PC sales spike with Windows 7 debut
Just three days were enough to push computer sales for the week up 40%
Click to enlarge. Source: Morgan Stanley, NPD
The sharp spike in the chart at right is the Windows 7 effect PC makers have been waiting for.
In a note to clients issued Monday afternoon, Morgan Stanley's Kathryn Huberty reports that NPD data for the week ending Oct. 24 — which included three days of Windows 7 sales — show PC sales jumping 40% year over year.
This was particularly encouraging, she writes, because sales in the early part of the week likely reflected the same pre-Windows 7 declines as the previous two weeks. PC buying for the weeks of Oct. 17 and Oct. 10 was down 29% and 2%, respectively, as consumers waited for Microsoft's (MSFT) new operating system to launch.
Click to enlarge.
Huberty dismisses concerns that computer vendors over-shipped ahead of the Windows 7 launch, demonstrating in a second chart that PC inventory levels are still below average.
So which computer maker's shares are likely to benefit most? In a separate note issued Tuesday, Huberty singles out Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), whose potential for growth she says is under-appreciated by investors.
She also likes Apple (AAPL) as an investment, but less for its computers than for the new distribution agreements that are driving iPhone sales.
[Follow Philip Elmer-DeWitt on Twitter @philiped]
Sales will increase as people held off buying windows to get windows 7.
But just out is Empire EFI, or boot 132 loader, or Rebel EFI which makes OS X snow Leopard run on a PC!
I wonder what that will do for MS sales, since microsoft has been steadily losing market cap and cutting jobs.
And the Alienware Area 51 is a $4000 machine!!! How much of an idiot can you be? You don't even compare hardware configurations that are similar in price!
The last ignorant fool that said something like that was a complete fanboy.Just through one comment, I can already see how foolish you are.
Were should I start?How about I compare a Pc and a Mac Pro.Let's say
Alienware Area-51 ALX Desktop VS Mac Pro.
"the Mac Pro comes with 3 GB of memory, at the lowest configuration"
I've heard it a thousand times.
The Mac Pro at most will upgrade to 32 gigs of ram.The tough truth is,with a processer speed of 2.26 GHz,32 gigs will get you nowhere.The Alienware has a processing speed of 3.86 GHz bringing out full performace.
"Apple thoroughly tests the configurations and doesn't simply put the latest intel chip into the machine without knowing it will perform well, not be too noisy, and not generate too much heat."
Ok…So with a poor cooling system that makes no sound,Mac hardly can even call itselve "a gaming system".With a liquid cooling system,the Alienware makes no sound and can actually play a game.With Intel Xeon,Mac pro cries for a quicker way to do things.
"The next update will include more Ram, a faster processor, better graphics, and even larger hard drive (640 gb currently)."
Yea,and pigs can fly.Since you know nothing of what you are saying,let me rephrase it."The next update"is basically you saying "lets wait until the next generation in computing!" Pcs will have "updated" into a super computer by then.And the hard drive,I've seen Pcs with 1.5 TB of space already.
"currently the 4th most popular computer company in the US behind HP, Dell, and Acer.
HP, Dell, and Acer are all PCs ,so you admitted PCs look down on Apple.Everday, Apple is losing in the market.
You clearly are a foolish fanboy with no knowledge of computers.
Derek,
Your inaccurate and dumb comments don't warrant a response, but I will anyway. For your information, the Mac Pro comes with 3 GB of memory, at the lowest configuration. Also, certain Mac's do not receive product refreshes as often as others, and the Mac Pro has not received an update for a while. Apple thoroughly tests the configurations and doesn't simply put the latest intel chip into the machine without knowing it will perform well, not be too noisy, and not generate too much heat. The next update will include more Ram, a faster processor, better graphics, and even larger hard drive (640 gb currently). By saying that Apple has "no knowledge of how this market works" is frankly a completely ignorant comment. They are the most successful company in silicon valley, worth slightly more than Google. They are increasing their market share and are currently the 4th most popular computer company in the US behind HP, Dell, and Acer. That says a lot for a company that "has no knowledge of the market" especially given the fact that they ship the hardware, software, and OS all from the same company. You are a dumbass.
