Apple sells 645,000 devices a day during Q2

Apple sells 645,000 devices a day during Q2

Summary: Apple sold an incredible 645,000 devices on average each and every day over the 91 days of the financial quarter.


On Tuesday, Apple announced its Q2 2012 financial results, and the information offers us a look at just what a sales powerhouse the Cupertino giant has become.

Individually, the numbers are staggering. Apple sold 35.1 million iPhones, 11.8 million iPads, 7.7 million iPods and 4 million Macs. This works out to an incredible 58.6 million devices sold over the 91 days of the financial quarter. To put that another way, it is nearly 645,000 devices a day, with over 385,000 of these being iPhones, and almost 130,000 of them iPads.

But if we take a deeper dive into the numbers, we can tease out some more eye-opening figures. For example, over a period spanning 42 quarters (Q1 2002---Q2 2012) Apple has sold 344.3 million iPods, but in a period spanning only 20 quarters (Q3 2007---Q2 2012) the company has sold 218.1 million iPhones.

iPad sales data also makes interesting reading. So far, Apple has sold 67 million iPads. It took the company 24 years to sell that many Macs, 5 years to sell that many iPhones and 3 years to sell that many iPhones.

Notice also how Apple has shifted to selling higher value devices, selling as many iPads -- which range in price from $399 for the iPad 2 to $829 for the 64GB Wi-Fi + 4G iPad 3 -- as it does iPods -- which range in price from $49 for the 2GB iPod shuffle to $399 for the 64GB iPod touch. The iPad and the iPhone are in many ways the 'new iPod', only a far more profitable iPod for Apple.

If we add Macs into the equation, they are barely a blip on the post-PC landscape. The chart below focuses on the period during which the iPhone has been available.

iPod sales may be declining, and Mac sales stagnant, but strong iPhone sales along with the iPad going from strength to strength means that Apple has nothing to worry about.

Apple has undoubtedly made the transition to being a true post-PC company.

Data sourcesApple.


Top accessories for your iPhone and iPad

Image Gallery: Top accessories for your iPhone and iPad Image Gallery: Charge Image Gallery: Charge

Topics: Mobility, Apple, Banking, Enterprise Software, Hardware, Smartphones

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Oops

    Apple sold an incredible 58.6 million devices every day over the 91 days of the financial quarter.

    645,000 everyday = 58.6 Million everyday

    typo i think

    Otherwise, Interesting!
  • Where are the iHaters?

    To tell us all how WP 7 will bury the iPhone, because Nokia simply makes the best phones?
    Or how despite Apple selling 35.1 million iPhones, Nokia was the number one selling phone, at two million last quarter. It makes Nokia "shipping" 2 million phones look sad, but like their partner, they don;t want to scare people away with dismal numbers.
    Jumpin Jack Flash
  • Apple sells 645,000 devices a day during Q2

    Apple sold less iPads, 1 million less than estimated. HAHA!
    Loverock Davidson-
    • Hey there you brainless wonder...

      "11.8 million iPads" compared to how many Windows 7 tablets? Oh yeah, you won't find those numbers, cause they're too low to register! Just like your precious WP 7, too insignificant to warrant it's only line in the list.
      Jumpin Jack Flash
  • Good news for Apple

    They'll probably become the first trillion dollar company in history pretty soon.
    That will be quite a financial accomplishment indeed.

    But I wonder what's going to happen to the company once they've reached as far as they can possibly reach when it comes to global growth. After all, they play in the high-priced end of the market, which means that they will eventually reach a point of saturation in the West where they will not be able to expand their user base any longer and will have to come up with new ways to channel more money from their established customers - and that could lead to a backlash. If that fails, we may end up witnessing the largest collapse in world history.

    I expect that some of the Apple faithful will cringe and lash out at me, but seriously, when I look at Apple, I see a house of cards. Despite the fact that Apple is growing so amazingly fast now, it's undeniable that Apple has a significantly lower market share ceiling than its competitors. The faster it grows its user base, the faster it will reach that ceiling. How far do you think a high-end company is going to be able to go in a world where as many as 70% of the globe's inhabitant will never be able to afford these products?
    • Havent been paying attention have you Debby Downer:)

      Apple is still selling the 3gs and 4 even though the 4S in the new model. The 3gs is often bundled by carriers for little to nothing with contracts. They are doing the same thing now with iPads. The fantastic thing is that a lot of the components that go into the iPhone 4 and even the 3gs are the same that go into the 4S and production has been mastered on these devices making production of them very cheap and keeping Apple's margins high even when sold for less. The real trick is when are carriers going to make smartphone contracts the "rest" of the world can afford?

