Skip to main content

Why the Mac may be poised for double-digit market share

iMac
iMac (Image credit: iMore)

At a high-level, based on many of the theories taught in business school, the Mac should not be gaining share against the once dominant Windows PC ecosystem. For the 2000-2010 sales period, the Mac averaged 3% share of annual sales. Now, at the end of 2014 the Mac was just over 6%. It's been steadily rising as a percent of annual PC sales. I genuinely believe Apple's share of the PC industry is poised for growth but what dynamics have changed from a decade where they averaged 3% to a new era where they are poised for growth?

Ben Bajarin is a technology industry analyst with a gift for explaining trends in a way that's both logical and understandable. Whether it's how many big phones really sold in North America prior to 2014, or the revenue potential of the wearable, Ben not only has the numbers, but the context, and that makes his opinions not just informative but invaluable. — Ed.

The customer

Microsoft dominated PC sales because their customer for Windows PCs in that era were corporate IT buyers. Those customers look more at price than they do overall experience. Starting around 2008, however, the industry began selling more PCs to consumer as opposed to corporate buyers. This shift is the watershed moment which began to build the foundation for the Mac as a growth story. The second fundamental change builds upon the first.

The market

When we look back at the history of the PC industry, we observe the vast majority of the PC's life has been selling to enterprise buyers. The consumer PC market is relatively young when looked at as a percentage of that time. Decades of continual PC purchases mature enterprise buyers — they came to know exactly what they want and why they wanted it.

The same dynamic was not true of the consumer market until very recently. Consumers are only beginning to understand what they want in a PC and why. In many cases, our research indicates consumers are asking if they even need a PC in the era of tablets and smartphones.

When a market matures it typically begins to segment. This is thanks to continual purchases of a product to help refine and shape what the buyer understands about their needs, wants, and desires with a specific product. This dynamic has been absent in the past, but now that we see mature market dynamics emerge, we see it benefitting the Mac.

Consumers, for example, say they want to buy a PC they know will last and will be well supported by the vendor in case anything goes wrong. They know they will be keeping their PC for five years or more and so they're seeing quality as an investment. They also want the peace of mind that if something does go wrong it will be fixed. Consumers seem to be recognizing that in the Mac.

The halo

Lastly, I believe we have to recognize the role the iPod and now the iPhone has played in Apple's success. Prior to the iPod, Apple's products appealed to only a very small and passionate user base. With the iPod, Apple was able to give millions of new customers the Apple experience. And with iPhone Apple is now giving that experience to hundreds of millions of new customers. The iPhone, by far, has Apple's largest customer base, and it is from this base the potential upside for other hardware in the company's ecosystem exists.

The Mac is the one product where Apple still has the lowest market share of total sales. With PC sales estimated to be in the 300 million per year range for the foreseeable future, we are watching in real-time as Apple's share of annual PC sales increase. Prior to 2014, the Mac had only sold above five million units in one quarter in its history. In 2014 Apple sold more than five million Macs twice, back to bac,k in Q3 and Q4. Looking to 2015, I believe Apple will see their first ever quarter of six million Macs or more.

The future

How high can the Mac's market share go? At Apple's peak, when the market was very small, it was 16%. Not only do I believe Apple can get back to 16% but I think over the five year time frame the fundamentals of the PC markets could see Apple reach 18-20% of annual sales.

Some may feel the Mac is the least "sexy" story around Apple, especially with the grand narrative around iPhone and now Apple Watch. However, I personally believe the Mac growth story is one of the least appreciated and yet fundamentally impactful stories around many areas of Apple's growth going forward.

Ben Bajarin is a Principal Analyst at Creative Strategies, a market research firm based in Silicon Valley. His primary focus is to study global consumer markets for personal computing. You can read him on Tech.pinions and follow him @benbajarin.

