Here’s the Wall Street Journal, quoting NPD numbers:
Apple Inc.’s unit sales of computers through U.S. retail channels fell 6% in January from the same month in 2008, the first monthly decline in three years, according to market-research firm NPD Group.
The data suggest that Apple’s premium pricing, which helped boost revenue when demand was strong, may be hurting the company now that consumers are being more careful about their spending amid the recession.
That people would argue this would not be the case … it still baffles me.
Update: Commenter Dssstrkl makes a great point:
How about we consider the fact that MacBook sales went up in January, and it’s Mac desktop sales that are down. Big surprise there. The current iMac is over 10 months old, the mac pro is over a year old and the mini hasn’t been updated since August 2007! There’s a massive pent-up demand for new and modern desktop Macs. Watch the numbers go through the roof when Apple finally gets off it’s collective ass and pushs through some new systems.
I’d read TFA, but I don’t want to subscribe to the WSJ.
If I were in the market for a new computer (not just yet – give me a year) I’d still buy a Mac, even if the cost was a little higher. I’ve hardly had any issues with my white Macbook, and would be confident buying another Mac.
I don’t find that Macs are really more expensive than PCs – one doesn’t always have to go buy them at a brick and mortar shop; the refurbished sale list online works well too (and is cheaper).
I read a while ago, may have even been on boingboing, an article about how millionaires buy things. Basically, they buy expensive but well-made things that won’t wear out or become obsolete as fast. They also take care of the things they have, so they will last longer.
I own a few macs, and I will continue to be a Mac owner and buyer because (QA issues aside) they last longer, are made of better materials and are less prone to failure than their PC counterparts.
@ DEEJAYQUEUE #2
You’re right on that, and the same holds for the aristocracy in times past. You buy things that are well made and durable and you don’t have to replace them, and neither do your children. Hence I am writing this from my great-grandfather’s desk, sitting on a chair made in the 1800s, in a house originally built in the 12th century.
This is also known as the Samuel Vimes “Boots” Theory of Economic Unfairness.
Alys, there’s no reasonable way to argue against the fact that Macs are more expensive than PCs. Comparing new to new or refurb to refurb is the only reasonable way, and even high quality PC laptops significantly undercut comparable Apples.
I was facing just this decision recently, and went with a Dell Latitude E6500. This despite how pretty the new MacBook Pro is. I got a machine that was superior in many ways – longer battery life, faster processor, more memory, more ports, for a thousand dollars less than the MacBook Pro (the Dell was $1420, the comparable Apple was $2499). It’s a magnesium case and LCD chassis, LED backlit screen and keyboard, etc. etc. It even already came with a 3-year warranty whereas the Apple warranty added yet another $350.
Looking to the lower end there’s an even larger percentage difference.
I’m not arguing that the Mac is a bad deal, not at all. But it’s definitely more expensive than the equivalent PC.
I’m also a mac person — my next machine is likely to be a current but refurbished Mac Pro, because of these reasons: I know it will be enough to carry me through at least 2-3 years.
Whereas now my desktop is a $1,200 self-built PC that gives me a BSOD now and again and probably will piss me off to the point of replacement in a few months.
Any comparable figures on declining sales for Dell or HP are conspicuous by their absence. I’ll accept that Apple’s sales are off 6%—no big surprise. What about the other guys? Is Apple at a comparative disadvantage right now? ISTR that just last quarter (with the recession already in full swing), Apple had growing sales when everyone else was in the dumps.
On “premium pricing,” I think that if you do (pardon the pun) apple-to-apple comparisons, Apple looks pretty good. You can buy cheaper computers, but when you match specs, it’s pretty close. Just last week I had a chance to use my tax guy’s HP laptop when I met with him. It was an appallingly flimsy, Fisher-Price grade piece of kit. My wife and I speculated that it probably cost $500-600. When I got home, I looked it up: $1025. Right around Apple’s (still available) $999 polycarbonate Macbook, but nowhere near as nice.
How about we consider the fact that MacBook sales went up in January, and it’s Mac desktop sales that are down. Big surprise there. The current iMac is over 10 months old, the mac pro is over a year old and the mini hasn’t been updated since August 2007! There’s a massive pent-up demand for new and modern desktop Macs. Watch the numbers go through the roof when Apple finally gets off it’s collective ass and pushs through some new systems.
I’m personally waiting for a new mini to act as my media center, but will wait until there’s an update. There’s just no way I’ll buy a current mac, just because I know there’s new stuff coming. We should also point out that the general PC industry, sans netbooks, is doing far worse than Apple.
Macbook Nano… Where are you?
The global netbook explosion coinciding with the global market implosion is no fluke- people need cheap ways to get things done.
Most of my computers are Macs- they just work better with the software I like to use, and they go longer (for me) without needing maintenance.
In the end, Macs do cost more than their competitors, but then, so do Lamborghinis.
“That people would argue this would not be the case … it still baffles me.”
Bingo. That personal computers have positive price elasticity of demand is not even a question.
Of course, that will not prevent people from arguing that this is not the case because their personal demand is price inelastic, or from the cognitive dissonance that quickly follows.
