Does anybody else think that iPhone has not garnered more Mac users?

[63dot]

I would always see surveys that put Mac users at 5% percent (corporate settings) to maybe 20% percent at most (home users). It's seemed the same for nearly 20 years. While there has been some new Mac users, I would think iPhone alone would give Apple the image it needs to get majority user share worldwide.

With the incredible boost from iPhone, iPod, iTunes, and iPad, one would think that PC users who bought these other Apple products would buy Mac, but I haven't seen it. Why is that?

1) Does OSX suck these days? Do modern day Macs suck?
2) Are Macs too expensive?
3) Are iPhones so good that all the attention goes to only that? I see people with several iPhones, every incarnation, but not one Mac.
4) Is it because Windows 7 is much better than Windows Vista?
5) Is it because tablets are the in thing?
6) Is it because Macs are so tough that people buy them every ten years, like mine? (two 2006 minis)
7) Is it because we went through a recession that made even upper middle class people have to choose between and Mac and an iPhone?

8 ) or is it a combination of these things?

 

[z31fanatic]

Price and familiarity with Windows. Most people resist change. They go what they are comfortable with.
Windows has had 90% or more of the market for more than two decades now. It's hard to break that when your cheapest computer starts at $900. Apple doesn't make $300 computers like most PC manufacturers do.

 

[Tomorrow]

With the incredible boost from iPhone, iPod, iTunes, and iPad, one would think that PC users who bought these other Apple products would buy Mac, but I haven't seen it. Why is that?

I'm not sure - my family and I switched to using Macs shortly after I got my first iPod, and I really don't think we're the only ones, so I suspect it has actually happened and for some reason either you missed it or just haven't seen it.

1) Does OSX suck these days? Do modern day Macs suck?
2) Are Macs too expensive?
3) Are iPhones so good that all the attention goes to only that? I see people with several iPhones, every incarnation, but not one Mac.
4) Is it because Windows 7 is much better than Windows Vista?
5) Is it because tablets are the in thing?
6) Is it because Macs are so tough that people buy them every ten years, like mine? (two 2006 minis)
7) Is it because we went through a recession that made even upper middle class people have to choose between and Mac and an iPhone?
8 ) or is it a combination of these things?

1) In my opinion, OS X peaked around Snow Leopard. The new tweaks to make it more iOS-like are huge steps backwards, as far as I'm concerned. But I bought a new Mac last year and I still enjoy the machine and the OS.
2) For many people, yes. It's naive to think price isn't a factor.
3) Many people (particularly businesses) aren't going to switch OS platforms because of software. That's just the way it is. No amount of iPhone love is going to change that.
4) I'm one of those who thought Windows got a LOT better from Vista to 7, but I still prefer OS X. For now. It's going downhill, IMO.
5) The proliferation of tablets has cut out a lot of consumer-level computer use, but not all of it.
6) I don't replace computers based on how "tough" they are, but how long the hardware and software continue to meet my needs. YMMV.
7) I don't know how big a factor this is/was, but for me it was a non-issue.
8) Maybe, each user is different.

 

[Jessica Lares]

It's the price point. That's the only complaint I've ever heard, price.

People don't pay the $100-200 more for the 32-64 GB iPhones either, even though it's obviously what they'd like to have.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I'm not sure - my family and I switched to using Macs shortly after I got my first iPod, and I really don't think we're the only ones, so I suspect it has actually happened and for some reason either you missed it or just haven't seen it.



1) In my opinion, OS X peaked around Snow Leopard. The new tweaks to make it more iOS-like are huge steps backwards, as far as I'm concerned. But I bought a new Mac last year and I still enjoy the machine and the OS.
2) For many people, yes. It's naive to think price isn't a factor.
3) Many people (particularly businesses) aren't going to switch OS platforms because of software. That's just the way it is. No amount of iPhone love is going to change that.
4) I'm one of those who thought Windows got a LOT better from Vista to 7, but I still prefer OS X. For now. It's going downhill, IMO.
5) The proliferation of tablets has cut out a lot of consumer-level computer use, but not all of it.
6) I don't replace computers based on how "tough" they are, but how long the hardware and software continue to meet my needs. YMMV.
7) I don't know how big a factor this is/was, but for me it was a non-issue.
8) Maybe, each user is different.

Very good and comprehensive answer.

I'm one of those who was persuaded to 'switch' a few years after I had bought an iPod (and had experienced the first rate customer service that Apple offered after that iPod died while within warranty and was immediately replaced without seeking refuge in contractual small print). So, both the 'halo' effect of the iPod and excellent customer care were motivating factors for me.

Thus, I have absolutely no doubt that the iPod had a huge influence on Apple's sales, and certainly helped to increase them. However, in recent years, I suspect that this 'halo' effect has dissipated as far as Apple computers are concerned, and has instead, become more pronounced in the tablet and iPhone markets, which is where Apple has increasingly targeted their R&D and their marketing.