77 Comments
  • Things like the Continuity technologies, where you can do everything from taking or making calls to sending or receiving texts to handing off activities between iPhone and Mac, to me, increases not only the value of the Mac, of of using the Mac with an iPhone. The halo until last year was brand-centric with some familiarity and sync advantages. Now there are considerable workflow advantages making it manifest. Also: Thrilled to have Ben guest writing on iMore!
  • I do expect the continuity/handoff thing to spread to other ecosystems and those who use them have Apple to thank. I did have a problem with taking a phone call on my iMac where the voice told me to "press 1" to continue on and there was no virtual keypad I could find to follow that direction. Could be that I just could have pressed "1" on my computer keyboard but instead I started cussing and yelling and ultimately just hung up.
  • A majority of PC owners/potential buyers are also current owners of iOS devices. Agree with Rene. Apple really needs to push the idea that using a mac is a seamless experience with the iPhones and iPads that they already own. They haven't really done much advertising pushing the usability of OSX since the "I'm a Mac" ads that I recall. Many of these people are upgrading from Windows XP or Windows 7. Going to Windows 8 or Windows 10 is more jarring than learning to use a mac, so now is the perfect time to capitalize on the iOS user base and sell them macs.
  • Let's not forget that Apple and IBM have joined forces in mobile enterprise.
    Huge foot in the door for Apple. Meanwhile, Wintel is dead in mobile enterprise
    (and circling the drain in consumer.)
  • In case you haven't noticed, IBM isn't doing so well these days.
  • My iMac is the only PC I own (and I have 3, and 2 smartphones) with horrible wifi (latest 21.5" model, < 2 mo old). If I had known I'd be going through router after router trying to get a decent connection on it short of rearranging my house or moving my desk downstairs to hardware it, I'd have gotten another Windows PC. Thinking about selling it at a 30-40% loss to do just that.
  • I have an Asus router and a rMBP, no wifi issues at home or any caffe's / free wifi... I have 4 home automation devices and a small linksys travel router setup to service them as well.. Parents have a 27" iMac and 1 MBA that worked with their Verizon WiFi router and now Uverse w/an Airport Extreme.. Again, no issues ether. Maybe it's a non-localized phenomena - /cough... :D Sounds like a case of head banging... I'd avoid that and just ask for help from an Apple store.. less stressful.. let them test it..
  • I live in a 3 story house. WiFi is on the 3rd floor and I get perfect reception in the garage. You certainly have a problem and it's not your Mac. Sent from the iMore App
  • I have a brand new 21" iMac too, and I'm using Apple's latest Time Capsule router just 20 feet away in the same room and I get the same thing. Apple has had immense troubles with all their Wi-Fi and Bluetooth stuff this last year or so. I'm fairly certain that they re-wrote the entire Wi-Fi/Bluetooth modules from scratch on all devices which is probably what caused it. I've had Wi-Fi/Bluetooth troubles with my iOS devices and all my computers over this year. I went in to the Apple store about the iMac and the fact that Continuity and AirDrop were problematic and the guy had the temerity to tell me flat out that there were "NO Wi-Fi issues at all" and that "people are believing there are, but there aren't." Basically called me a liar in other words.
  • n8ter you might really need to get a mac airport. You can get a refurbished model cheap, they set up easy and run great. If you are really having such a serious problem, you can always take the iMac in for a check up. But I have never really had such a problem except when using cheap routers. Just saying.
  • I have a house full of Macs (old Macs don't die they just get used for something, like home automation). I use Apple Airports and don't have any WiFi issues.
  • Obviously no experience with PC's int he enterprise. Mac just can't hang. Deployment tools and management software is not there and with Apple's record of software that is PURE SHIT, forget it!
  • Bitter much?
  • That was true about ten years ago but not today. We have and use Mac management tools of basically the same kind as Windows uses. Also a lot of serious corporations and institutions basic systems are Unix anyway, which is the same as the Mac.
  • Apple has stopped putting efforts in Enterprise when they realized that they had no chance of making it past the IT middle man with their end-user focused business plan. IT-focused businesses literally own that space and Apple chose to not alter their model just to get "some" enterprise action. I personally find it telling that Apple is putting it's eggs in the iOS basket in regards to carving a place in enterprise, not the Mac. So your poorly worded comment is moot, Apple wants some Mac side entreprise action, but not at the cost of becoming more like HP or Dell.
