Comments on: Analyst: June MacBook sales boost overall Mac numbers

The new lineup of MacBooks unveiled at WWDC, along with fresh price cuts, should push Mac sales back up, says Piper Jaffray analyst.

[ikramerica--2008]

This conclusion re: 13" shortages at the Apple Store is wrong. The shortage/delay is in the Intel 2.53 GHz processor. Same delay in the 15.4" model with that speed chip. All other MBP models of all sizes, including 13" models, are shipped within 24 hours.

It's the chip that is in short supply, not the computers.

[myles taylor]

Source please.

[cvaldes1831]

The source is the Apple Store. You could have just gone to store.apple.com and clicked on the link to MacBook Pro:

http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/macbook_pro?mco=MTE3NDg

[myles taylor]

Yea they're super popular. I think buyer confidence is up too and the fact that they are dropping the prices really helped. I don't know about the shortages but yea.

[solu1978]

Yes .. it was a nice move by Apple to lower the price.. I just bought one a few weeks back.. Windows 7 runs and displays awesome. Loving every moment with my Mac book Pro and Windows 7.

[EvesApple]

Is there any reason why you are not using the awesome OS that came with your MacBook?

[Perry_Clease]

"s there any reason why you are not using the awesome OS that came with your MacBook?

I would think that he doesn't have a MacBook and is using the OS that came with his PC notebook/netbook

[Mark_Anderson]

Or it could be that he prefers W7.

[cary1]

"His firm initially estimated that Apple would sell 2.2 million Macs during its third quarter of 2009, which ended in June."

Shouldn't it be Second quarter?

[mbenedict]

Apple's fiscal year starts in October. So its 2nd quarter ended in March, and its 3rd quarter ended in June.

[bigbwai2000]

All Things Digital - this has gotta hurt Microsoft, since it shows their ad campaign isn't really working.
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20090707/microsoft-laptop-hunters-campaign-having-no-effect-whatsoever-on-13-inch-macbook-pro-sales/

[ikramerica--2008]

The ad only strikes a chord when it points out how there is no 17" MacBook for under $2000. The rest of the ads are pretty pointless, and now outdated, but MS continues to air them because they are at a loss. The "only mac under $2000 has 2GB of RAM" one is now just patently false. As if paying $40 for a 4GB upgrade was such a deal breaker to a filmmaker anyway, but still, now it's just a complete falsehood. Yet MS has been running it for almost a month after the new MBP 15" models were released and prices dropped.

[jglb]

actually, i think the campaign worked to perfection..or do you really think Apple would have dropped the prices on their own if not at least heavily influenced byt that Ad campaign? anything that gets APPL to lower their prices, and then reduce margins, is probably a good thing for MS

[MacMatte2009]

I argue that, in spite of soaring MacBook sales, it could be better if Apple offered matte screens.

This argument below is an excerpt taken from http://macmatte.wordpress.com where the raw poll data is found.

Most online polls show that 40% prefer matte, but 20% would still buy glossy if forced to do so. This means that 20% of past Apple users refuse to buy glossy Macs.

Skeptics have tried to dismiss the poll results by asserting that, if that many Mac purchasers really did prefer matte, then Apple?s sales figures would be falling, so the argument goes. That is not true.

Those people ? who point to Apple?s upward growth as vindication of the glossy-only policy ? are not taking into account that most of the impetus to switch to Apple comes from other factors, namely: the window of opportunity created by Microsoft Vista?s inadequacies, the halo effect of the iPod/iPhone, and from OSX?s perceived advantages over Windows Vista/XP. All these factors combined mean that, even if a substantial number of people detest glossy screens, Apple?s sales figures would still show an upward trend ? not because everyone loves glossy screens ? but in spite of it.

Read the user comments at http://macmatte.wordpress.com Many users said they?ll be forced to keep using their existing matte hardware rather than upgrading now. Therefore, a deleterious effect on sales may only become noticeable until around 3-5 years later when these holdouts are forced to replace hardware, and then have to make the choice of whether to stick with Apple.