Yea,so basically a company with no appearent knowledge of how this market works could actualy compete with Microsoft?
Kevin,
There are plenty of "dumb" mac users. By "dumb" i'm assuming you mean not tech savvy. In fact, a large chunk of new mac customers do not have much computer experience and are drawn to the ease of use the products bring. When someone is factually wrong, correcting them does not constitute a remark like the one you made stating that we think "we're smarter than you…" I recognize Windows is ubiquitous and everywhere, that majority of corporations use PC's, and that there is more software available for windows than for OS X. However, PC folks need to recognize that there definitely is a market for the Mac, and that they are offering a product as a total package that can effectively compete with PC's.
That comment by Alexander on November 5th at 3:09am is a typical mac user. Basically its "we're smarter than you, we use these computers because we know more than you and you are either a moron or a silly immature teenager that either way is too dumb to own a mac".
Thats all I have to say!
Aaron,
Your argument is invalid. You say "NO CONSUMER SOFTWARE SUPPORTS DUAL PROCESSORS" yet the Mac Pro is a PROFESSIONAL machine and not designed for regular CONSUMERS. The GT120 provides plenty of graphics processing power and up to four of them can be installed on the Mac Pro. People who purchase the Mac pro are generally not very interested in playing games, but more interested in driving humongous displays to display their creative or professional work. Since you are obviously not a Mac user, why spend the time dissing the hardware? What's in it for you? Nearly every mac user, whether a regular consumer or a power user is more than satisfied with their system. It is the Windows PC folks that we hear complaining about issues. For example, Windows 7 was a bitch to install because Microsoft was distributing corrupt files for users downloading the OS when it became available. I run windows 7 on my macbook pro, and my customer service experience was more than inadequate. Anyone can always build a more powerful computer than you can buy, and anyone can build a Hackintosh and load OS X, so those that choose an already well-rounded and competent apple machine are willing to pay for the outstanding customer support, quality build materials, near top-of-the-line hardware, and excellent bundled software. The apple total package and value will always outstrip cheap, plastic, PC grade shit…..argument is over….it will go on forever. Continue using your PC and periodically reinstalling the OS, running virus scans, defragging the hard drive, and installing shitty software…
It's rediculious to think that a person would actually choose a $3,000 low-end Mac with 2 gigs of RAM,500 gigs of hard drive space,and low quality gameing cards over a $500 Pc with 8 gigs of RAM,750 gigs of hard drive,and a top-branded graphics card.I don't quiet get it.Maybe if Apple cared more about quality,Macs might just be used more than Pcs in another centurary.I tried a Mac before,but I was only able to play minsweeper for a few minutes and then,FREEZE!The little rainbow loading circle came up,minsweeper was nowhere to be found.A few hours into Finder and,nothing.I wasted about three hours.
this is typical for new "gadgets and programs" wait till the new wears off and the glitches and problems add up. typically, i think microsoft concentrates on a strategy of new programs and things whether they are read for market and glitch free and ready for end users or not.
manys the night ive sit here and cussed bill gates,then in awhile theyll come out with a patch. now i see theyve gone as far as charging for sp3. something released to fix screwups on os s. . im glad he and mrs gate love the press and glamour they get from donating huges sums gainted through selling flawed os s and the like with the attitutde"of well just patch it later. while the rest of us are out here limping along with an operating system theyve quit support for because they quit supporting it and just forgetting about the gliteches the rest of us put up with every day .. thank good for user groups
someday maybe they ll drive a slicion wafter crosss into gates as as good good bye to an era gone by (figureatively off course} although he has located his new plant in canada can take advantageg of hiring foriegn programs without the scrutiny of laxly enforced immigration laws in the us
Alexander: That was a typo on my part I was referring to the MAC PRO.
