I'm typing this from my acer aspire one right now and, honestly, this is more computer than I even need...
I will admit that I am a bit odd, the only thing I really use my computer for is an SSH/HTTP client; certainly my usage habits are different than somebody like my mother..
But then there's my mother...I bought her one of these a few months ago, and she LOVES it. Her desktop machine (which she uses for running quicken or something like that) took a shit a few weeks ago, and her motivation to have me fix it is about 0. Her aspire is more computer than she really needs (except for, maybe, the screen. The resolution leaves a bit to be desired).
So who IS buying computers that cost over a grand?
Well, there are gamers...people who are most certainly not going to buy buying a mac (despite a lot of games being available on OSX, it still isn't up to speed with windows). They might spend over $1000 (I am not a gamer, so I don't really know what is required for gaming these days. If it can run tuxracer and armagetron then I'm content). Buuut....most of the gamers that I know buy their computers from newegg and put them together themselves.
Even the desktops that I buy for my users at work only cost under $1k and that is with dell's "holy shit" service plan.
Apple, you're dominating the over >$1000 market because you're the only one IN it.
This claim would be akin to the coffee shop that I am sitting at claiming that they have 90% of the coffee market in Cross Lake, MN. They're the only coffee shop here.
That said, I think the statistic actually includes portables, not just desktop machines.
As an analogy, it would be like Cray boasting 20 years ago that they owned 90% of the $10,000+ computer market.
Apple needs to innovate on the low end, or die.
On the other hand, it seems like computing for the masses will converge onto mobile devices, and Apple currently has the strongest offering in that market.
Or the whole market for things called "computers" is growing, and the high-end market is just growing slower than the rest of it.
This doesn't mean that the high-end market is doomed. It might just be growing at a slower rate.
You may ask: Why doesn't Apple then try to get into a business that is growing faster? The answer is: Sales growth is not the metric. Any business can boost sales by lowering their profit margin. (Old-school dotcoms used to grow like wildfire by giving the product away below cost and hoping to make it up in volume.) What matters is profit growth.
I can't imagine Jobs is happy about being just being a billionaire when there are guys like Gates who dwarf his wealth and success (and therefore have the cash to actually saves many more lives and alter world history)
It's the Wal-Mart effect - you flood a market suddenly with cheap, shoddy product and people will jump for it, but it's not sustainable as your vendors and suppliers start dying off.
Profit margins are disappearing for the likes of Asus, Dell, and HP, and they're skating on thinner ice than ever before. Would you rather be selling $300 computers at a $5 profit each, or $1200 computers at a $100 profit each?
People got on Sony's back early on when they claimed that the introduction of a netbook will do nothing but start a "race to the bottom". They were attacked for being out of touch with reality and trying to peddle overpriced ultra-portable notebooks. But they were right.
Their market share might be single-digit, but hasn't it been growing?
Another interpretation might be that consumers are simultaneously migrating towards Apple PC's and laptops as well as purchasing netbooks and similar for added convenience. That's the story in my household.
This has a huge amount to do with this. Where else can you buy high-end PCs in a physical store, besides the Apple store?
One of the most fun parts of the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field is the statistics -- "91% of the > $1000 market", "most revenue during a non-holiday quarter", "most computers sold on sunny tuesday afternoons in spring", etc.
This stat is so cherry-picked it might as well have been "Apple claims 100% of the 'glowing-fruit-on-lid' PC sales."
Dell eventually acquiesces if you press them. Toshiba never did fix the defective laptop they sold me.
Now Apple. I bought a MacBook Pro some time back in '06. It bit the dust this past Christmas (Dec '08), and I called Apple up; the below is what happened, embellishment-free:
- Waited less than 2 minutes for the first representative to answer. I told her about the problem, she called up my file and noticed I had done previous repairs for the laptop, and immediately offered a full replacement (as opposed to a repair attempt).
- She transferred me to a level-2 tech, I was on hold for less than 2 minutes again, and when the L2 tech got on the line the first representative relayed all the relevant information to him, in my presence, and asked me to confirm that this is correct.
- They never once argued about the validity of any of my claims, nor did they ask for proof that my motherboard was truly shot.
- I told them that I needed to do work over the holiday break (this was Dec. 20th-ish), and asked them to expedite the process. I had my new computer by Christmas eve. - They upgraded me to a unibody MacBook Pro for free, without me asking for one.
Try getting THAT kind of service from any other PC manufacturer on the market today.
From anecdotal experience, every graduate at my old high school just picked up a 13" Macbook Pro. They're everywhere.
More people then flock from the middle to the lower end. Looking at this page from dell: http://www.dell.com/home/laptops
A ton of laptops in the $400-600 range, 2 @ $1000, and then you hit their high end alienware stuff from $1200 and up
Not necessarily a bad thing but it's definitely not a 'boost' in sales.
Buried a bit deeper is something more interesting: Despite these advantages, US Mac retail sales slowed for about six months.
The Macolypse Hits Apple* From about November 2008 to April 2009, Mac year-over-year US retail sales declined, even as Windows PCs dramatically gained. There was kind of a numbers reversal, following the late-September stock market crash. For example, in October 2008, following release of new aluminum, unibody laptops, US retail Mac revenue grew 25.5 percent, while Windows PC sales fell 4.2 percent, according to NPD. By January 2009, Mac retail revenue was down 10.4 percent from a year earlier and Windows PC revenue was flat.*
He goes on to say Mac Sales are up for June YOY, while attributing some of this success to price cuts, and noting that while Apple enjoys the high-margin territory firms which are pricing on value are holding onto market share.
I think the real losers here are not PCs in general or even manufacturers with a range of offerings like Dell and HP, but other luxury computer brands like Sony and boutique workstation suppliers.
As noted, the brick-and-mortar limitation is really distorting. Last time I was in Office Depot or Best Buy, they were strongly emphasizing value over performance with their space allocation.
The only other company whose laptops people rave about is Sony. I personally don't think that you should have to pay $2000 for a subnotebook, but if you intend to do that, Sony makes a very nice product.
Everyone else would love to get into this market, but can't. Dell, HP, Asus - they've all tried, but Apple's "low-end" products are better than their "high-end products."
Sure, I'm sure that Apple would like to get into the lower-end market, but they won't compromise quality to do that. The mac mini is the only low-end product they make, and it is also the only mac that doesn't have a convincing value proposition (funny how that works).
Apple has successfully positioned itself as a premium brand and that is great for them.
The Inspirons compete with the XPSs as far as specs, but the quality and build of the XPS machines take them a notch above.
