ed Oswald, BetaNews

May 20, 2008, 3:46 PM

In personal computers retailing over $1,000, Apple's Mac products comprised two-thirds of all that were sold during the first quarter, research group NPD says.

This number is up from 57 percent in January of 2007, and 18 percent in 2006.

The Cupertino company is also rapidly increasing its overall market share. 13.8 percent of all desktops and laptops sold bore the Apple logo, up from 9.5 percent in the same period last year.

Apple's turnaround is even more stark when comparing it with the market as a whole. While sales of Windows-based notebooks have been flat, Apple's laptops showed a 50 to 60 percent increase. The story is the same with desktops: Windows systems are down 20 percent, while Mac desktops are up 45 percent.

It is fair to note that nearly all of Apple's systems are above that $1,000 price point. The only system that sells for under $1,000 is the company's Mac Mini system.

Analysts point out that this flies in the face the "cheaper is better" logic typically attributed to the personal computer market. Instead, it seems as if consumers are willing to pay a premium on PCs as long as there is a perception of quality and a good user experience, NPD explains.

Much of the success could be explained by its retail strategy, which has been a major driver in turning its business around. This is also likely a result of the much-hyped "halo effect" surrounding Apple's successful line of iPod music devices.

The third piece of the puzzle may be the release of the Leopard operating system. NPD observed a marked increase in sales of Macs following its release, indicating the new OS may have pushed consumers to give Apple a second look.

Apple's share begins to look much less impressive with the addition of enterprise sales, which research firm Gartner includes in its stats. Apple has essentially zero market share there due to its lack of enterprise products. The company's only entry is its Xserve server, which has seen little adoption among large IT deployments.

Gartner recently reported the company garnered a 6.6 percent share overall, putting it in fourth place in rankings there.

Even so, Gartner said Apple recorded a 32.5 percent overall share increase over last year.

Add a Comment (42 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By rgare

edited May 20, 2008 - 4:51 PM

PCs are now largely divided into two camps. Work and gamer, the vast majority of gamers build there PCs, the vast majority of work PCs (home office types) can be purchased for sub $500 price tags. The only group left is the media buff, which has been Apples bread and butter for years anyway. This is a prime example of focusing your research to support your predetermined headline.

Score: 0

By neapolis

posted May 21, 2008 - 3:23 PM

Hey! Anybody wants to buy my old crappy notebook for over a 1000 bucks? ... Price should make it "high end", doesn't it?

Score: 0

By shellcodes_coder

posted May 21, 2008 - 12:09 PM

Apple sucks so do their system. PC and Vista are the best. Oh yeah, they are good at barking and polishing the outer frames of computers and nothing else that's why I will never-ever use their craps again

Score: 0

By artfuldodga

posted May 21, 2008 - 11:37 AM

My PC gaming rig was not that expensive and could blow away the top of the line Mac, so WTF is the point of this article?

Score: 0

By imafurby

posted May 21, 2008 - 10:50 AM

There are a lot of dweebs out there who just love that "High End Mac stuff", if you'll pardon the expression "high end."

Score: 0

By psycros

posted May 21, 2008 - 3:04 AM

This is one of the most misleading BN articles I've read in a long time. That 13.8% figure undoubtedly ignores the home built PC segment which is probably some 20-25% of the market. This is where nearly all the serious gamers are (who sometimes DO spend over a $1000 on a system). High price does not equal "high end" as others have pointed out. I'm tempted to think there might be an Apple zealot behind this piece.

Score: 0

By preinterpost

posted May 21, 2008 - 9:12 AM

"home built PC segment which is probably some 20-25% of the market"

Are you out of your mind?

Score: 0

By neapolis

posted May 21, 2008 - 3:15 PM

No. He's not.
This BN article sucks.
Complete lack of proffessionalizm.
Sorry... You get much more real "pro" stuff for less then Apples overprised... let's say it: "normal PCs without Windows".

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted May 21, 2008 - 12:57 AM

"It is fair to note that nearly all of Apple's systems are above that $1,000 price point. The only system that sells for under $1,000 is the company's Mac Mini system."

