Should Apple even produce desktops/laptops?

[mammador]

Since the iPhone/iPad/iPod are the bulk of Apple's revenue, should it focus on the Mac line again? The idevices have made Jobs an international celebrity after all lol..

 

[Emulex]

yeah but you can't get real work done on idevices. lol. try to photoshop a raw image from a full size sensor DSLR on your ipad. maybe it has 20gig of ram?

 

[randomlinh]

if they get rid of the macs, you effectively kill the iDevices as well. Devs won't have anything to build on.

 

[Nothinman]

OS X has essentially become a support function for IOS. Since Apple requires you to build IOS apps on OS X they can't kill OS X until they open up support for other OSes. But that seems to be all they care about these days, so no they really shouldn't be making them any more but they don't have an alternative solution yet.

 

[Phynaz]

Mac sales are increasing at something like 7x the market...basically doubling every 9 months or so. Why in the world would they stop??

 

[gorcorps]

It's true they have a very small chunk of the market, but it's growing. Plus they take the same hardware that'd cost 800 anywhere else and get 1500 for it. Why would they want to stop that?

 

[mammador]

Mac sales are increasing at something like 7x the market...basically doubling every 9 months or so. Why in the world would they stop??

Is this true in relative terms though? I doubt Macs market share is growing relative to IBM clones, that is what counts in the end. The fact is that in terms of revenue, the idevices are bringing in the bulk of revenue for Jobs and co., and companies put forward resources in the most profitable areas.

 

[mugs]

Is this true in relative terms though? I doubt Macs market share is growing relative to IBM clones, that is what counts in the end. The fact is that in terms of revenue, the idevices are bringing in the bulk of revenue for Jobs and co., and companies put forward resources in the most profitable areas.

Why is that what counts in the end? I think Apple is happy to have an entire small pie rather than a small slice of a big pie. And their profit margins are bigger than the other PC makers.

What does Apple gain from devoting more resources to iPads/iPods/iPhones? They're not going to grow their market share with iPads and iPods, all they can really do is prevent it from shrinking and keep the money flowing by refreshing the devices every year - which they do. Not much more they can do there.

iPhone isn't suffering from lack of resources, if anything they're giving up some market share because of intentional decisions Apple makes. But really, you can't expect a company to take 50% of the smartphone market.

OS X has essentially become a support function for IOS. Since Apple requires you to build IOS apps on OS X they can't kill OS X until they open up support for other OSes. But that seems to be all they care about these days, so no they really shouldn't be making them any more but they don't have an alternative solution yet.

If Apple wanted to get out of the PC market, which would be really stupid, they could just let you run OS X on any PC...

 

[ubercaffeinated]

i love my iphone and ipad, but if i had to choose between ios devices vs imac/macbooks, i'd choose the imac/macbooks hands down.

macbooks have provided me with a computing experience nothing short of revelatory. no pc laptop manufacturer comes close to what apple creates (the hp envy line comes close, but only because the envy is a macbook pro clone)

 

[Nothinman]

Why is that what counts in the end? I think Apple is happy to have an entire small pie rather than a small slice of a big pie. And their profit margins are bigger than the other PC makers.

Which was made very clear when they killed off their server line. They see small, mobile devices as the future and their desktops/laptops are just there to enable that.

And their profit margins are higher because they're only really competing with themselves so they can mark them up 100-200% with virtually no repercussions.

If Apple wanted to get out of the PC market, which would be really stupid, they could just let you run OS X on any PC...

Yes and since they don't currently allow that, they don't have an alternative yet.

 

[akugami]

Mac sales are actually growing in the last few years. Part of it is probably for supporting iOS based devices because it seems a lot of purchases have been made in the business sector. Macs still do very well with consumers.

Keep in mind that while Mac based computers are about 10% of the overall computer market, Mac sales are actually not ranked that bad compared to individual OEM's like Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. Too lazy to look it up but I believe Apple is ranked like 4th or 5th but because they are marketed as a premium brand, where all of their computers are premium priced, their profits probably place them in the top 3.