Now let see for $2500 I get a Xeon CPU, which is intended for servers, and a GT120 which is designed for laptops. Seriously MAC engineers do not know what they`re doing since the ideal situation would be a standard i7 chip and at least a GT200 series from NVIDIA like most other vendors would sell you.
Not only that you can pay an extra 800 dollars a total of $3300 and get dual Xeon chips when we already know that NO consumer software supports dual processors at this time. Then they go on to sell you multiple GT120 processors when NO MAC software supports more than a single graphics chip, because you actually need Windows drivers and Windows Games to even take advantage of multiple graphics processors. Otherwise if you wanted dual display the GT200 series would provide that anyways since it`s made for a desktop environment!
These are really shady business practices if you ask me designed purely to gouge and mislead the consumer. The fact is the $3300 dollar system is no more powerful than a $200 dollar Xbox 360.
No Zeal here, I think I spend most of my time rebutting people and not zealing around like the Mac faithful do all the time. I agree that this implementation from Mac is a good one, but starting with Vista or 7 system defrag will run every day and keep the system nice and tidy so that going forward your defrags won't take long as the system does it constantly so there won't be much fragmentation to fix the next day if you see what I am saying. Basically on Vista and 7 it runs in the backround and you may never even notice it, but glad someone could finally had specifics on a Mac that they like over Windows. Kind of refreshing to see that over the typical ridicule on constant skip.
I hate to break the bad news to all the PC users out there, but MACs tend to be better machines. If you compare a high end MAC to a readily available brand name PC i.e., Dell, HP and Gateway, MAC's features and convenience outshine the crappola dished out by those companies any day of the week. HOWEVER, I cannot and will not ever agree with the contention that a MAC can and will outperform an individually designed PC. If you build the PC yourself, and you have complete control over the products involved in the build, I can almost guarantee you that you will wind up with a better product. All gamers have to agree with me on this. The best systems are always individually built PCs. I think we need to end this discussion right there. If you want to buy a Dell or HP then go for it, but don't think for a second that you won't encounter problems and bloatware that you just don't find on MACs. But if you are like me, and you really want to learn to build it yourself, get ready to enter a world where the shackles of MAC and name brand PC are nowhere to be found.
Thank you Eric for your insightful comments. However, in your zeal to defend Microsoft, you missed my point. The issue is not fragmentation. Every time any system writes to disk, there will be fragmentation. The issue how to effectively does an OS defrag. Yeh Visa/7 do a daily defrag but I have 2 drives, 1TB each (at 65% capacity). Defrag brings the system down and you can't do much at that time. As opposed to MAC OSX which solves this at write time (go research if you like how osx implements defrag). I am a windows users and I wish MS fixed this when they had a chance, when they implemented NTFS.
Steve, you are right, I should have used the word fragmentation, but looking deep, it is really how an OS defragmetns is what is important. Fragmentation will happen regardless.
Thanks both of you for comments though.
Billa007, I think you got that backwards… "defrag" is what you do to a fragmented disk. Over time PC files become fragmented by moving, deleting, copying, etc. As files are fragmented disk access becomes slower… so you defrag your harddrive to put the files in a more contiguous arrangement.
Billa007,
Once again back for some good fact checking. Not sure where you get your info but Mac OSX files do get fragmented and do need defragmentation. Its called disk optimization and all it does is automatically defragment files for you. http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1375?viewlocale=en_US
Also Vista and 7 run disk defragmenter automatically every day or every week whichever you choose, so fragmented files is not really an issue past XP.
One thing which Windows user almost never point out is how the Windows performance gets slower as time goes by. Among other reasons, most damaging is the disk defragmentation.
Oh someone needs to tell them how OSX solved that problem 12 years ago. MAC disks don't defrag, thus giving you good performance years after you bought the machine.