  • Apple stopped caring about servers. The idea that Apple doesn't put efforts into the enterprise is at odds with the reality. For example, OS X in many ways supports Active Directory better than they support Open Directory. The default file sharing protocol in Yosemite is SMB3, not AFP. They've steadily worked to make client deployment easier regardless of back-end platforms, and in some cases actually do much better than MS, especially when it comes to imaging. iOS is an easier foot in the door, but the support for enterprise users of OS X is hardly dying or even ignored.
  • Yes I know, I just failed to mention that I was talking about the marketing aspect of catering for the entreprise market (sales force and assorted endeavours necessary to be involved in the enterprise/institutional buying process) and the Mac product portfolio strategy (jobs-to-be-done-differentiated lines instead of industry-differentiated lines).
  • so you posted something that had nothing to do with what you really meant?
  • Are you trolling me or something? English is a secondary language to me, but I believe I was pretty clear about the point I'm making... Sigh
  • Your point was based on invalid assumptions. "Apple has stopped putting efforts in Enterprise when they realized that they had no chance of making it past the IT middle man with their end-user focused business plan." That's provably incorrect. If Apple weren't still putting efforts in enterprise, why bother with Active Directory support in the OS? Kerberos? Exchange Support? Why spend the time to build an in-platform infrastructure that literally does *nothing* other than make it easier to manage Macs from a centralized console and then publish the specifications for that infrastructure so that multiple third parties, including IBM, Microsoft, etc., can integrate OS X machines into their management system? Why change from AFP? Why put in support for ACLs? Apple has not "stopped putting efforts in the enterprise". There are actual facts that disprove that statement. There is also nothing about supporting Macs in the enterprise that requires becoming an HP or a Dell. Again, this is provable. you also have a very narrow view of IT, one that precludes the changes that are happening at the desktop/end node level, something Apple has been able to take real advantage of. It's not that your point was unclear, it's that it was verifiably incorrect, and when confronted with that, you immediately tried to make it as though you weren't wrong, I was wrong for disagreeing with you and using facts to support that.
  • When confronted? Haha, I answered by saying "yes I know"; meaning that I agree with you that from a technical aspect, Apple never "stopped putting effort in enterprise" (they do have important industries to cater to after all; creative, education, research, themselves...). And I clarified by saying that I meant they had given up on enterprise from a marketing and product strategy angle. Or maybe these two points are irrelevant to you?
  • I switched from Windows Vista to OS X Tiger in an enterprise IT environment and it caused no problems at all. Myth. Busted. :)
  • You can't put Macs in an enterprise environment. The IT department would eventually have to lay off all the help desk staff. Who wants that kind of bad press?
  • The idea that mac users somehow have this magical commune with their machine, or that somehow macs don't ever require support, or even really LESS support than Windows boxen is cute. Hilariously wrong, but cute. I recently spent 6.5 years in a 100% Mac desktop environment, most of the servers are OS X with some windows boxen for things requiring windows. In terms of user support, you have the same problems you'd have in any environment. Software issues, why is my computer slow, how do I work this, etc. The number of OS-specific issues on either platform are about the same. There's fewer problems with malware, (although that problem is well-solved regardless of platform), but more problems with compatibility in terms of documents and applications. It all balances out. So no, a network full of macs doesn't even come close to meaning you get to fire your help desk. It just means you trade one set of problems for another.
  • Lighten up, Francis! That was a joke. Wait, let me put that in a format you can understand: http://www.bing.com/search?q=define%20joke&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=define%20joke
  • "Hey, you called me out on this completely silly thing I said with no technical accuracy whatsoever. IT WAS A JOKE" Hey francine, tip: no one can read your mind. If people don't get your joke, maybe it's because you can't tell jokes well, or the joke kind of sucked. Something to keep in mind.
  • Dang, BOFH! You got some serious Windows management anger issues.
  • Of course I do. Your ability to psychoanalyze someone you've never met nor know across the internet is amazing!