However, I must say that every work environment I have worked in used Windows, and still does. I'd see this as a huge reason; indeed, until it became possible to use Microsoft products such as Office, (above all Word and Excel) on an Apple computer, Apple had locked themselves out from what most of the rest of the world used.

It is no use arguing (as some Apple aficionados did when this topic came up) that what Apple produced was a better product; that may well be, but most of the world uses something else, and what you use needs to be completely compatible with what they use and completely comprehensible to them.

Then, there is the matter of cost. Most companies exist to make a profit; to them, computers are a necessity and an unfortunate expense; unless they work in a creative field, where such things may matter, they will not seek to spend extra in this area. Likewise, international organisations funded on taxpayer monies are hardly going to wish to justify the purchase of Apple computers to an auditor dispatched from their sending authority to audit their books.

 

[rdowns]

It's the price point. That's the only complaint I've ever heard, price.

People don't pay the $100-200 more for the 32-64 GB iPhones either, even though it's obviously what they'd like to have.

I disagree. That's exactly how Apple maintains their incredible margins, the extra $100-$200 for increased iPhone storage or RAM on a Mac and/or higher capacity SSDs.

 

[Jessica Lares]

I disagree. That's exactly how Apple maintains their incredible margins, the extra $100-$200 for increased iPhone storage or RAM on a Mac and/or higher capacity SSDs.

Disagree that people don’t pay for them, or?

I paid for my 64GBs. I would pay for a bigger SSD in my Macs too.

 

[rdowns]

Disagree that people don’t pay for them, or?

I paid for my 64GBs. I would pay for a bigger SSD in my Macs too.

Yes, people absolutely pay for the upgrades.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Yes, people absolutely pay for the upgrades.

Do you mean that they pay through the nose for these upgrades? In other words, that the upgrades are expensive and that this is a way that Apple makes money? Or, do you mean that people will willingly pay for an upgrade because it is what they want or think they need?

 

[Jessica Lares]

See, I disagree with that. Just look at what happened when iOS 8 was released for instance, and then look at people who have been complaining that iPhones shouldn't start at 16GB - With the belief that the 12 GB you get with that is too small for everyone, when it's really that they have a problem of having to pay that extra money to get the actual capacity that works for them.

 

[Crusoe]

IMHO, it's also familiarity based on what they've used before and what they use at work/school.

If -- like most big corporates I've worked at -- you use a Windows version day-in, day-out, there are disincentives to switching to a new OS at home. I'm generalising, but if you know Windows does what you want it to do, and you know how to use it, combined with the price point already mentioned, there's little reason why you'd want to change and have to familiarise yourself with a new OS. I imagine that many iPhone users don't need a lot of single-vendor integration with their desktop/laptop OS -- perhaps no more than syncing music (which you can do from a Windows machine) and contacts/emails/calendars (which you can do on a Windows machine, or on any platform if you're using, say, Google for those services).

Corporates don't have a big incentive to switch because Apple has never really pushed for that market so can't match the offerings of established players. And legacy compatibility is a massive headache (just look at how many corporates still run old versions of IE, XP, or even 2K for some specialist applications).

 

[rdowns]

Do you mean that they pay through the nose for these upgrades? In other words, that the upgrades are expensive and that this is a way that Apple makes money? Or, do you mean that people will willingly pay for an upgrade because it is what they want or think they need?

Both. I don't know about paying through the nose but many of their upgrades are expensive, especially those that you can do on your own if you desire. Most don't want to be bothered so they pay Apple. These upgrades add precious basis points to their margins, which is great for the stockholder in me and sucks for the consumer in me.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Both. I don't know about paying through the nose but many of their upgrades are expensive, especially those that you can do on your own if you desire. Most don't want to be bothered so they pay Apple. These upgrades add precious basis points to their margins, which is great for the stockholder in me and sucks for the consumer in me.

Fair enough, and thoughtful answer.

I suspect that quite a few people who had bought into Apple's advertising and marketing (in the days when it was marketed as 'cool' and cutting edge to own an Apple computer or device) are a bit put out to realise that they don't, in fact, belong to an esoteric and 'cool' in group, or priesthood who appreciate advanced technology, but, rather, are simply consumers and that Apple is a company - one that makes stylish products, certainly, - but that it is still a company and is one driven by the need to generate income and make a profit.

Re the question posed by the OP, my own sense is that Apple no longer defines itself simply by making computers. Real income can be tapped from other - more lucrative ad remunerative - sources. This started with the transformation of the music industry with the iPod which revolutionised how music was consumed, and then - how music was bought and how it was marketed to individuals. Ultimately, the very model of music ownership for all of the players in the industry has been dramatically and radically transformed beyond all recognition in the past twenty years.

Thus, iPhones, and iPads, and Watches are probably only the beginning of such an evolution. Part of this evolution is that the computing division will no longer assume quite the importance it once had, and resources and future R&D priorities may well reflect these changed prorates in time.

Actually, I can see the day - and I suspect that it is not all that far off - when Apple will be a company that defines itself by all of the other stuff it makes - and revolutionises - (and even wrecks) - while retaining an arm to manufacture computers. These days, computers are not where the big money is.