I don't think it's a big deal using Macs for developmental purposes. Apple could easily release a development kit for Windows based computers. It's just another way for Apple to tie you into its products. But this is not a reason for Apple to make or not make Macs. It's all about making money and while the hot news for Apple is it's iOS devices, tied in by iTunes, Macs still make good money for them. That's why they'll continue to make Mac computers.

 

[manly]

Is this true in relative terms though? I doubt Macs market share is growing relative to IBM clones, that is what counts in the end. The fact is that in terms of revenue, the idevices are bringing in the bulk of revenue for Jobs and co., and companies put forward resources in the most profitable areas.

Huh, why would you doubt it? Macs are part of the PC industry and their sales are growing as the overall market stagnates. No, Phynaz wasn't just comparing Apple to themselves...

Without looking at the latest quarterly results, isn't Mac still around 1/3 of their business? And besides the strong growth, it's also a healthy-margin business. This is actually miraculous if you consider the cut-throat PC business as a whole, even if they're just competing against themselves (as Nothinman asserts). And I don't strongly agree with that premise; besides the Mac faithful, anyone who buys one is choosing it over a Win7 system of some make.

Just because they had a failed Xserve strategy doesn't at all equate to shuttering the Mac business. Not just consumers anymore, but businesses are buying MacBooks (unheard of just a few years ago) and the potential growth in the Far East is off the charts.

If they truly wanted to spin off/shutter a major business line, legacy iPods (non iOS) is obviously the easy pick.

 

[spikespiegal]

And their profit margins are higher because they're only really competing with themselves so they can mark them up 100-200% with virtually no repercussions.

Actually, the fallout of that mentality is meaningless corporate market share. It's funny, but I've been involved with TCO projects involving Apple, and once you get outside Apple's distortion field you find out how expensive and isolated Apple actually is. Everybody on the corporate side wants to VM their boxes, gut them, and stick them on a SANs. Apple forces you to think old school.

Oh yeah....we have some OSX wrappers for Vmware somewhere

 

[mugs]

Which was made very clear when they killed off their server line. They see small, mobile devices as the future and their desktops/laptops are just there to enable that.

And their profit margins are higher because they're only really competing with themselves so they can mark them up 100-200% with virtually no repercussions.



Yes and since they don't currently allow that, they don't have an alternative yet.

OK, I'm confused by the point that you're trying to make here. You said that "no they really shouldn't be making [computers] any more but they don't have an alternative solution yet." To me it sounded like you're saying the lack of the alternative solution is preventing them from getting out of the PC market, but you seem to realize that their "alternative solution" isn't a hurdle they need to overcome, it's a self-imposed restriction. So obviously the "lack" of an alternative solution is no problem at all.

You seem to think that Apple shouldn't be in the PC market, which I think is absurd, and Apple obviously agrees. Why do you think Apple shouldn't be in the PC market when they're selling a ton of computers and making a lot of money on them?

I doubt Apple was selling many rack-mounted servers, and I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by saying that Apple's monopoly is what allows them to have high profit margins. Obviously it is, but that doesn't change the fact that those margins are a good reason to keep making computers.

 

[Nothinman]

OK, I'm confused by the point that you're trying to make here. You said that "no they really shouldn't be making [computers] any more but they don't have an alternative solution yet." To me it sounded like you're saying the lack of the alternative solution is preventing them from getting out of the PC market, but you seem to realize that their "alternative solution" isn't a hurdle they need to overcome, it's a self-imposed restriction. So obviously the "lack" of an alternative solution is no problem at all.

You seem to think that Apple shouldn't be in the PC market, which I think is absurd, and Apple obviously agrees. Why do you think Apple shouldn't be in the PC market when they're selling a ton of computers and making a lot of money on them?

I doubt Apple was selling many rack-mounted servers, and I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by saying that Apple's monopoly is what allows them to have high profit margins. Obviously it is, but that doesn't change the fact that those margins are a good reason to keep making computers.

If I had to go out on a limb I'd say Apple is in the middle of a transition from PCs to iOS devices. The latter are obviously what they see as their future but they haven't figured out how to kill off the PC line and still make money off of development. That's why there's no alternative solution right now, they don't want to open it up. If they cared about development on Windows or Linux they could easily release an SDK for them, but obviously they want to force you to buy their hardware and an OS X license to do that.