  • Oh bless your heart honey. Here's a cookie, now run along, the adults are talking.
  • Says the guy named “bynkii.” smh
  • LIGHTEN UP FRANCIS!
  • The iMac is a nice machine, but it has limited appeal. People who haven't got iMacs solely, will already have a decent monitor, keyboard, mouse. It is a waste of resources, not only financially but environmentally, to get an iMac which comes with a screen, keyboard, mouse. The mac mini is fine but is under powered for a lot people. Apple needs a more powerful headless mac with optional keyboard and mouse. Apple will not increase OS X desktop share with this current lineup (in addition to the comments above which I second). Apple has the resources to correct this, but is unwilling to.
  • They have the Mac Pro which is a "headless" device and quite powerful.
  • I know that already, but its way out of the price range for many.
  • I agree, just bought my first MAC, a mini. It works great for my family and what we need it for but it is basically a headless MacBook pro. A desktop class headless machine from Apple would be priced as an iMac though. I guess that's why many still build hackintosh's.
  • Who, exactly, is the Mini "underpowered" for?
  • Not for me its not. But for others it is.
  • I keep seeing and hearing people say that, but when I ask about it, it turns out it's for a really small set of needs that in some cases, (hardcore gaming) one would wonder why the mini, or really any Mac at all would ever be a consideration. for the majority of needs, especially in generic usage, as it turns out, the Mini isn't "underpowered".
  • The processor and memory options between the Mac mini and iMac are virtually identical; if the Mac mini is underpowered (and it is not), then so is the iMac. It would sure be nice if you'd have at least SOME factual basis for your Apple-bashing.
  • I love that iMore is attracting better and better writers and their insights and analysis.
    It's becoming a better bookmark every week.
  • I loved this article, but I gave up caring about Mac market share years ago for some of the reasons mentioned (but not really highlighted) in this article. The reason I don't see these market share numbers as anything to care about is because when most people talk about Mac marketshare, what they really mean is, "How many PEOPLE will CHOOSE a Mac over Windows?" Unless you are an analyst, what people are trying to find out is which platform is more POPULAR, not gross sales. And that is something that the numbers don't really show. They don't show them of course because ALL purchases, even corporate purchases are included in the statistics. If I'm going to start a call centre business for example or any high volume low money operation, I'm going to buy thousands and thousands of Windows PCs, and all my employees will be counted in the Windows column for sales, even though absolutely none of them have "chosen Windows." Most large businesses don't care about the things Apple is selling (quality, long-lasting, easy to use), even though most individual consumers do. I'm no analyst or statistician, but I remember reading an analysis at least a couple of years ago, that attempted to tease the "consumer numbers" out of the overwhelming morass of "business sales" in PC market share, and they came to the conclusion that Macs *consumer* market share was already about 25%. That one in four consumer purchases of computers for the home, was already a Mac. So if you want to know which platform is more POPULAR, I think these numbers do a poor job of showing it, and also that it's clear the Mac is already in the double digits with consumers. It's arguable that a Mac is never going to be the go-to device to purchase for vast businesses operating on small margins. The PC sales to corporations and call centres and sweatshops and so on are commodity purchases and should really not be included at all IMO.
  • "I'm no analyst..." Actually, that was some pretty decent analysis--thanks!
  • I can tell you're no analyst. Your comment used logic and real thought to arrive at its conclusions. you can't be an analyst and do that.
  • Hey now! I think the analyst who wrote this article is fairly logical and thoughtful :) Perhaps I am biased.
  • You get a bye Ben. You and Horace Dediu are about the only analysts in the Apple market I pay any attention to. Because you're atypical and don't just pull everything out of your nethers :-P
  • Well said. :) and Thanks for the kudos, much appreciated.
  • Thanks for the thoughts on my article. I agree market share is widely deceiving, but it does give us useful insights on a number of topics. Mac has the highest share in sales of premium PCs, but those are low volume relatively. Mac has higher share among creative professionals, but also lower volume as a segment. And yes, if I did break out consumer vs, enterprise sales, Macs would have higher share there as well. But overall, the key takeaway with Apple is to focus on profit share not market share since they dominate in profits in every segment they compete. But since I also do a lot of analysis for Wall St. firms, the financial upside of what I laid out is quite relevant for Apple. Lots of other pieces to dig into as well, as no analysis is ever complete or exhaustive at 900 words, but I do appreciate your thoughtful comment.