      Pagan jim
      James Quinn
      • LOL. You need to travel more....

        First of all, you're making a grave mistake by assuming that just because the old 3GS and 4 models can be subsidized by carriers to the point of being widely affordable in western countries, they'll be equally affordable in the rest of the world. [i]In fact, they're not. Not even close.[/i]

        Even now, despite the ultra low prices you see in the US, the 3GS and 4 are not cheap phones. The carriers still have to pay hundreds for each, and only the wealthiest carriers with healthy numbers of postpaid subscibers can afford to shift so much of the phones' value to the contract payments.

        There are three things you need to keep in mind about phones in developing countries. One is that the final cost of the phones to the carriers include some high import costs and import duties. The next is that the carriers in developing countries only apply minimal phone subsidies. And finally, only a very small percentage of the huge population of phone users in developing countries buy phones with postpaid contracts.

        Despite the lower price of the 3GS relative to the newest 4S, by the time the developing world carriers pay the required taxes and shipping costs, that old device typically ends up costing almost as much to them as the newest 4S costs to the US carriers (which is about $650 per 4S).

        Given the low usage of postpaid services, the high cost of bringing these expensive phones into the country, and the tiny amount of subsidy applied to each phone, the monthly data and voice service packages of the iPhone data plans become astronimal, even for the supposedly 'cheap' 3GS. Only the small numbers of wealthy individuals end up being able to afford to use an iPhone. Furthermore, the high cost of these iPhones prevents them from ever being offered on prepaid plans. It is only prepaid phones that are capable of getting widespread adoption in developing countries. For proof of that, just look at what Blackberry did in developing countries. They stagnated in developing countries as postpaid phones for years until they became inexpensive enough to be offered on prepaid plans. They introduced the smartphone to the masses in many developing countries and became the phone of choice for teens and young adults 35 and under. It has only been recently that Android entered the prepaid phone market and began to erode the Blackberry's dominance.
      • In the case of the 3gs one can get it for nothing with contract.

        So like I said it's not the phone so much as it is the contract. As for taxes and such import fee's that is true for everyone right and the same for local carriers and subsidies so perhaps actual smartphone adoption will take time on other area's but if that is true for one (Apple) it is likely true for all. In the end it's not the phone but the contract and perhaps feature phones will rule in these areas for some time to come? Don't know don't care actually cause volume means little profit means everything and if I compare tactics I'd rather be Apple than say an HTC.

        Pagan jim
        James Quinn
    • sorry

      Every person that can afford an Android phone can afford an Apple phone.
      And there is still that 90% of the computer market.
      And corporations and schools are just getting started buying iPads, especially with the $399 iPad 2.
      And the TV market is still wide open.

      And there is still almost no competition in most of these markets--tablet, TV, iPod. And where there is competition--Phones--Apple is sucking up all the profit.
      • You're kidding, right?

        Stop dreaming. None of your points are relevant to the global picture at all. The US market is not representative of the rest of the world.
      • Who can afford what?

        "Every person that can afford an Android phone can afford an Apple phone."

        Sorry, but have you seen the Andriod phones in the supermarkets in the US? Under $100 with no contract. And likely never to be updated past Andriod v2.whatever they come with.

        Says someone who likely his Apple devices.
      • I would say there is lots of competition in the TV market.

        Panasonic, HTC, Sony, Samsung, LG, Phillips...just to name a FEW.

        All these TV's are the latest generation with internet, Youtube, Netflix, Picasso, etc. I can't imagine what Apple could possibly due to convince users, even me, an Apple lover, to buy a TV from them. Especially since I just bought my 55" HDTV Plasma only 1.5 years ago. It will be a good 5-7 years before I buy a new TV.

        Otherwise, everything else you wrote is spot on. Just not the TV part.
        The Danger is Microsoft
    • Actually, that's pretty denaible

      "(Apple) play in the high-priced end of the market"-eMJayy

      Do they? A typical computer cost $2,000 or more in 1984. Adjusted for inflation that's over $4,000 in today's dollars. And cars cost $20,000 and more. But I think there's quite a few of them on the market.

      To buy an Apple product today, all you need is $500 in disposable income. And that pool of buyers is huge.

      "'s undeniable that Apple has a significantly lower market share ceiling than its competitors"-eMJayy

      Actually, its pretty deniable.

