AAPL Stock: 121.98 ( -1.01 )

Printed from

Apple second to Dell in PC sales conversion

updated 08:10 pm EDT, Thu June 17, 2004

Apple needs low-end CPU

As many as who considered a Mac over the last 12 months actually ended up purchasing one and many those who didn't choose Apple chose based on price, according to MacNewsWorld: "The study, Hidden Opportunity for Computer Manufacturers, showed that from May 2003 to April 2004, nearly 26 million Americans purchased a computer. Of those purchasers, 73 percent opted for desktops over laptops, while 56 percent were replacing an existing system. Although 50 percent of potential Apple customers ended up purchasing an Apple, 22 percent purchased a Dell instead, the study showed. The study also noted that, although Apple sold 900,000 computers over the length of the study, it could have potentially sold 800,000 more during that time period."

by MacNN Staff





  1. xdude

    Joined: Dec 1969



    What percentage of the 26 million were potential Apple customers?

  1. Glasspusher

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Dell buyers'll be back

    ha ha. Considered a Mac but bought a Dell? They'll definitely be buying a mac for their next one! ROTFL. Some people only learn the hard way. I'm sure one of the reasons is they'll be sick of waiting for Longhorn to show while we Mac users are using OS XI.

  1. macnews

    Joined: Dec 1969



    Apple needs to learn a lesson here - price matters. I disagree pointing out a computer like an emachine, decently built but way cheap. There is no reason to totally cheapen the mac but Apple does need to get the emac in some lower price ranges. Even getting a tower model in the lower $1000 range - maybe not a g5 but why not a 1.5Ghz g4?

  1. denim

    Joined: Dec 1969



    I don't know about putting much belief in a study called hocum.

  1. fiesta cat

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Headless iMac/eMac?

    Headless iMac/eMac in a Cube like enclosure.

    If you can sell a G4/1.25 eMac for $800, then you should be able to sell it headless for even less.

  1. hayesk

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Re: Headless iMac/eMac

    Apple gets those CRTs for almost nothing. Look at how cheap 17" CRTs cost these days. It would only lower the price by a few bucks - and then everyone would complain "Gee, for $75 more I can get an eMac with a screen! What a ripoff!"

  1. JimWall

    Joined: Dec 1969


    but can they make money?

    It is perfectly possible for Apple to sell thousands of machines and lose money on each on. The more they sell the more they lose. If you check the margins of companies like Dell they are often very thin.

  1. atomicon

    Joined: Dec 1969



    Price does matter to a lot of people living on a budget, and although they might like to get an Apple, they just can't justify the cost when they can get all the same basic things accomplished with a Dell. Lots of people would love to drive a Lexus, but they buy a Toyota instead. Apple doesn't want to make a low-end computer because it cheapens their Lexus-like high end image. However, as we all know, Lexus and Toyota are the same company! So what if Apple started it's own "clone" brand? Let's say this new brand were to be called the "Peach" computer company. Then the analogy looks like this: Apple = Lexus, Peach = Toyota. If these "Peach" computers ran the Mac OS, were priced to compete with midrange PC's, were sold at national electronics retailers (NOT at the Apple store), and looked good as well, I think they would sell millions. Apple could retain control of the OS and the hardware running it, increase the market share of the Mac OS, and keep all the hardware profit from the sales, all while maintaining the premium brand image of Apple computers.

    What do you think?

  1. droosan

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Re: value

    I think that's not a bad idea. However, that was what the iMac was originally supposed to be. Also remember Performa?

  1. mgescuro

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Re: Value

    That is an awesome idea to do a brand extension; however, there are a few issues there....

    1) It took Toyota 20 years to establish a name for itself as a "high quality car."
    2) It took Lexus 10 years to establish itself as a dominant player in the luxury market. (ie - it took a long time to generate sufficient brand equity with Lexus.)
    3) Toyota was moving "upscale" with Lexus.
    4) Apple would be moving "downscale" with "Peach;" therefore, it would create a negative image as a "cheaper version."
    5) Maintaining a secondary brand would incur significant costs to APple.. and as everyone points out.. the cheaper the computer, the thinner the margin (if any).

    It's a very good idea, but in an industry that doesn't generate significant margins without a great deal of economies of scale (ie - Dell), there's no surviving.

    And there is no instance in the luxury car market in which the maker decided to create a "cheap" version of its own products. BMW/Mini is probably the closest... but the Mini's are exactly cheap.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.


Network Headlines

Follow us on Facebook


Most Popular


Recent Reviews

HP 14-x030nr 14-inch Chromebook

If you're like us, chances are you've come to realize that you need the ability to access the Internet on the go. Also, you've prob ...

15-inch MacBook Pro with Force Touch

Apple's 15-inch Retina MacBook Pro continues to be a popular notebook with professional users and prosumers looking for the ultimate ...

Typo keyboard for iPad

Following numerous legal shenanigans between Typo -- a company founded in part by Ryan Seacrest -- and the clear object of his physica ...


Most Commented