Asus knocked off the list of top 5 PC manufacturers in the world, by Apple

[mr moose]

Apple is definitely not getting pushed out. If anything they'll go up. Their Mac sales have been increasing recently.

If HP split their market share, apple could easily get pushed out.  HP have 18% so even with a 30/70 split they'll take two positions pushing 5th place out.

 

As I said, worse case scenario with an HP split will be no change to the current list, and worse case Asus and apple both falling outside the top 5.

[GloriousPain]

can't happen,  because HP currently have more than double the market share of 4th position (acer). Worse case scenario is that nothing changes and the smaller split from HP is out of the top five, or the split leaves HP with two top 5 places pushing both Apple and Asus out of the top 5.

Yeah I didn't think about that; You're probably right...

[Redliub]

If HP split their market share, apple could easily get pushed out.  HP have 18% so even with a 30/70 split they'll take two positions pushing 5th place out.

 

As I said, worse case scenario with an HP split will be no change to the current list, and worse case Asus and apple both falling outside the top 5.

I mean yeah, but the market share doesn't tell the whole story here. Look at Apple's profit share:

[mr moose]

I mean yeah, but the market share doesn't tell the whole story here. Look at Apple's profit share:

 

The list is top 5 selling pc vendors, it doesn't have anything to do with profit, It only goes on units shipped.

[Redliub]

The list is top 5 selling pc vendors, it doesn't have anything to do with profit, It only goes on units shipped.

That wasn't my point. As long as they're making almost 50% of the profits in the industry, they are never going to fall that far behind. They essentially have no competition in the area they compete in.

[mr moose]

That wasn't my point. As long as they're making almost 50% of the profits in the industry, they are never going to fall that far behind. They essentially have no competition in the area they compete in.

I'm sorry, you've lost me. I have no idea how you came to that conclusion.  Profits don't really mean anything other than how much money the company can make from a unit, Higher profit margins can shrink sales as much as push them.  It really comes down to the target market and how the consumer will respond to the product. In fact if you had read the IDC report you'd know that one of the explanations given for apple making it into the top 5 was due to a reduction in the price of macs, not a growth in profits (which is an average of 23%).  I really don't understand what you mean by them not having competition, it plain to see they have plenty of competition.

[Valentyn]

Yeah, the 27" one. It's a display that's over 3 years old and still commands a >$1000 tag, where a PB278Q costs $579. It's not even a 16:10 panel. 

 

Yeah, even Apple users are shunning the Cinema Display. It's just not worth it, many are desperately holding out hope for an updating 4 or 5K one, but many like myself have moved on.

 

I found my love with the LG34UM95 as my thunderbolt display. If only I knew the curved version was due at the same price point where I am.

[steffen_anywhere]

A bit harsh, also self-perpetuating the fanboyism that you're speaking of.

 

BOOM! Good one, seriously, there are two kinds of Apple users...Advocates and Fanboys... And then there's also the group of professionals that needs shit to work 'just like that' and doesn't care whether or not they pay $1000 more... So please don't assume that EVERYONE who uses Apple devices is a fanboy. Apple has made computers that I'd buy and also ones that I'd never consider... And, for the record, almost all educated Apple users never start this debate... . It is always some hater...

[Silent_Xaxal]

If this doesn't include component or accessory sales, then it means nothing to me or Asus, seeing as Asus is one of the only component manufacturers to have it's hand in nearly everything and have most of it's product retinue as top recommends (Most articles I've read regarding Apple have always had some form of anti or pro apple bias, and I can't help but feel that this article exudes the pro, if even so slightly. As for Asus, they currently have monitors, routers, GPUs, Audio Solutions, and Tablets/Smartphone besides pre-built systems sales, and I may have even forgotten some of their other ventures in this statement.)

[mr moose]

If this doesn't include component or accessory sales, then it means nothing to me or Asus,

 

you speak on behalf of Asus do you? 

[ShadowCaptain]

snip

 

This article is purely about PC sales

 

Since HP, Lenovo, Apple and Acer do not make the same products as Asus, comparing them like for like is silly

 

Its like comparing BMW and Mercedes, and then going "oh but what about BMW motorbikes, you have to include them"

[Sklo]

since when does apple produce PCs

 

#PCMasterRace

[mr moose]

This article is purely about PC sales

 

Since HP, Lenovo, Apple and Acer do not make the same products as Asus, comparing them like for like is silly

 

Its like comparing BMW and Mercedes, and then going "oh but what about BMW motorbikes, you have to include them"

 

But HP make medical test equipment and ECG machines and oscilloscopes,  surely that must account for something?