      Apple has 70 plus percent of the MP3 market. But they only have 5% of the total phone market. And yesterday AT&T announced that 60% of ALL the phones they sold last quarter were iPhones. With 40 million plus in iPad sales last year, Apple dominates market share in the tablet market but the market itself has virtually no ceiling. And traditional PCs? Apple has 8% market share in and industry that sells 400 million units a year. And Mac sales have outgrown the sales of other computers for 24 straight quarters.

      Apple has a low market share ceiling? You've got to be kidding me. They have the best selling products in the best selling categories in tech. If there's a ceiling its still far out of sight.
      • Why are so many of you in dream land?

        What does the price of cars have to do with the price of today's phones? "The market" that I refer to obviously implies today's phone market and nothing else. You're grasping at straws.

        [i]"To buy an Apple product today, all you need is $500 in disposable income. And that pool of buyers is huge."[/i]

        Like I said, you guys seriously need to travel more. [b]Apple devices that cost $500 in the US DON'T cost $500 in most parts of the world.[/b] They cost substantially more than that. Taxes and shipping costs are NOT equal everywhere. They are very high in developing countries and that means that a $500 product can actually double in price by the time it hits store shelves there. That's one of the factors that prevented the PC market from gaining much traction in the developing world for years, causing the number of global PC users to be stuck at 2 billion for quite some time. $1000 PCs were costing $2000 or more and the pricing was made worse by limited local demand. It's only now that laptop prices have dropped to $200 in the US that these machines can now be afforded by numbers large enough in developing markets to power some growth in the global PC market and encourage first time buying of PCs in developing markets. But note this - those $200 PCs cost as much as $500 by the time they hit the shelves in poorer countries - and that's still high for many folks there. Apple's i-products cost too much to enjoy any widespread market presence now or in the future in the developing world for just that reason. That's my point. If you don't like that dose of reality, that's just too bad.

        "Apple has 70 plus percent of the MP3 market."

        Correct. But what you guys still don't get yet is that the MP3 player market isn't anywhere near a global phenomenon. In other words, the mp3 market is really a niche. The average person in the developing world, which makes up over 70% of the global population doesn't buy mp3 players at all. Instead, while folks in the US, Canada, Europe, Japan and Australia were eating up those iPods, the other 70+% of the globe were overwhelmingly using mp3 player capabilities in their feature phones and skipping the whole idea of buying standalone mp3 players.

        [i]"And yesterday AT&T announced that 60% of ALL the phones they sold last quarter were iPhones."[/i]

        What does that have to do with the rest of the globe? I'm talking about Apple's limitations at the global market level, not simply the US market level. Even if Apple captured every single American, the US population is only 5% of the globe. There are over 5 billion cellphone users globally, and 70% of them are in the developing world.

        [i]And traditional PCs? Apple has 8% market share in and industry that sells 400 million units a year. And Mac sales have outgrown the sales of other computers for 24 straight quarters.[/i]

        Apple only sells 4 million macs to the [i]entire planet each quarter.[/i] The US PC market typically buys 17 million machines per quarter. The question you should be asking is - why is Apple, this ultra popular brand, only able to sell a mere 4 million macs to the entire planet? Profits are a nice thing to have, but at the end of the day, Apple's profit increases are still intimately tied to its ability to gain market share. At some point sooner or later, Apple will find itself unable to grow its user base because its prices prohibit billions from buying its products. Stop deluding yourselves.
      • He knows nothing...

        He spends his days in back alley brothels in seedy 3rd world countries. If he actually visited a foreign country with money he would realize Apple builds stores in high end fashion malls across the world. Not the back alleys emjayy frequents.

        emjayy makes the very poor assumption everyone but the US is poor, and that Apple can't make money on foreign soil.....wrong. Actually, Apple makes more money from foreign sales due to a lack of US corporate tax rates on that income.
    • Sorry emjayy....

      But I think Apple knows way more about Apple than you do.

      But you can continue to pretend otherwise.
    • Strewth...

      You can tell when someone is over-reaching when their post is choc full of 'probable' 'if' 'could' 'might' 'may' etc etc topped off with 'house of cards'.
      Totally clueless fail.
  • Typo

    "...5 years to sell that many iPhones and 3 years to sell that many iPhones."

  • Two thoughts

    1. Since every iPhone is also iPod, no wonder than iPod is declining;

    2. Even though Macintosh market is stagnant, the growth rate 7% is still three times higher than 2% for the industry average (by the way, those 2% contain input from Apple's growth, too; so in reality Macintosh market grown like four times faster).
    • How is 7% growth stagnant anyway... Isn't any growth at all growth?

      Pagan jim
      James Quinn