Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster has released a new report covering the full June quarter Mac and iPod sales data from market research firm NPD.
According to the data, Apple's Mac sales came in down 5% year over year, despite the introduction of the newest Haswell-based MacBook Airs at this year's WWDC. During the same time period last year, Apple unveiled both upgraded MacBook Airs and the new Retina MacBook Pro, so it seems the lack of a refreshed MacBook Pro lineup may have impacted sales for the quarter.
/article-new/2013/03/mac_lineup_early2013.jpg?lossy)
As with his previous reports, Munster notes that it remains difficult to extrapolate NPD data to Apple's global sales performance, but he views the June data as "neutral to slightly negative," down from slightly positive in a May report.
We note that we had expected an uptick in Mac sales in the month of June given updated Macbook Airs at WWDC; however, Mac units were [down] 12% y/y for the month of June according to NPD. Based on the differences between NPD data and Apple reported Mac sales over the past few quarters, we note it is becoming more difficult to draw conclusions from NPD data.
Munster stands by his belief that iPads will continue to cannibalize Mac sales and sticks with his prediction of 5% year over year decline in Mac sales for the June quarter. Macs are currently responsible for less than 15% of Apple's total revenue.
As for iPods, Munster's analysis of NPD data suggests that units are down 32% year over year, while the Piper Jaffray estimate suggests that sales are down 23% year over year on a global basis. However, as iPods only represent 2% of Apple's revenue, the overall impact of the sales decline is minor.
Top Rated Comments
Add to that the entire desktop line is outdated, and that doesn't help the Mac at all.
Plus most of the Mac software has been neglected for years.
Thankfully updates are coming and they started with Logic X which was great.
Cannot wait for a new iWork, however I have fears it'll be a crippled iOS version ported to the desktop.
I would call that overpriced, not "out of date".
To be honest, when my new iMac comes in (fusion drive, 16GB RAM, 650M), I may return it. I really don't think I should have spent $1800 after tax on a computer with 5200RPM drive, fusion or not. I think I need to wait and see if the 2013's on the SSD standard or at least come with a 7200RPM drive.What you can get in a PC does mean anyone buys it. I personally am in trenched in the technology business and I know precisely 1 person with a graphics card in their PC that has more than 2 GB of VRAM. Don't overvalue things that are virtually unnecessary.
I agree that the Fusion Drive should absolutely be standard, and I won't buy and iMac as long as they're not.[COLOR="#808080"]
In fact, what I was so irritated about was that the 21.5 DOES come with an SSD only option, but they want $300 on top of the $1499. So let me get this straight: I build a computer with a HARD DRIVE and it costs $1500. Ok cool. But then I opt for an SSD, it costs another $300? What about the discount for the HARD DRIVE that got replaced? Did Apple forget I'm basically "returning" the hard drive? They basically are saying we are still charging you for the HARD DRIVE even though you are not getting one.
Apple is being to sneaky/greedy with their pricing and it's turning people off.
What exactly is outdated about the current iMac?
Besides the 5200 RPM drives?SSD should be standard, but I understand Apple fears people may want to have more storage on a desktop, so therfore we have fusion drives. Fine, but fusion drives should have been standard WITH 7200 RPM drives. In the year 2013, 5200RPM drives should not even be considered.
Besides 512MB of VRAM?
PC cards are starting to come in 4GB allocations! iMacs, for the price they are charging, should have 1GB standard. Instead, Apple uses binned parts that doesn't pass Nvidia inspections and therefore we have only 512MB of VRAM on our cards.
Besides the GPU itself?
Isn't the baseline 640M SLOWER than last years (2011 models) baseline? Of the two baseline 21.5 models, the 650M and the 660M should have been used as standard, both with 1GB of VRAM. On the 27's, the 675MX with 1GB of VRAM and the 680 with 2GB of VRAM should have been standard in their base.
I think its because everyone is holding out for the Haswell versions of the pros
Most of the public has no idea what haswell will even do for them. Imo price is the big factor