[ShadowCaptain]

But HP make medical test equipment and ECG machines and oscilloscopes,  surely that must account for something?

 

Ok then, lets bring in Apples smartphone and tablet sales

[mr moose]

Ok then, lets bring in Apples smartphone and tablet sales

and monitors, routers, laptops, tv device, detachable storage, smart watch, ipod, graphics tablets modems and printers. :lol:

[ShadowCaptain]

and monitors, routers, laptops, tv device, detachable storage, smart watch, ipod, graphics tablets modems and printers. :lol:

 

Exactly

[Techteen14]

It really depends on who you ask. I personally think the Verge is a great site. The only problem is that they can be Apple-biased (which seems to be a common problem, unfortunately). However, that just makes it more impressive that a non-Apple laptop was so highly regarded by them.

Apple hardware has actually gotten a lot better in recent years. My old MacBook Pro had its motherboard (or logic board, as Apple like to call it) fried. While it was going to cost $750 to replace it, it would cost $1000 to get a brand new MacBook Pro. Apple had an online deal where it was $200 off for back to school, and a $100 gift card the purchase of a MacBook (insane deal, especially from someone like Apple) $1000 is a crazy price to pay for a Pro. That's high-end ultrabook money. However, unlike ultrabooks, it had a LOT more power under the hood. I'm running a 2.9Ghz Haswell i7 whereas a typical ultrabook of the same price is outfitted with a sub 1.5-1.8 ghz i5. Granted, it's the old "non-retina" Pro but in my honest opinion, I like the older Pros more (different argument for different day). The Macbook Airs are also pretty competitive (i think), and as are the Mac Pros. I'm pretty sure the iMacs and iPhones are still overpriced though when looking at raw specs (whole different story if you talk about hardware utilization, software, etc.)

(Sorry for my rather late reply, I had a busy weekend and couldn't post)

Yes, the Verge is pretty Apple-biased (especially the "This is my Next" series), but IMO if you don't learn the opinions of the opposite "side", you can't make a good argument against them (this is my philosophy in a lot of things, not just tech). Plus while they usually give Apple products exaggerated reviews, they do tend to review other products fairly, IMO.

By "$1,200", I meant the MacBook Air. I really like the Pro series, and if I had the money (which I don't) and a reason to buy one (which I don't), I'd probably pick one up and dual boot Windows 8.1. The Air series, however, is super overpriced for the performance you get, IMO (though they have gotten better with the $899 model). This is evidenced by the fact that for usually less than $100 more than the 256GB 13" model, you can pick up a Retina MacBook Pro 13" 128GB, which has something like a 65% better processor. I understand the diminutive processors are so it can boast that tablet-like battery life, but I feel that the average person would rather have ~6 hours of battery life and better processors than 9-13 hours and Windows Tablet-like performance. But, this would cannibalize sales of the Pro, so there's that.

The iMac is horribly overpriced for what is basically a stationary laptop. Which is pointless, as the reason you pay a lot of money for a laptop is for portability. Either keep the price the same and add desktop parts (like the i5-4XXXS or i7-4XXXS series), or drop the price and keep the same specs. An iMac with a 5K screen will be interesting, though.

[Redliub]

By "$1,200", I meant the MacBook Air. I really like the Pro series, and if I had the money (which I don't) and a reason to buy one (which I don't), I'd probably pick one up and dual boot Windows 8.1. The Air series, however, is super overpriced for the performance you get, IMO (though they have gotten better with the $899 model). This is evidenced by the fact that for usually less than $100 more than the 256GB 13" model, you can pick up a Retina MacBook Pro 13" 128GB, which has something like a 65% better processor. I understand the diminutive processors are so it can boast that tablet-like battery life, but I feel that the average person would rather have ~6 hours of battery life and better processors than 9-13 hours and Windows Tablet-like performance. But, this would cannibalize sales of the Pro, so there's that.

The iMac is horribly overpriced for what is basically a stationary laptop. Which is pointless, as the reason you pay a lot of money for a laptop is for portability. Either keep the price the same and add desktop parts (like the i5-4XXXS or i7-4XXXS series), or drop the price and keep the same specs. An iMac with a 5K screen will be interesting, though.

The Air is considered the best laptop around by several publications I believe. It starts at $999 and for that price you get an i5, PCIe SSD, 14 hour battery life, great keyboard/trackpad, etc.

 

I'm not saying I'd ever buy one but to act like it's overpriced is kind of silly at this point. It's clearly not when you can't produce a laptop of similar caliber for the price from a different manufacturer. The only thing that comes close is the S7-392 I believe which is more expensive and has less battery life.