Indeed...

Score: 0

By Morsel

posted May 21, 2008 - 12:25 AM

Good for Apple. Mac rules and so do I.

Score: 0

By preinterpost

edited May 21, 2008 - 9:16 AM

If it would I'd use it. Fortunately I don't any more. They are pretty though.

Score: 0

By Jedite

posted May 20, 2008 - 11:46 PM

This is quiet simple.. Apple PC pain in the arse to upgrade, PC not so much.....

This is the type of thing that is really hard to messure since I know there are alot of ppl who don't buy branded pcs from Dell/HP ect and rather build their own rigs... Im one of those spent 1500 last year for a PC equal to a 4k Dell pc and Im sure i dont appear in that statistic.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 21, 2008 - 10:53 AM

Me either.

All but my wife's desktop here at home are built by hand.

Thank goodness for MWave and Newegg.

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

edited May 20, 2008 - 10:46 PM

I don't own a Apple nor will I ever but someone putting a dent in Microsofts business is a good thing. I still think Macs are polished turds but as I don't own one, I can't honestly comment on thier s***tyness. Unlike you people who bash Vista but don't actaully own it.

I do own two iPods and I can honestly say they suck in sound quality compared to my daughters Sansa.

Score: 0

By preinterpost

posted May 21, 2008 - 9:17 AM

And now load rockbox onto the Sansa and you are in business.

Score: 0

By Morsel

posted May 21, 2008 - 12:20 AM

Turn off the EQ, get better headphones and you're in business cuz those little crappy hearphones that ships with'em are really disgusting.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted May 21, 2008 - 12:58 AM

He's been there, done that. :)

Score: 0

By GS5

posted May 20, 2008 - 8:14 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't high end computers usually accompanied by exceptional (high)(super fast)performance??? Apple computers have always been mediocre at best when it comes to performance. My girlfriends piece of $h!t $2,550.00 iMac can't hold a candle to my less than $1800 bare bone overclocked performance monster. Although I must say, the iMac is nice and shiny.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted May 20, 2008 - 9:50 PM

Thats exactly my point (in post below)

Score: 0

By pand0ra

edited May 20, 2008 - 6:53 PM

Just because the price is over $1000 does not mean it is a "high end" product, just an expensive one. It's been shown that Apple has a 60%+ markup on their products over $1000.

Score: 0

By EricTetz

edited May 20, 2008 - 6:29 PM

I'm glad that others can see how misleading this report is.

Imagine you buy two machines, identical down to the model number. You get a discount on one (a sale, perhaps), and pay full retail for the other. Is the one you paid more for 'high end' compared to the other? No! That's not what 'high end' means to computer users; it doesn't refer to price, it refers to position on the power spectrum. A 'high end' machine is closer to the bleeding edge. A $1000 Apple is a 'low end' machine by PC standards.

Moreover, the price of a 'high end' machine is a moving target, so it's nonsensical to define that phrase in terms of an arbitrary price point, count Apple's slowest machines as 'high end', and proclaim them winners of the high end market.

A more accurate title for this report would be "Apple Computers Cost More Per Clock Cycle Than PCs", but that wouldn't be news, would it?

Score: 0

By JohnJones

edited May 20, 2008 - 5:15 PM

Does anyone here making these sour-grapes evaluations own an Apple computer ??

Score: 0

By pitdingo2

posted May 21, 2008 - 6:08 AM

of course not.

I do own a MacBook Pro. It is by far the nicest laptop i have ever seen or used. OSX is _way_ better than the OSX clone Vista (i am forced to use at work).

I would not trade this MacBook Pro for _any_ M$ based laptop.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 21, 2008 - 10:51 AM

better than the OSX clone Vista (i am forced to use at work).

Wait...

Isn't Vista the OS they all say no companies will ever use?

Huh...

Score: 0

By ncaissie

posted May 21, 2008 - 10:10 AM

I tried macs twice and it sucked both times.
Vista has problems but when you compare OSX to XP, XP kicks a$$. I like having control offer my stuff. MACs are for the loosers that can be trusted to configure their own computer.