I wouldn't say they're selling a ton of computers, they're making a ton off of selling a small number of computers because their markup is so high.

 

[James Bond]

If I had to go out on a limb I'd say Apple is in the middle of a transition from PCs to iOS devices. The latter are obviously what they see as their future but they haven't figured out how to kill off the PC line and still make money off of development. That's why there's no alternative solution right now, they don't want to open it up. If they cared about development on Windows or Linux they could easily release an SDK for them, but obviously they want to force you to buy their hardware and an OS X license to do that.

I wouldn't say they're selling a ton of computers, they're making a ton off of selling a small number of computers because their markup is so high.

Wrong

http://www.tuaw.com/2010/10/20/apple-mac-sales-could-sustain-a-fortune-500-company-by-itself/

One in five PCs sold in the United States is a Mac, making up 20.67% of U.S. consumer market share, and bringing in triple the amount of money the Mac has earned since fiscal year 2005.

 

[Nothinman]

Wrong

http://www.tuaw.com/2010/10/20/apple-mac-sales-could-sustain-a-fortune-500-company-by-itself/

I have no doubt that their revenue could sustain a fortune 500 company because of the extreme markup Apple can place on their standard PC hardware simply because it comes with their logo on it. And that 20% number may be correct for a specific amount of time, like the previous quarter or even year, but there's no way it applies to the overall number of consumer PCs in the states or especially the world.

And where do you think the other 67% comes from? IOS devices, iTunes, etc. The things that Apple wants to push more of because of the accelerated turnover, even tighter control they can exert, etc. When someone buys a Mac Pro they generally use it for 5+ years, when someone buys an iPhone they get a new one in like half that time.

 

[Emulex]

apple didn't make most of the server lineup of products - they need to produce something themselves that is rack mountable. the demand is there. i hate to see mac mini's thrown on a shelf its embarrassing to not have redundant power.

but apple themselves should create the rackmount units entirely and sell them like the mac pro or mac mini. the xserve was a bastard child and its storage likewise.

 

[James Bond]

I have no doubt that their revenue could sustain a fortune 500 company because of the extreme markup Apple can place on their standard PC hardware simply because it comes with their logo on it. And that 20% number may be correct for a specific amount of time, like the previous quarter or even year, but there's no way it applies to the overall number of consumer PCs in the states or especially the world.

And where do you think the other 67% comes from? IOS devices, iTunes, etc. The things that Apple wants to push more of because of the accelerated turnover, even tighter control they can exert, etc. When someone buys a Mac Pro they generally use it for 5+ years, when someone buys an iPhone they get a new one in like half that time.

I guess I don't see what point you're trying to make. 20% of PC's sold today are made by Apple. That is a huge amount.

It seems like you think it is wrong of Apple to mark up their hardware. This is something that every business does. They aren't going to charge less just to be nice, they are going to charge prices that people are willing to pay.

Apple is making tons and tons of money on their computers, so why on Earth would they stop doing that? It's not like Steve Jobs is going to walk in the office one day and be like "Well we are making billions of dollars off these computers, but we make even MORE money on iPhones, so lets just forget about the computers". It makes absolutely no sense.

 

[silverpig]

I guess I don't see what point you're trying to make. 20% of PC's sold today are made by Apple. That is a huge amount.

It seems like you think it is wrong of Apple to mark up their hardware. This is something that every business does. They aren't going to charge less just to be nice, they are going to charge prices that people are willing to pay.

Apple is making tons and tons of money on their computers, so why on Earth would they stop doing that? It's not like Steve Jobs is going to walk in the office one day and be like "Well we are making billions of dollars off these computers, but we make even MORE money on iPhones, so lets just forget about the computers". It makes absolutely no sense.

This guy gets it.

The ONLY reason why they would stop selling macs right now is if they were constrained by (production/capital/operational) issues which prevented them from manufacturing the next iPhone off the line by instead choosing to produce a mac. If the iPhone is higher margin, you make that INSTEAD of the mac. However, they are not constrained that way and can produce both macs and phones, so they do both.