[patrickjp93]

(Sorry for my rather late reply, I had a busy weekend and couldn't post)

Yes, the Verge is pretty Apple-biased (especially the "This is my Next" series), but IMO if you don't learn the opinions of the opposite "side", you can't make a good argument against them (this is my philosophy in a lot of things, not just tech). Plus while they usually give Apple products exaggerated reviews, they do tend to review other products fairly, IMO.

By "$1,200", I meant the MacBook Air. I really like the Pro series, and if I had the money (which I don't) and a reason to buy one (which I don't), I'd probably pick one up and dual boot Windows 8.1. The Air series, however, is super overpriced for the performance you get, IMO (though they have gotten better with the $899 model). This is evidenced by the fact that for usually less than $100 more than the 256GB 13" model, you can pick up a Retina MacBook Pro 13" 128GB, which has something like a 65% better processor. I understand the diminutive processors are so it can boast that tablet-like battery life, but I feel that the average person would rather have ~6 hours of battery life and better processors than 9-13 hours and Windows Tablet-like performance. But, this would cannibalize sales of the Pro, so there's that.

The iMac is horribly overpriced for what is basically a stationary laptop. Which is pointless, as the reason you pay a lot of money for a laptop is for portability. Either keep the price the same and add desktop parts (like the i5-4XXXS or i7-4XXXS series), or drop the price and keep the same specs. An iMac with a 5K screen will be interesting, though.

I just found this out myself yesterday, but the iMacs do use desktop CPUs.

[Techteen14]

The Air is considered the best laptop around by several publications I believe. It starts at $999 and for that price you get an i5, PCIe SSD, 14 hour battery life, great keyboard/trackpad, etc.

I'm not saying I'd ever buy one but to act like it's overpriced is kind of silly at this point. It's clearly not when you can't produce a laptop of similar caliber for the price from a different manufacturer. The only thing that comes close is the S7-392 I believe which is more expensive and has less battery life.

It starts at $899, even though it hurts my case I still want to be factually correct. I'll be talking about that one this whole post, unless I specify otherwise.

The i5 is a very low power one, and interestingly it's a dual-core 1.4GHz processor. Apple A8, anyone? Plus, a regular laptop i5 like the one used in the Pro is ~65% more powerful.

The SSD is only 128GB. 256GB is the lowest most people will go. That'd be another $200.

Neither Air gets 14 hours of battery life. The 11" gets up to 9 hours, while the 13" gets up to 13 hours. (I say "up to" because that's what Apple says. I can say my iPad gets 30 hours of battery because it's lasted that long ONCE when all I did was browse the web for a few minutes and stare at the home screen with the brightness on low, but that doesn't make it the average).

This is completely subjective and depends on whether you even use them. (Bluetooth alternatives while the MacBook is hooked up to a monitor, for example) I prefer Lenovo's keyboards, and as long as it's not laggy, grimy and squishy, a trackpad is a trackpad.

Then again, I have no need for a laptop of any kind and owning one would be pointless in my use case, MacBook or otherwise. I'll probably end up getting the new Galaxy Note 10.1 or 12.2 and custom a PC. Or maybe I'll dropp the tablet completely and just use that Note 4 I want when I don't feel like using my PC. It depends on how good the new Galaxy Note 4-inspired tablets are. I think this'll be good enough for most users.

Now let's talk about cons:

720p (or is it 768p? Either way, it's low-res) screen: this is 2014, Apple. 720p isn't acceptable anymore. If people are complaining about the iPhone 6's "just good enough" almost-720p screen, why on earth is it okay to make a 11"-13" 720p screen?

Design: while the design is nice, it needs a refresh. IIRC, it's still the same design as when Steve pulled it out of a manilla envelope in '07.

Color: again, while the color is nice and sleek, I'd take the black of my dad's '08 MacBook (regular, no Air or Pro after it) or the Space Gray-esque color of the Mac Pro over the silver. This goes for the Air, Pro, Mac Mini and iMac. Sure, there's Colorware, but it's expensive and voids the warrenty.

Anyway, please do your research before posting something.

[Techteen14]

I just found this out myself yesterday, but the iMacs do use desktop CPUs.

Go figure. (I probably thought that because of the newest, cheapest 21.5" one that's basically a MacBook Air) That actually adds about $150-200 worth of value to them to me. I'd still buy an XPS 27, but now the iMacs aren't AS overpriced IMO.

Still overpriced, but maybe by $100-200 now instead of $250-300.