@2,3 I am sure all the people for whom a $2,000 computer is equal to a month’s income or 2 month’s rent will appreciate your financial advice.
@tensegrity
What, we can’t save up for large purchases? For those of us without thousands of dollars lying around, there’s always the option of saving enough to make your purchases. I consider the $2500 I spent on my PowerBook in 2002 as well spent as the $2200 I spent on my MacBook pro in 2006. Both machines are still in active service and paid in full. While I expect to replace both machines with mobile nehalem MacBooks later this year or in 2010, it’ll be because I want modern machines that will last another 4-5 years. How many cheap-ass Dells purchased in 2002 are still running, let alone running Vista or Win7? That PowerBook is running 10.5.6 just like the MacBook. That kind of longevity and prolonged utility is why I’ll continue to buy Apple, and thats before getting into the advantages of the platform.
And while I’m on the subject, why is no one hitching about how expensive Sony, Dell XPS, Alienware, Falcon Northwest and every other premium Windows OEM is? Not every PC is a piece of shit Inspiron or HP. Hell, the HP Blackbird costs over $4000! Gaming PCs, even DIY rigs are crazy expensive and need to be upgraded all the time. Let’s please stop this PC = cheap and Mac = expensive BS, because it just isn’t true.
Yes, there are (a lot of) PCs that are cheaper than the least expensive Mac, but there are also a LOT of PCs more expensive than any Mac. If you need something to check your gmail, get a netbook, if you want to play Crysis, build a gaming rig. You pay for what you need, and if your needs require certain hardware and software, you’ll pay more than someone with basic needs.
Few regrets, much pleasure, love Darwin.
I switched to Macs a few years ago, despite getting Windows OSs as gifts from the Redmond company store. Two of my Intel Macs have been running 24/7 for more than two years, less a couple of weeks on the road. 57 days uptime prior to last reboot on my main computer. The hardware is well built, the OS is stable and 3 years warranty is available on refurbished Macs direct from Apple.
@11 Hey, knock yourself out. Get a Macbook air, iPhone, etc it’s all good. I just find it awesome that some commenters don’t recognize that people may buy lower priced products because that’s all they can afford and not because they don’t properly recognize the quality/value of Apple products.
Might this also have to do with eople holding off until the Nahlem based Mac Pros come out?
If you need something to check your gmail, get a netbook, if you want to play Crysis, build a gaming rig.
I played Crysis just fine, at 1680×1050 with most graphics options maxed (up until the zero-gravity stuff, at which point I turned down a couple of things) on the $600 Gateway I bought two years ago.
Granted it had a $200 video card and $100 RAM upgrade added to it over time. But there’s this weird notion that you need to spend $3000 for a “gaming rig” when all you need is a reasonable CPU (in my case, the slowest available Core 2 Duo), a midrange graphics card and sufficient RAM.
Here’s the Wall Street Journal, quoting NPR numbers:
NPR or NPD?
/pedant
@11 – For every example of a Mac lasting X years, you can find a Dell or HP or home-built PC that has done the same. I have a Dell Inspiron E1705 originally from 2006, that I bought used on Ebay, and it still works great. You may want to cover your ears, it also runs Vista.
I’m surprised to see people still unwilling to admit that a decent part of the Apple premium is do to nothing more than it having an Apple on the back of the lid. They very well may have a higher standard of quality and look nicer, but that can only go so far when the price gaps reach past $500. There’s certainly nothing wrong with that, we’re probably all guilty of paying more for popular name-brand items of various types, but at least be willing to admit it.
I like Tensegrity’s suggestion about how with Macs, the elasticity of what a market will pay and the elasticity of what specific consumers will pay is markedly different.
Grimc, fixed. Lol.
The reason Apple computers seem more expensive is because Apple doesn’t do low end. That’s not to say low end computers are bad, they’re just not in Apple’s business model. Also, Apple doesn’t have as many different models, so there aren’t as many possible options available. And yeah, not all Apple products are as good a value as others. And some things, like Apple’s RAM prices are overpriced.
When Apple switched over to Intel processors, it became a lot easier to to an apples to apples comparison. Here’s an example article…(it’s about a yer and a half old.)
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=macintosh_os&articleId=9023959&taxonomyId=123&intsrc=kc_feat
As an example in the article, the author, Scot Finnie, looks for a Dell equivalent to Apple’s $2,799 17-inch MacBook Pro.
Assembling the nearest equivalent Dell notebook feature for feature, the equivalent Dell was $3,459.
For the extra $650 you get higher-end video and six USB ports instead of three, but it also weighs nearly two pounds more and is much chunkier (1.69-in. thick, compared with 1 in.)
Not such a bad deal for an Apple…
@ Tensegrity
I do realise that; what I said wasn’t intended as advice, merely as an illustration of the fact that it is, indeed, a rich man’s world. Hence “unfairness”.
Oh, and I’ve never bought a mac.
@20 trilby, gotcha. Sorry I was in a bit of a snarky mood yesterday.
Also, people are switching from desktops to laptops generally.
@#16:
“For every example of a Mac lasting X years, you can find a Dell or HP or home-built PC that has done the same.”
Exactly. There were around ten times as many of them to start with, and yet the same number survive.