  • "... but I think over the five year time frame the fundamentals of the PC markets could see Apple reach 18-20% of annual sales." Especially if Apple switches the low-end models to ARM-based processors. This might eliminate the cooling fan and reduce battery size, for ever-thinner enclosures. And it would definitely eliminate the Intel Tax (tm). Apple is forced to pay boutique prices for their Intel CPUs because of their relatively small orders compared to the Dells and Lenovos of the world. Lower cost -> lower retail price -> increased sales. The mass market would barely notice the CPU switch. The "pro" market would, but Apple might let them keep their Intel "Pro" Macs and MacBooks. Using the old time-honored fat binary trick, of course, so Intel and ARM code could be shipped as a universal build. Developers would only only need to choose the "fat binary" build option in Xcode to compile apps for both Intel and ARM.
  • Yeah, because the market hardly noticed switching to Intel, and no recoding was need...okay, can we just stop this myth? Switching CPU architectures is hard, it will always be hard, and one example of this is that Apple is the desktop computer manf. to have done so more than once. Or even once. It has never been easy, it will never be easy. in addition, what Intel "Tax" is there? How much is it?
  • I personally think that - medium term - iOS is where PC class market share will grow. It's just that iOS (especially iPads) has so much ahead of it in terms of maturity and development that maybe in 4-5 years we will be looking at an iOS platform that has the potential to replace nearly all PC use-cases. Maybe then connecting a monitor and keyboard/mouse to an iPad (or why not an iPhone) will yield a similar result to a dedicated PC. Certainly to get there, a lot of processes and interactions need to be defined/made/fine-tuned and apps need to mature has well, but that is the road ahead. So the Mac might not make it very far in terms of market share if it has to compete against a more productive and powerful iOS platform.
  • I think what mobile computing and iOS has shown us is that by a large margin, most people don't actually NEED a "PC." The average consume is just as well served by an iOS device as a PC for the tasks they need a computer for. This is why mobile sales are through the roof and why Apple is already in double-digit numbers in the market that actually counts.
  • On BIG reason not mentioned in this article: the Internet. It used to be to get "real" work done you needed a PC to interpolate with all the other PCs. Now a lot of real work is done over the Internet in the "Cloud." This is weakening the PC's network effect and creating an opening for heterogeneous computing.
  • The Mac's Achilles heel in many businesses is not some stodgy IT department but vertical applications and, yes, macros. Visual Basic may be crap, but it is crap a lot of businesses have built extensive foundations on, from BigCo glue apps to your doctor's practice management. That has been a big part of why people buy Windows - not because of price but because there are some very specific apps written for them only available there. This is getting to be less of a problem as more of these apps move to web front ends - one doctors office I work with added 2 Macs to her setup as her EMR app moves away from AcriveX and officially supported Chrome on OSX - but it is going to be a limiting factor on Macs for a long time to come. Sent from the iMore App
  • with office 2011 and the upcoming 2015, the Macro issue is much less than it ever was. The caveat there is "as long as you stay within office". It's when you move out of office that the need for windows in terms of VBA becomes quite real. that's something that would require years of massive effort on the part of both MS and Apple, and I'm pretty sure if they thought it worth the effort, they'd have done that already. But that's only really a problem if you buy into zero-sum. if you don't, then it's just one of those things that happens in any arena with multiple competitors. Some are better at this thing, others are better at that thing.
  • While it would be neat to see the Mac have significant growth, I think Windows 10 is going to make a comeback for Microsoft and the OEMs.
  • I hear this a lot from my Windows tech buddies... Strange that I remember hearing the exact same thing about Windows 8.1. I don't necessarily think you all are wrong, it's just that it feels like the world is moving past traditional PCs and that PC growth is a thing of the past.