I wish MS would solve this issue (unless they have in 7 and I don't know about it)
Aaron,
There is no such thing as an iMac pro. Ironic, due to the fact that you have felt the need to post that Mac users don't know the difference between different hardware configurations. Currently the new iMac's use the Nvidia laptop card as you call it in the lowest end configuration and all other models use different levels of an ATI Radeon chip. Apple believes that the people purchasing the lowest end imac configuration do not need more graphics horsepower than the perfectly competent 9400M. The new displays are stunning and ultra high resolution. Also, Mac fanboys believe that you should "spread the word" about the benefits of OS X and the Apple total package. It is not to our benefit to continue increasing our market share, because viruses may become more prevalent on our systems if we do. We prefer apple remains relevant, but a small player in the PC battle. There are many Mac users that rely on the systems for powerful tasks, not simply novice users. And as for the skewed number of comments, Apple users are excited about their machines and the company that they have faith in and are glad to refute uninformed comments such as yours…
Aaron,
There is no such thing as an iMac pro. Ironic, due to the fact that you have felt the need to post that Mac users don't know the difference between different hardware configurations. Currently the new iMac's use the Nvidia laptop card as you call it in the lowest end configuration and all other models use different levels of an ATI Radeon chip. Apple believes that the people purchasing the lowest end imac configuration do not need more graphics horsepower than the perfectly competent 9400M. The new displays are stunning and ultra high resolution. Also, Mac fanboys believe that you should "spread the word" about the benefits of OS X and the Apple total package. It is not to our benefit to continue increasing our market share, because viruses may become more prevalent on our systems if we do. We prefer apple remains relevant, but a small player in the PC battle. There are many Mac users that rely on the systems for powerful tasks, not simply novice users. And as for the skewed number of comments, Apple users are excited about their machines and the company that they have faith in and are glad to refute dumbass comments such as yours…
What boggles my mind is if mac makes up 10% of the market.. why in the world are half the comments from Mac fanboys, seems rather skewed? Oh wait that's right you paid 2x the money you should have and now are working it off like Lisa Simpson…
And also why does the IMAC PRO ship with an Nvidia graphics chip that was designed for Laptops. Oh that`s because a MAC user would NEVER know the difference.
Why people always compare MAC vs. PC?
MAC is about design and sleek, but you can't do any upgrade. There not much software out there for MAC. For example, you can't stream your content via PS3 thru your MAC using TVersity. Programmers are not interested in writing programs for MAC. Remember, if you want to use programs that are not available for MAC, you must install Windows via Bootcamp. Microsoft collects more money from you. MAC or PC, you end up give away $$$$.
Most of the mac fans don't realize that mac is a closed platform unless like windows which have to support tons of different hardware/software and still able to run.
Why not apple it's OS in the market and try to support all the hardware out there with 3rd party drivers etc. and show that its OS won't crash in such situation.
I support Linux and hope 1 day the people can overcome geek tag associated with Linux and consider it as user friendly as windows. Ubuntu is moving in the right direction in this regard.
Didn't we get a PED post yesterday about apples stunning 0.7% increase? Or something like that… and how it was slowly overtaking windows?
I can't remember the last time I had a BSOD in Windows. I certainly haven't had one under 7 and I didn't have any with Vista. Come to think of it, I don't think I ever had one with XP either.
I only had two crashes when I was using Vista, forcing me to reboot. Both times it happened when I was using QuickTime. Go figure.
Nice to see you too, Steve. I see you've got your head firmly implanted in your hind quarters still. The free clinics still flooded over there in Cali? That's just too bad.
Mac Stability?
http://www.tgdaily.com/software-features/44501-snow-leopard-glitch-means-windows-7-runs-faster-on-macs
And this one
http://www.internetnews.com/security/article.php/3843436/Snow+Leopard+Bug+Bites+Mac+Users.htm
And this one too
And to Sacto Joe – A Mac would have to use bootcamp and run windows to run windows games which DO NOT run as well as on a Windows based PC.
Oh, look…Ryan the Windoze shill is back.
What is Redmond paying Astroturfers per post these days, Ryan?
Sacto Joe:
"which can run all PC software in native mode"
Running PC games in native mode as in using OS X? I'd love to see you try. The limitation of OS X is the same as Linux – no DirectX support without significant coding work on a file-by-file basis. You're kidding yourself if you believe that the select few ported applications that are offered for Macs perform anywhere close to their PC brethren.