 

[mmntech]

That's like asking if Microsoft should keep making home operating systems.

 

[Nothinman]

I guess I don't see what point you're trying to make. 20% of PC's sold today are made by Apple. That is a huge amount.

It seems like you think it is wrong of Apple to mark up their hardware. This is something that every business does. They aren't going to charge less just to be nice, they are going to charge prices that people are willing to pay.

Apple is making tons and tons of money on their computers, so why on Earth would they stop doing that? It's not like Steve Jobs is going to walk in the office one day and be like "Well we are making billions of dollars off these computers, but we make even MORE money on iPhones, so lets just forget about the computers". It makes absolutely no sense.

I don't think it's wrong for them to markup their products, I realize they have to make money. But they're a special case in that they're really only competing with themselves so they have virtually 100% freedom to push the markup however high they want with little to no consequences. I think it's absurd that their users pay that premium, but that's on them and not Apple.

And 20% is a lot larger than anyone would expect, but I would guess that's at least partially so high because overall PC sales are slower than they were 5 years ago. The last half/quarter of 2010 was what most people are considering the recovery of the most recent recession in the US. And that article still doesn't say over what time period that 20% was measured. The last quarter of 2010? All of 2010? Dec 2010? If the market is selling 50% less of a product than normal and you have 20% of that, good for you, but that's still a small number overall.

That's like asking if Microsoft should keep making home operating systems.

Not at all. MS is a software manufacturer, they make their bread and butter from licensing software to businesses and a large portion of that is to OEMs that sell home PCs. All of the other stuff like the XBox, Zune, phones, etc is secondary while the reverse seems to be true for Apple now.

 

[James Bond]

I don't think it's wrong for them to markup their products, I realize they have to make money. But they're a special case in that they're really only competing with themselves so they have virtually 100% freedom to push the markup however high they want with little to no consequences. I think it's absurd that their users pay that premium, but that's on them and not Apple.

And 20% is a lot larger than anyone would expect, but I would guess that's at least partially so high because overall PC sales are slower than they were 5 years ago. The last half/quarter of 2010 was what most people are considering the recovery of the most recent recession in the US. And that article still doesn't say over what time period that 20% was measured. The last quarter of 2010? All of 2010? Dec 2010? If the market is selling 50% less of a product than normal and you have 20% of that, good for you, but that's still a small number overall.



Not at all. MS is a software manufacturer, they make their bread and butter from licensing software to businesses and a large portion of that is to OEMs that sell home PCs. All of the other stuff like the XBox, Zune, phones, etc is secondary while the reverse seems to be true for Apple now.

Lol. Ok man.

Look you can spin it however you want. Apple sells 20% of all computers in the WORLD. I don't know how you can actually try and make that sound like a "small" number.

And no, they aren't competing with themselves, they are competing with the entire computer market. Some people prefer Mac OS, and if you do, then you buy a Mac. Case closed. That's all there is to it. If you think that that is somehow unfair, please explain.

And you appear to be delusional about how much an Apple computer actually costs. You're right, they cost more than the average Dell, but it's not like they are twice as much. This argument has been brought up about 500 times, so you can read past threads if you want comparison, but the verdict is that a MacBook Pro costs about as much as a similarly spec'd Dell.

Edit: As a side note, I have NEVER purchased a Mac.

 

[QueBert]

When I come into some monies Apple will get a purchase from me. That 27" iMac's a thing of beauty. And it's not even expensive compared to other all in one computers.

 

[manly]

I wholeheartedly agree with James Bond, but Apple does NOT have 20% global PC market share. (If they did, their stock would be well over $500/share.) Without consulting the actual numbers, 20% share would be #2 close behind HP. Apple IS very strong in retail channels in the U.S. but I don't think they're even close to 20% domestic market share yet. As akugami said, Apple does have a lion's share of profits (if not outright #1 just for client PCs).

Apple's global PC market share is relatively small, I don't think they're even in the top 5 yet. And it's growing briskly in the the Far East, call it the iPhone halo effect if you must.