  • "in case anything goes wrong. They know they will be keeping their PC for five years or more and so they're seeing quality as an investment." I'm writing on a 2008 iMac.
    PC's either windows or apple are not investments! They are Expenses!
    The value of either is in the understanding of the "expense value" of the buy. I agree with most of your proposition but not the investment part. I have been a Appler for over 30 yeas and have bought used and new machines. Dependability and Trust in Apple through my experiences have proven to me the Value Equation that is Apple. Security is the game changer in this world of getting screwed and the period at the end of the statement.
  • Anecdotally, I've found that friends or family experience a higher level of delight and have their biggest “aha!” moment by switching from a PC to a Mac than someone who switches from a non-Apple device to iOS. The countless nuances and attention to detail that have gone into making the Mac experience pretty great catch people by surprise over and over.
  • It could. My main issue with macs is still lack of upgradable components and their gamin offering. So that's why I still go PC for desktop. Laptop I could see getting a MacBook. And honestly, the modern day windows experience isn't as bad as people think.
  • that would be a better point if the number of people who actually upgrade things wasn't a rounding error at best. Once you exclude hobbyists and gamers, the people who upgrade video cards or upgrade even their hard drive is pretty small. They just get a new computer. That's one of the reasons that the PC market has driven their prices so low. If you can get a new computer for not much more than the price of a hard drive, why bother?
  • There's something about the look of a mac interface that I just like. I don't know why or I can't seem to identify what it is. Sent from the iMore App
  • Apple's share is poised to explode for another reason: price. So many people WANT a Mac. The thing is so many Macs are simply over-priced. Oh, I know, I know the 'lecture'. Part one of the lecture is that Apple prices have come down. Which is true. Part two is that some PCs are more expensive than similarly spec'd Macs. True again. Part two of the lecture is that Apple makes so much profit by avoiding the 'race to the bottom'. And so Apple knows what its doing and we poor fools in the real world are too stupid to even comment. Sorry. I'm commenting. I believe Apple wants 'cool' share above marketshare. This means it will never attempt to become the dominant OS and computer in the world. If it wanted that, it would act accordingly in the three areas -- 1. The Mac Mini. Whether Apple likes it or not, there's a new pricepoint in the mini-PC world. Under $200. Yes, I know, they may not have the spec or OS of a Mac Mini, but that's not the point. If Apple wants to explode the user base, a solid Mac Mini for $299. This means anyone with flatscreen TV could have a nice surfing Mac for that amount. Apple could even throw in an Apple TV mode. Or -- 2. -- Apple TV could become iOS. And stay at $99. Which is way above Fire TV and Chromecast, but hey -- you'd get access to awesome games and turn your TV into an iOS TV Mac kinda thing. 3. MacBook Air. The rumored MacBook smells a lot like the Asus Zenbook at the recent CES. Which can be had for $800. That would be a nice pricepoint for Apple. The no-brainer laptop from Apple. But if buyers want a cheaper pricepoint -- AND THEY ALWAYS DO -- how about -- 4. -- a rumored iPad Pro that is really a Surface like iOS 'laptop'? (If that isn't what the Macbook Air already is.) A $599 iOS 13 inch book would explode among people who want a simple Mac that dances circles around a Chromebook. If you look at those prices these aren't racing to the bottom. They are just lower. It would force some PC manufacturers either out of business or said PC makers wouldn't drop prices any further. So the people with no money would still buy cheap stuff, but meanwhile Apple would get to %16 in minutes.
  • I wanted to edit this but somehow I'm triggering a spam filter. So it looks like I can't count. LOL. There are three parts to the lecture, not one, two, and two. ;-) Also, I suggested there are there are three areas of product consideration where I listed four. And I left out the entire desktop scenario. You get the idea.
  • Your entire post seems based on the idea that the way for apple to achieve real success is to try to more closely align their pricing structure and elements of their sales practice with that of windows based competitors. But, they are the wealthiest business on the planet, making more money and growing faster than just about anyone, have products that draw a mind-boggling level of consumer desire and excitement and have become the company whose ceo had been invited over for tea by leaders around the world. All of this has occurred in an environment where they specifically made business decisions contrary to your suggestions. What I'm hearing is that you want them to sell stuff for less. So do I. They'll do it if and when it's right for their strategic business vision. But I'm pretty confident that feeling compelled to compete in the way you are describing will have virtually nothing to do with it. Sent from the iMore App