Others dismiss the matte-trend in the polls by rationalizing that the type of people who post comments on websites tend to be professional computer users and computer geeks, i.e. by inference, not representative of the total, overall market that Apple is trying to reach. In other words, what they?re arguing is that even if the polls indicate 40-75% like matte, that?s a minority because the majority of Apple users don?t read Mac website or post comments on Mac websites.

I would argue differently. In sales & marketing, the Pareto principle ? 80/20 Rule ? applies, namely that most sales come from a core of users. Equal sales are not generated equally across the population. The 80/20 Rule says that 80% of your sales come from 20% of your clients. Therefore, I would argue that people who post comments on Mac websites are more representative of this minority that generates the most sales. Why do we read Mac websites? So we can buy the stuff that interests us. Mac website readers would tend to be more representative of this core of high-volume purchasers who get multiple Mac?s not just one, and who upgrade more frequently than the peripheral buyers. Any marketing-savvy person will laugh if you think you can ignore the core minority who are fanatical about your products ? because they?re the minority that bring the bulk of your sales. For this reason, the online polls are telling Apple that their core, fanatical minority are crying out loudly for a matte screen option on all Macs.

In other words, Apple?s figures could have been better, if the matte option had been there. Example: if Apple?s profits increased to $6 billion, when it might have increased to $7.2 million ? the glossy people argue the increase to $6 billion proves everyone loves glossy ? whereas, the matte crowd argue it could have instead been $7.2 billion in higher sales, if not for the people turned away because of all-glossy screens.

Where do I get the hypothetical increase from $6 billion to $7.2 billion potential? At comment No. 88 at the http://macmatte.wordpress.com website, the polls indicate that close to 20% will not buy Macs with glossy screens ? this includes people like myself who outright refuse, and also those who did buy glossy but later regretted it. Therefore, $6 billion x 1.2 = $7.2 billion. (Of course this is just a rough calculation for the sake of argument, and I haven?t factored in what percentage of Apple?s sales are made up of Macs.)

And since when does it require sales figures to slope downwards before a company listens to the needs of its customers? Let?s be reasonable: any company that would require its sales chart to head downwards before it heeds the calls of its customers will not be in business for long. The converse is true: any company that refuses to listen to its customers? needs, simply because its sales figures are climbing, is ?..

[MaLvaDo39]

Put a screen protector on it.

[ikramerica--2008]

Yes, that's what I was wondering. Can a good quality screen protector with a satin finish solve the issue, or would it introduce it's own issues? I'd be happy to try it myself, but I'm plugging away on my Santa Rosa MBP until the Core i models arrive with quad processors.

[kelmon]

I'd honestly like to downgrade from my current 17" MBP to a 15" model next time for various reasons but there are 2 issues that give me pause for thought:

1. The glossy-only option for the 15" model
2. The ability to edit photographs satisfactorily on a 15" screen

I suspect that I'm going to be sticking with a 17" model next time but I am consistently amazed that Apple does not at least offer the Build To Order option of an anti-glare display for the 15" model despite customer demand for one. By all means offer the 15" MBP with a glossy display by default but at least provide the option of an anti-glare one for those that need it.

[myles taylor]

You know, the thing I love about CNet comments is that when someone copies and pastes it ruins all the apostrophes and turns them into question marks. It's nice to see when someone is being a total plagiarist.

[NKND200]

Online:

13" 2.53 250G HD : 7 ~ 10 days
All other combinations including SSD , 1 ~ 3 days

13" 2.26 The only option that is 7 ~ 10 days is 250G HD.

i.e. the issue is maybe the 250G HD and not the machine itself.

[ikramerica--2008]

Ah, you are so right!

So it's not be the 2.53GHz Core2Duo at all, but the 250GB SATA 1 drives Apple is using. (Fujitsu?). Because the 15.4" 2.53GHz standard model also uses the 250GB drive and takes 7-10 days, but if you configure it with any othe drive, it's 1-3 days, the typical CTO time for Apple. I looked at the chip, when it's the HDs in short supply.

Dell usually overcomes these shortages by giving customers "free upgrades" to configurations that aren't in short supply. Then again, Dell still takes 2 weeks to deliver a computer most of the time. I got a stock configuration Vostro A90 and it still took 10 days...