[patrickjp93]

Go figure. (I probably thought that because of the newest, cheapest 21.5" one that's basically a MacBook Air) That actually adds about $150-200 worth of value to them to me. I'd still buy an XPS 27, but now the iMacs aren't AS overpriced IMO.

Still overpriced, but maybe by $100-200 now instead of $250-300.

Why do you say laptop chips would make it overpriced? They're equally as powerful. Cinebench of 4980HQ vs 4770k results in the same score.

[Techteen14]

Why do you say laptop chips would make it overpriced? They're equally as powerful. Cinebench of 4980HQ vs 4770k results in the same score.

There has to be some tradeoff, or else there wouldn't be laptop chips and desktop chips, we'd all just use whichever's best.

Or is it just motherboard compatibility?

[Redliub]

It starts at $899, even though it hurts my case I still want to be factually correct. I'll be talking about that one this whole post, unless I specify otherwise.

The i5 is a very low power one, and interestingly it's a dual-core 1.4GHz processor. Apple A8, anyone? Plus, a regular laptop i5 like the one used in the Pro is ~65% more powerful.

The SSD is only 128GB. 256GB is the lowest most people will go. That'd be another $200.

Neither Air gets 14 hours of battery life. The 11" gets up to 9 hours, while the 13" gets up to 13 hours. (I say "up to" because that's what Apple says. I can say my iPad gets 30 hours of battery because it's lasted that long ONCE when all I did was browse the web for a few minutes and stare at the home screen with the brightness on low, but that doesn't make it the average).

This is completely subjective and depends on whether you even use them. (Bluetooth alternatives while the MacBook is hooked up to a monitor, for example) I prefer Lenovo's keyboards, and as long as it's not laggy, grimy and squishy, a trackpad is a trackpad.

Then again, I have no need for a laptop of any kind and owning one would be pointless in my use case, MacBook or otherwise. I'll probably end up getting the new Galaxy Note 10.1 or 12.2 and custom a PC. Or maybe I'll dropp the tablet completely and just use that Note 4 I want when I don't feel like using my PC. It depends on how good the new Galaxy Note 4-inspired tablets are. I think this'll be good enough for most users.

Now let's talk about cons:

720p (or is it 768p? Either way, it's low-res) screen: this is 2014, Apple. 720p isn't acceptable anymore. If people are complaining about the iPhone 6's "just good enough" almost-720p screen, why on earth is it okay to make a 11"-13" 720p screen?

Design: while the design is nice, it needs a refresh. IIRC, it's still the same design as when Steve pulled it out of a manilla envelope in '07.

Color: again, while the color is nice and sleek, I'd take the black of my dad's '08 MacBook (regular, no Air or Pro after it) or the Space Gray-esque color of the Mac Pro over the silver. This goes for the Air, Pro, Mac Mini and iMac. Sure, there's Colorware, but it's expensive and voids the warrenty.

Anyway, please do your research before posting something.

I don't appreciate 14 year olds telling me to do my research. And given how much you still have to learn about this as evidenced by your post I suggest you stop telling others to do their research while spouting bullshit like an idiot. I've done far more research then you have on this subject and I'm insulted that you say I haven't but in the preceding paragraphs show that you really have no idea what you're talking about.

 

Shall I list everything you got wrong here?

 

-The performance of an A8, while good, is nowhere close to that of a U-series Intel x86 processor. It uses so much less power it's laughable you'd make the comparison.

-You seem to find it interesting that it's a 1.4Ghz dual core but it's an i5, showing your lack of understanding of what actually makes a processor fast.

-Most battery tests peg the battery 12 hrs minimum, most people get 14 hrs, myself included.

-If you think there's no such thing as an objectively good or bad trackpad you're insane. I own four PC laptops and a MacBook Air, (two of which are Thinkpads) and I have to say that while Thinkpads are good, the trackpads don't compare.

-You're trying to judge laptops are from the inherently biased viewpoint that you'd never buy one.

-The only people complaining about iPhone resolution are those that don't own them.

-The design is not the same as in 2008. I should know, I owned the original before I broke the charger (ran it over repeatedly with a desk chair) and bought a new one. The design is so different it makes me wonder if you actually know anything about MacBook Airs in general.

 

The i5 is a U class processor, same as all other ultra books. The Pro uses a U processor too, albeit it a -58 model with Iris graphics. The screens are fine on the MacBook Air. They'll be Retina soon enough but until then the color reproduction is fine and they're so thin to boot it's amazing that they work at all.

 

You seem to advocate for a design refresh essentially for refresh's sake, which is bad design. The design has been evolving slowly since the original in 2008 and as of now does look quite different and much thinner than it did then.