  • Despite all evidence to the contrary, I don't understand why pundits and commenters like sreenplayhouse insist Apple wants market share. The company has never done ANYTHING to dominate market share in any facet of any product. I think Apple is fine with having competition. In my experience they have never once exhibited a "crush the other guy" mindset. They just want to make quality products then sell them at prices that makes Apple the most valuable corporation in the world. Perhaps you should submit your piece to Business Insiders or something. Then the Macalope could make fun of you too.
  • China.
    Just the explosion the iPhone 6, 6+ has in that country, will be enough to put the Mac to the 18-20% annual sales the article mentions about. The reason is that it will open the eyes :) of what the whole Apple eco system means and their next computer purchase will be a Mac.
  • I think having the iPhone can only help Mac sales as more of iOS gets integrated. But ms could market to consumers much better than they do now. Windows 8 was pain. And it didn't have to be that way. And that pain will continue to cost them. Many get an iPhone because it has best apps. That's true for windows. iOS has best games. True for windows. Windows can offer the best experience. But ms has to treat consumers as if they don't know what they're doing. Because most don't. It has to be set up and marketed much better. Xbox controllers should come with a pc. Games should be a highlight after just turning it on and ready to be played. Believe it or not most users don't even know they can use a controller on a pc. Apple understands consumers far better. The Mac App Store is an example. Sent from the iMore App
  • For me, the halo went the other direction. I had a rMBP for a year or two and when Yosemite and iOS 8 added new features like Continuity and Handoff, not to mention iOS extensions and keyboards, I ditched my Android devices for iOS devices last year.
  • I am reading these comments and they're all very interesting. I hear no one talking about price. Apple has to do something to make the Mac more affordable If they want to increase marketshare. When you have a decent computers that are being sold from Microsoft at $299 and up, it really becomes a tough sell to consumers to go purchase $1000 Mac.
  • and yet, Mac sales steadily rise.
  • They are on the rise because Windows 8 is so terrible. Sent from the iMore App
  • or because MS hasn't done much to create compelling new features outside of the enterprise. The new CEO appears to have a clue about that. But clearly, for Apple to succeed, MS must fail, right?
  • "…Apple has to do something to make the Mac more affordable If they want to increase marketshare…" Who said Apple wants to increase marketshare? Oh, I know. Pundits at Business Insiders writing click-bait opinion pieces. Apple has never done anything that would indicate they give a damn about marketshare. Apple has become the most valuable company in the world by selling high-quality products at prices people who can afford that quality are willing to pay.
  • I personally think that this is how the market will eventually become: You want a tablet more powerful than your average iPad or Android tablet: buy a Windows tablet You want a touchscreen laptop/2-in-1: Buy a Windows convertible (many people, including me, would never buy a laptop without a touchscreen) You want a Windows desktop: Build your own (this is what I have done) Anyone else: Buy a Mac. The only people buying non-touch Windows laptops and pre-assembled Windows desktops are those on a budget, those who are bought into the MS ecosystem or those who hate Apple.
  • Whatever makes you think, without even one shred of statistically valid evidence, that your personal, idiosyncratic preference typifies the preferences of a significant segment of the market, not to mention the majority of it?
  • bet those banks that saved $200 on each win pc that is costing them a couple million dollars is now regretting the decision to go WIN.
  • To be honest, the only reasons I still have a PC are 1) I still have to provide tech support for PC users and thus, I have to maintain familiarity with Windows and 2) The racing SIMS I play don't run on the Mac. If I had the money, I'd buy a more updated Mac Pro Work station and dual boot Windows and Mac on it, as long as my Logitech G27 Wheel/Pedal set and racing SIMS ran without a hitch. If my 2006 Mac Pro could run my racing SIMS in 64bit mode, I wouldn't even own a PC, I'd just own Macs. It took 9 years for the HDD in my Mac Pro Workstation to fail and require replacement. Can't say the same for any PC I've ever owned.