Mac web presence up 35% in 12 months

Mac web presence up 35% in 12 months

Summary: Intel Macs have been good for Apple.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Apple
44

Intel Macs have been good for Apple.

The number of Macs on the web is up by almost 35% on what is was 12 months ago, according to data collected by Net Applications

[poll id=14]

The numbers make interesting reading.  Here's what they were as of Oct 2006:

Operating SystemMarket Share (%)
Windows XP84.62
Windows 20005.79
Mac OS4.09
Windows 982.04
Mac Intel1.12
Windows ME0.96
Other1.35

Now compare those to the numbers from a year ago:

Operating SystemMarket Share (%)
Windows XP77.44
Windows 200010.03
Windows 985.13
Mac OS3.87
Windows ME2.12
Windows NT0.88
Other0.52

 That's pretty impressive growth.  Switching to Intel certainly has been good for Apple - I think that maybe it prompted people to upgrade earlier than they might have done otherwise.  In fact, you can watch the Mac Intel growth in the data clearly - uninterrupted month-on-month growth since Feb 2006:

MonthMac Intel Market Share (%)
Feb 060.03
Mar 060.08
Apr 060.16
May 060.23
Jun 060.36
Jul 060.49
Aug 060.62
Sep 060.84
Oct 061.12

It'll be interesting to track the progress of Mac growth over the next 12 months and watch how this plays out.  If the growth is just as a result of people upgrading their old Macs for shiny new Intel ones then we're going to see the growth plateau over the next few months.  However, it's possible that Apple have managed to break into new territory with its Intel-based Macs, and if that is the case Apple could enjoy further growth. 

Maybe the idea of being able to run both Mac OS and Windows on an Mac is more of a selling point than I'd first anticipated?

Topic: Apple

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

Talkback

44 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Another impressive number..

    The number of "Other" is over double YOY. It looks like Linux may be grabbing some share, as well. The next twelve months should be interesting.
    Back on topic. I can say that I have seen a lot more Mac users since the Intel switch. Two years ago, I saw nearly no others in my field with Macs, now I know several -all with Intel Macs.
    crash89
  • I have seen an increase in geeks with Macs now since Mac is based on

    Unix and it has all the open source tools freely available. I think because it is both x86 based and Unix, we will see growing numbers. And, the great thing is that we have 100% of Apple users on an alternative browser. That reduces the number of people with access to IE, and helps force sites to be work correctly on all browsers. Ya gotta love the Mac users!!
    DonnieBoy
  • Excellent

    This is a good sign for Apple.

    http://www.eefoof.com/image/18398
    ahinkle
  • Please label your chart

    A chart without clear labels does no good. What are the numbers in your 3rd chart, the one on marketshare? They can't be percentage of marketshare as Apple is way above .03% to 1.12% of the market. Is it showing growth in marketshare?

    Oh and by the way, my company's websites, used by scientists, shows about a 60-35 ratio of Windows to Macs.
    tic swayback
    • i think it's percent market share for intel macs <nt>

      ...
      doctorSpoc
      • Can that be right?

        In October '06, Apple only sold Intel Macs, no PPC Macs were left in their offerings. Was Apple's marketshare for computers really only 1.12%? If so, that's a huge dropoff for them.
        tic swayback
        • Yes it can be right

          That 1% is against the entire installed base of ALL computers dating back till the beginning of time.

          For instance we access the web with 100% Mac machines, dating back to 1998 iMacs, but no Intel based ones.

          Apples sales market share is based only on its relation to sales of other makers during a given period of time.
          j.m.galvin
          • I'm not sure I understand you

            So are you saying the numbers presented represent the percentage of Macs in use that are Intel-based (compared to all Macs in use)? Perhaps that does make sense, although if that's the case, the chart should be better labeled to indicate this.
            tic swayback
          • Yes

            The Header sell said: Mac Intel Market Share (%)
            j.m.galvin
          • Okay...

            ...I just think it's a little vague of a label.
            tic swayback
          • Thinking about this a little more...

            Apple's Q4 results from this year had them selling 1.61 million computers.
            http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/oct/18results.html

            Assuming the vast majority of those were Intel Macs, if the table is correct and is showing what you're saying it shows, that means that there are a lot more Macs out there than I thought. Think about it, 1.61 million Macs makes up sales from July, August and September of 2006. From the chart, that shows Intel Mac marketshare rising 0.48 %. If 1.61 million Macs = 0.48% of the total number of Macs out there, then that means there are roughly 335 Macs total out there. Which is 10X more than I expected.