 

[rdowns]

These days, computers are not where the big money is.

That may be true but Apple earns the lion's share of all computer industry profits (not including servers) for their Mac line, not to mention, their Mac business on its own would be a Fortune 500 company.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

That may be true but Apple earns the lion's share of all computer industry profits (not including servers) for their Mac line, not to mention, their Mac business on its own would be a Fortune 500 company.

I don't doubt that, but I suspect that this is no longer their priority. My sense is that Apple is diversifying, and is looking to other avenues for fruitful - and future - sources of income.

I can see a time when Apple will be a company that produces a great many things, which happen to include a well-regarded, technologically accomplished and stylish computer line, rather than a superb computer company that dabbles in other things. Everything that the company has been experimenting with over the past decade or so seems to suggest this.

 

[MICHAELSD]

As a living example of somebody who went from a fanatic Windows user (I purchased a CD copy of Vista, with glee) to a more fanatic Mac user solely because of the iPhone, I believe the iPhone is the single most dominant driving force to Apple's Macintosh sales growth.

 

[roadbloc]

Maybe. My opinion will be biased since I've become to dislike Apple's software, a lot. I wouldn't ever buy a new Apple product now.

 

[63dot]

I looked at their overall computer sales and if taken historically, it's in that 5% percent number like mentioned here, give or take a percent. That's what I read when it's mentioned though I wish it was an OSX centered world instead of Windows 7 and 8.

But there have been spikes since iPod including on month where Macs were almost 20% percent of sales that month and we all talked about it here like we were cracking Wintel. But overall market share any given year is less than 10% percent. I used to care and it used to make the news but now it's all about iPhone and iPad.

I remember the sales force at the Apple Store who boasted about devices being half of Apple's share, but now those same salespeople are happy to mention Apple leads this market and it's more than 80% percent of what they make.

I don't think the main purpose, after a short time seeing the phenomenal sales of iPod, was for Apple to switch people, thus the disappearance of those commercials, but to be the leader in their own market (devices). Wintel will continue to control the computer market, but bigger money is to be made, profit wise, in electronic devices. When Apple tried to take on the Wintel empire, it was a respectable company in the middle of the pack of computer manufacturers, but since devices like iPod (related iTunes store), and iPhone, it's now the biggest company in the world.

When somebody says while your leaving, "Don't forget your iPhone" as if iPhone is the generic term for cellphone like Kleenex is for tissue, then who cares about iMac sales?

 

[JackieInCo]

I bought my first MacBook Pro back in July 0f 2007, exactly one week after buying the iPhone. Why? Because of the way the iPhone was designed to work perfectly with OS X.

Last November, I tried going back to a Windows computer again and bought a Surface Pro 3. I used it through May when I got so bored with it and kept wanting a MacBook Pro again. I bought a MacBook Pro in May and since then, the SP3 has only been taken out it's drawer twice and that was to Jailbreak my iPhone and iPad.

I bought my first Apple device around 2004, a 30GB iPod Photo. I barely used it and quickly lost interesting it. The iPhone changed everything for me and because of that, I also bought my first iPod Classic back then. To this day, my iPod Classic plugs into my car stereo for my daily drive. Back then in 2007, Apple cut the price of the iPhone so much that they offered all buyers a $100 credit to use in the online store so I used it towards the purchase of my first iPod Classic.

 

[Obi Wan Kenobi]

I disagree. Most people in my profession are self-employed. Before iphones, Mac users were a tiny minority. In 2015 around half of people no use Macs. iPhones and iPads have definitely had a halo effect on laptops. We got our first mac laptop because we were so impressed with the iphone 3G.

 

[z31fanatic]

I disagree. Most people in my profession are self-employed. Before iphones, Mac users were a tiny minority. In 2015 around half of people no use Macs. iPhones and iPads have definitely had a halo effect on laptops. We got our first mac laptop because we were so impressed with the iphone 3G.

iPhone, ipod, and iPads have definitely helped Mac sales but I think the OP is asking why that number is not higher since iOS has such a big market share.

 

[JackieInCo]

iPhone, ipod, and iPads have definitely helped Mac sales but I think the OP is asking why that number is not higher since iOS has such a big market share.

Probably because iTunes and all iOS devices work on Windows computers so really, a Mac isn't needed. Maybe Apple fails with that aspect of marketing.

 

[MacNut]

Probably because iTunes and all iOS devices work on Windows computers so really, a Mac isn't needed. Maybe Apple fails with that aspect of marketing.

Works and works well are two different statements.

 

[roadbloc]

Works and works well are two different statements.

From my experience iTunes runs like a dead dog on both OS X and Windows. A horrible bloated app. I wish iSync could still be used.

 

[JackieInCo]

From my experience iTunes runs like a dead dog on both OS X and Windows. A horrible bloated app. I wish iSync could still be used.

I like the way it works on Both of my MacBook Pros and my Mac Mini. I have a problem with iTunes on my Surface Pro 3. Going to my purchases, it crashes iTunes and closes every time. I'm going to try and reinstall.