 

Anyway, please do your research before posting something.

[Techteen14]

OK, you can look now. Sorry I broke the page format.

Since you didn't get my humor sprinkled throughout that last post, I'll put everything into [quip][/quip] tags whenever I'm utilizing dry/deadpan humor, satire or sarcasm. A disclaimer: Nothing inside of quip tags is intended to offend, so don't take them seriously.

I don't appreciate 14 year olds telling me to do my research. And given how much you still have to learn about this as evidenced by your post I suggest you stop telling others to do their research while spouting bullshit like an idiot. I've done far more research then you have on this subject and I'm insulted that you say I haven't but in the preceding paragraphs show that you really have no idea what you're talking about.

[quip]*disregards this paragraph as it's just condescending ageism mixed with defence via fancy words us stupid kids should apparently be impressed by*[/quip]

-The performance of an A8, while good, is nowhere close to that of a U-series Intel x86 processor. It uses so much less power it's laughable you'd make the comparison.

-You seem to find it interesting that it's a 1.4Ghz dual core but it's an i5, showing your lack of understanding of what actually makes a processor fast.

That's a joke. I'm not stupid.

It's essential that the Air uses the 4260U, or else it wouldn't have as great battery life, and an upgrade po the processor could potentially cannibalize sales of the MacBook Pro.

-Most battery tests peg the battery 12 hrs minimum, most people get 14 hrs, myself included.

Why have you neglected to mention that you OWN an Air? [quip]This would automatically make you the expert.[/quip] Plus, when you say something like "they get 14 hours of battery life", me or anyone else is going to click over to Apple's site to fact check that. So next time, say something like, "In my experience, the battery life lasts about 14 hours." This WILL NOT (usually) BE DISPUTED.

-If you think there's no such thing as an objectively good or bad trackpad you're insane. I own four PC laptops and a MacBook Air, (two of which are Thinkpads) and I have to say that while Thinkpads are good, the trackpads don't compare.

I am truly sorry, I meant to put "IMO" in front of that part of the sentence. It should read, "IMO, as long as it's not laggy, grimy and squishy, a trackpad is a trackpad." As in, I don't really care, but some or even most people might.

-You're trying to judge laptops are from the inherently biased viewpoint that you'd never buy one.

[quip]And you're not biased at all. It's not like you're defending the Air or anything.[/quip]

-The only people complaining about iPhone resolution are those that don't own them.

Own, or have used? I've used the iPhone 6 twice for about 30 minutes each (my friend let me use his for a while, and I played around with it in Best Buy once [quip]before noticing they had the Note 4[/quip]). While the screen isn't bad by ANY means, if I got close enough (~4") I could easily pick out the pixels. I couldn't replicate this effect with either the 6+ or the Note 4.

Also, I believe the Verge and maybe Engadget called it merely "adequate".

[quip]There's one more thing[/quip]. A while ago (I can't find the link after 3 minutes of searching), 9to5Mac showed that the eye can see AT LEAST triple the PPI of a Retina display (~900ppi). So yes, there IS a benefit of the 6+'s 401ppi display, the Note 4's 515ppi display and the LG G3's 534ppi(!!!) display. Whether or not it's big enough to care about is another discussion for another time.

-The design is not the same as in 2008. I should know, I owned the original before I broke the charger (ran it over repeatedly with a desk chair) and bought a new one. The design is so different it makes me wonder if you actually know anything about MacBook Airs in general.

2008 Macbook Air:

2014 refresh MacBook Air

Sure, it's thinner, but still the same design language.

The i5 is a U class processor, same as all other ultra books. The Pro uses a U processor too, albeit it a -58 model with Iris graphics. The screens are fine on the MacBook Air. They'll be Retina soon enough but until then the color reproduction is fine and they're so thin to boot it's amazing that they work at all.

I never disagreed with this, except for the resolution bit, which I kind of explained in the part about the iPhone 6. I really love how thin the Air is and how great the screen is, save the resolution. A Retina Air would be great, and would sell millions, I'm sure.

You seem to advocate for a design refresh essentially for refresh's sake, which is bad design. The design has been evolving slowly since the original in 2008 and as of now does look quite different and much thinner than it did then.

A "thinner" Air isn't anywhere close to the same thing as a complete overhaul of Apple's entire design language, which is what I said would be great. The Mac Pro doesn't really match anything, does it now? That's not Apple-like.

WAIT. What if (speculation time) the "it's been too long" phrase on Apple's event invitation is referencing the fact that the Macs need a bit of a fresh new look? Mabye even Macs in COLOR? (The invitation is colorful)