Joe, your "facts" are the ones that seem to need to get out of the way.
I just think it’s funning that Mac users still rely on Windows for their Mac machines. Just a thought!!
Apple's ad usually talk about negatives of Windows from a period long since gone. Much like Apple's own OS back in the early 90's which was buggy. Windows has long since shed the Blue Screen of Death. I think Apple's ads have become long in the tooth and most PC buyer's are at least savvy enough to sift through the BS. Apple is a marvelous
marketing machine. They manage to create hype of a product where most companies could not. They have a small percentage of the market but command a huge media audience.When Apple talks the media listen.
Microsoft has the last laugh in terms of user's and Windows 7 will go a long way to keep it that way.
What the PC side needs is better profitability from getting user's to buy better PC's. The tide is turning I think and Apple is worried.
So basically what the brilliant ANALyst Kate Huberty (a known failure at tech analysis) is pointing out is that no one was buying PCs for the past year because everyone was waiting to see what Windoze 7 had to offer over the abject disaster that was Vista, and then when it turned out that it was an improvement (and how could it NOT have been?) people decided to make those new computer purchases that they had been putting off.
Wow…you really need a PhD in economics to figure that one out, huh?
For Eric of Cincinnati.
Yes, one of the main reasons why Windows is supposed to blue screen is hardware. The problem is that Windows often blue screens for many reasons and often enough to be annoying, no reason at all.
Windows just has a history of being buggy, unstable and difficult. It may not be true moving in to 7. But reputations are a hard thing to live down.
Take a look at Linux. You mention someone should use it and they freak out thinking that hardware support is going to be flaky at best. Fact of the matter is for the last 5 years or so you've been all but guaranteed to be able to use whatever hardware you've got under Linux, and managing drivers for that hardware is WORLDS easier than in Windows. But Linux has a reputation to live down.
Yadda, Yadda, Yadda. As a former Mac fan and now a systems engineer I can pick through most these talk backs and just laugh. Its so funny how the Mac fans will just lay it out like an advertisment giving all the so called "good talking points". For example Charles says " I run windows in my macs with VMware or Virtual Box, that way, when windows bluescreens, I can laugh, and keep working on my mac." I guess no one told him that blue screens are caused by kernal level driver issues which is related to faulty hardware or a buggy driver and not an OS issue in itself. Blue screens are very very rare these days and should not occur unless the situation I stated above. This tells me that either vmware has some crappy drivers or the Apple machine it is running on has faulty hardware. I would think a computer technician would know this and to act all high and mighty does not convince anyone to switch it just gives us that know better a good chuckle. Also anyone with good computing practices can run Windows without AV software, but as a precaution I advice everyone even Mac users to run AV since nothing is immune to malicious software(most is social engineering these day), and I will bet someone will try to shoot that notion down too with some nice ridicule of Windows. I say use what you like, but please stop with the bogus info that sounds like a commercial on a constant skip.
Bought a Mac, went to ebay.com, tried to list the item, needed to download software to allow me to post in my own font, boxed up MAC, returned it.. Couldnt play flight simulator X, needed apples version of Word, the list goes on and on, no direct X 10, MAC are for the average user who isnt very savvy.
@Rick of Chicago,
Please explain how it is that a Mac, which can run all PC software in native mode, has "no games". Are you saying the PC has no games?
Or are you just a typical Apple hater who never let a good fact get in his way?
Who made this graph, Microsoft? It starts at +10%, shows an average of ~20%, drops to -30% in less than a month, then "spikes" to 40%.
And this tells us – what, exactly? That they had a pickup in sales from dismal to slightly above average? I guess you could call that a "spike", but it's really stretching the definition.
ex ped: Morgan Stanley made it, Sancto Joe, and it's showing sales compared to the same week last year. 40% year over year growth is pretty good in this business.
