5 ms·
Windows computers cost half as much, more or less, for the same specs so the replacement rate is probably much higher. Like for the same price you can buy a PC
by CoolGuySteve 7y ago
Windows computers cost half as much, more or less, for the same specs so the replacement rate is probably much higher. Like for the same price you can buy a PC laptop every 2 years vs 1 Mac laptop every 4 years.
When I worked at Apple, the plastic MacBooks outsold everything else because they were cheapest. It was weird that we did all our power/performance benchmarks on a $2000 15" MacBook Pro when they only made up 10-15% of Mac sales.
From that time, we also knew that Macs were extremely popular for home use, IIRC something like 30-40% penetration, but people were using Windows for work or being given a Windows laptop from work for personal use.
One of the reasons Apple never made a Netbook was that it was an inferior good. People, when asked, prefered a larger screen and trackpad but couldn't afford it. The bottom-tier 11" MacBook Air and the iPad were a response to upsell that demand.
- jfkebwjsbx 7y agoPrice has nothing to do with replacement rate. There are many bad laptop brands, though. 30% penetration in the USA. Here we are talking about global usage. In many other first-world countries Macs are nowhere to be seen, eg 3%.
- CoolGuySteve 7y ago> 30% penetration in the USA. Here we are talking about global usage. Then later in this same thread you say: > Webpages in non-latin alphabets probably use way less fonts from Google Fonts. So uh, which is it?
- jfkebwjsbx 7y agoI don't follow. Precisely because we are talking about the global usage you have to consider webpages in non-latin alphabets which increase the ratio of Macs for latin alphabet countries.