Score: 0

By revscat

edited May 21, 2008 - 1:45 PM

Hmm....

1137][revscat@Ivan:~]$ cat .bashrc
set show-all-if-ambiguous on
set -o vi

# For Fink
. /sw/bin/init.sh

.... deleted ....

And you enjoy "having control offer my stuff"? Yes, we're supposed to take you seriously when you don't know the difference between "over" and "offer".

But then again, I'm just a "looser" who enjoys hacking around with launchd, Python, pthreads, Java, Cocoa, and spends most of my time on my Mac in a bash shell.

Score: 0

By preinterpost

posted May 21, 2008 - 9:22 AM

These days when buying a laptop I only consider high end. Last time (autumn 2007) Apple did not even make it into the short list since the features were sub par - and liking pretty things I really wanted it to (besides the embarrassingly tacky lighted apple logo on the lid). Doesn't look like it's gonna happen this yearly upgrade cycle (looks like mobile quad core :)) either...

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 20, 2008 - 6:41 PM

Dual-CPU G4.

It's crap.

The damned thing's overheated more times than I can count and every time I bring it into the "Genius Bar", they blow it out and tell they've replaced the fan...or the heatsink...or a blocked coolant tube...

Yeah. That's some high-end stuff.

Score: 0

By God Dammit

posted May 21, 2008 - 3:26 AM

If the G4 CPU's overheat that easily it makes me wonder how reliable the G5 CPU's are.

Score: 0

By TheNewGuy

posted May 21, 2008 - 9:02 AM

From what I saw at work, that was a main problem with the G series chips as they went on; they got way too hot.

In fact, I think that was one of the major contributing reasons for even contemplating a move to Intel.

Score: 0

By God Dammit

posted May 21, 2008 - 2:07 PM

The move to Intel was specifically related to the fact that the PowerPC G5 CPU required water cooling and therefore couldn't be used in a laptop. Since by this time Apple was no longer IBM's largest PowerPC customer on the desktop due to the release of gaming consoles that used PowerPC CPU's, IBM didn't feel that it was a high priority to fix the G5's heat problem.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted May 20, 2008 - 9:50 PM

lol that sucks

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted May 20, 2008 - 5:37 PM

No, however I am consistently using one at work.

I like the OS; it's very well made. However, the construction of the laptops is horrendous.

The PPC laptops were constructed much better; the Intel ones fall apart heinously quickly.

Score: 0

By TheNewGuy

posted May 20, 2008 - 5:39 PM

Really? I've experienced quite the opposite. Then again, I had the cursed iBook G3 where some engineering drop-out made the decision to solder the GPU to the bottom of the board.

I've had no bad fortune with my new Intel MacBook.

Oh well, to each his own. Enjoy your preference.

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted May 20, 2008 - 4:38 PM

LOL. When did high price means high end? If Apple's computer consider high end, I don't know what is not.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted May 20, 2008 - 5:21 PM

Agreed. They sell their products at such a premium its ridiculous.

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted May 20, 2008 - 4:37 PM

The only reason they're selling most $1000 and over priced PCs is that the non Apple PCs are being priced ridiculously high at that point and it's easy to pick up a cheaper one with the same specs (more than likely).

/whingy bas****

Score: 0

By Niro

posted May 20, 2008 - 4:23 PM

LOL that's funny...does apple even have anything below $1000? Aren't most PC's below $1000 these days??

Score: 0

By mshulman

posted May 20, 2008 - 4:09 PM

So how do the percentages break down of sales above and below $1000? This info alone is pretty meaningless without knowing what percentage that is of total sales.

What if 80% of all cpu's sold are under $1000?

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted May 20, 2008 - 5:22 PM

No, these "facts" they give us here are useless because they sell their products at a much much higher premium than nearly all other computer manufacturers.

Score: 0

By auiotour

posted May 20, 2008 - 5:06 PM

The article states in computers above $1000. It says nothing about total or under $1000. thats not what these figures include.

Score: 0

By dlab21

posted May 20, 2008 - 4:07 PM

apple, their numbers are always impressive... until all aspects are considered...

Score: 0