Rick is talking about the Apple of 1996. It's best to get your facts straight before rattling off reasons to keep the status quo. Windows users just don't get it, because they're afraid of change.
Charles, you posted basically the same thing yesterday in the Apple sales story because I remember the comments about VMware.
You say, “Mac's are about the experience and stability, and Windows, has now become about the inexpensive and robust hardware… if you're a gamer, go with a cheap windows based machine, and put enough parts in it to make it cost as much as a mac. If you work in an office and just want the dang thing to work, buy a mac”.
If Windows is inexpensive and robust, why would I want to pay twice as much for a Mac that I would have trouble upgrading? Why would I pay twice as much for a Mac to have the “dang thing just work”? It seems that if it just works but has less expandability, runs less software than a PC, if I need to buy boot Camp, VMware or some other 3rd party product to run Windows (which I also need to buy), it should cost way less than a PC.
I have several PCs running XP and had to reboot them about the same amount as you did. Just setup anti virus and spyware to auto update and auto scan, reduced rights on accounts that are used to surf the internet, did not go to questionable sites or open odd email attachments and had no problems. It would make sense to pay the extra $50 for anti virus/spyware than to pay two times the amount of a PC for a Mac so it will “just work”.
Also, I, like many don’t like being held to the closed system Apple perpetuates in almost all of its products – iPod, iPhone, Macs – that can’t easily be upgraded. Heck, you can’t even change the battery on an iPod. Also, to paraphrase cosmonaut Lev from “Armageddon, “Mac, PC – doesn’t matter. All components made in Taiwan”. So again, why pay twice as much for Mac when it has the same hardware components as a PC? And it can’t be easily upgraded.
Mac is stable of course, because it's a closed environment. However,
Mac = no games
Mac = tons less 3rd-party software
Mac = lesser Office experience & integration
Mac = the Apple way or no way
Windows has its faults, but the world still runs on Windows. Mac is just a bit player.
That is a 40% increase year over year. So what this says is that the sales of systems this year was 40% higher than just another nothing special week of system sales. This says that those who would have bought systems in the past 3 weeks waited until the new os was on the systems rather than having to retrofit their systems. Doesn't seem like there is anything special going on here
@Charles: Dude U have no idea what you are talking about. The article is telling the investors how to make money on the "wave" of new units sold. Get out from your sand box and learn to read. You have Mac good. Go buy another one so we all (including Microsoft) can benefit from our investment.
Come back and read the bottom of the article where A is still a good investment, however "less for its computers". Go ahead buy another Mac 
Everyone screamed, ANYTHING but VISTA! Microsoft rebuilt Vista, called it 7, actually woke up to the fact that memory works in a bell curve, and that simply shoving 8 gb of ram into a machine, isn't going to make it much faster than a pc with 2gb. I've used it, it's a completely foreign interface, and seems fast… yet, if you are going to have to learn a whole new OS, and have the majority of your programs you bought not work, why not go with something that doesn't get virus' and spyware, and actually just works, like a MAC. I hate to say that, since I myself am a computer technician, but the macs I have had, have been zero trouble, the Windows machines I have, have to be babysat with Antivirus, Antispyware, yadda yadda yadda, crash half the time, etc. I run windows in my macs with VMware or Virtual Box, that way, when windows bluescreens, I can laugh, and keep working on my mac. 5 reboots total, on both of my macs, in the past year I have owned them, not 99.999 like Linux, but also about an 1/8 of the reboots I have had on my windows pc's. Mac's are about the experience and stability, and Windows, has now become about the inexpensive and robust hardware… if you're a gamer, go with a cheap windows based machine, and put enough parts in it to make it cost as much as a mac. If you work in an office and just want the dang thing to work, buy a mac.
Ahh the Apple, PC battle lives on here, there, everywhere. Meanwhile a Mac user (G4 workstation, Macbook Pro) such as I (btw also have two windows machines too) simply knows the truth….Mac is so far superior for the essential visual interface of the computing world its not funny….only thing funny is how Windows OS upgrades are like Mac OS systems mmmm 12 years prior on average!