            Which is why there's something screwy with the table.
            tic swayback
          • Why do you hate Apple so much?

            [i]that means there are roughly 335 Macs total out there. Which is 10X more than I expected.[/i]

            Come on now! I'm sure there are more than 33.5 Macs out there. Probably more like 40.
            NonZealot
          • Tic. It's friday, your brain needs a break

            That 1+% figure was Intel Mac's share of the ENTIRE number of computers hitting websites; PCs, powermacs, linux, etc. It has nothing to do with Apple market share for sales.

            As the author says, it shows a nice market progression for these new machines.
            j.m.galvin
          • Brain failing.....fingers not responding.....

            NZ--whoops, left out the word "million" there. Good catch. There's gotta be more than 40 macs out there, you're right.

            JM--which again shows why the figure is poorly labeled.

            ---That 1+% figure was Intel Mac's share of the ENTIRE number of computers hitting websites; PCs, powermacs, linux, etc. It has nothing to do with Apple market share for sales---

            Okay, lemme try again. The numbers shown are not the percentage of total Macs out there that are Intel based as was stated a few posts above this one. It is, instead, the total percentage of all computers in use, regardless of manufacturer? If so, that's pretty impressive, given more than 600 million computers worldwide, 1.12% would represent close to 7 million Intel based Macs sold.

            Which makes me doubt the relevance of these numbers to real world usage. If only 1.61 million Macs were sold in the last quarter, I have a hard time believing that the quarter and part of a quarter before it (and one month after it) were responsible for 5.4 million Intel Mac sales. Seems a little high, especially given how incomplete the Mac Intel lineup was in earlier quarters. I'm assuming that the website visit measurements aren't very good judges then.
            tic swayback
          • The numbers are always off

            All they do is take the percentage of hits from some big, general interest, sites. A lot are general news sites - trying to get a general result. They can't take it for every site. You'd need 100 supercomputers and the world's largest database to sort the results.

            It't the same with all this stuff. The Nielsons are not reliable for TV. It's just that nobody's come up with anything better. When the election is over you'll find some results that are different from polls. No sampling is ever completely accurate.

            All the auther said was that the results from this particular survey showed a very nice growth, on the web, for intel Macs.
            j.m.galvin
    • You prove these stats are garbage

      [i]Oh and by the way, my company's websites, used by scientists, shows about a 60-35 ratio of Windows to Macs.[/i]

      Which just proves that [b]any[/b] marketshare conclusions based on [b]any[/b] statistics related to web site hits are completely useless. These statistics tell us only that the # of people accessing a site that uses NetApplications software who identify themselves as using an Intel Mac has gone up by 35%. For all we know, apple.com and tic's website just started using NetApplications and that Mac client marketshare is actually dropping.

      Am I wrong to claim that these statistics tell us [b]nothing[/b] about marketshare?
      NonZealot
      • You are 100% correct

        You point out the obvious flaws in these web-based measures. What about computers that aren't connected to the web, that are used for dedicated tasks like cash registers? Those are completely ignored here. What about browsers set to show different identities than what they really are? Again, not taken into account here.
        tic swayback
        • Thanks tic but I can't take the credit

          Someone who is taller, smarter, and [b]far[/b] better looking than me deserves the credit for this one. ;)
          NonZealot
          • Steve Jobs? (NT)

            nt
            tic swayback
  • Spin

    Why would someone who is satisfied with the PC experience
    switch to Apple? I thought Apple was an expensive closed
    system with no software, built for dilettantes and designers? Is it
    because they use Intel chips? PC's have Intel or AMD, why
    switch?

    How about no. People are switching because the PC platform is a
    disaster. If you ask them why they switch, they inevitably say
    they were sick to death of nursing their PC back to life after this
    weeks malware or last weeks hardware failure. The experiment
    in open architecture has gone wrong. The experiment in
    "computer as commodity" has gone wrong. Microsoft has gone
    wrong.

    Is this new entry some kind of mea culpa. Not really. No, this is
    some attempt to reposition, and come to grips with this new
    reality. The one were a primary vendor doesn't pad nests, invent
    make-work industries, and channel ad dollars into echo
    chambers like ZDNet.

    Intel courted Apple. This will bear itself out as time goes on.
    Intel was just a sick to death with Microsoft as everyone else?if
    not more so. The preceding exercise in writing Windows centric
    morality plays is vanity. As power users pat themselves on the
    back for running a secure PC, Grandma got hosed with malware.
    Grandma's switching. Try to keep up intrepid contributors.
    Harry Bardal