Apple devices are out of budget for most countries, and they only own 10% of the worldwide market share in computing.
Outside desktop, Android owns the mobile market.
Really, it is just US analysts going crazy with M1.
I think it is safe to assume they will only get cheaper from their launch-day prices.
I know because I've been in that place.
I am not trying to say that the entire impoverished world is going to go out and start buying Macbooks because of the M1. What I am saying is that practical ARM64 workstations are now a lot more plausible at every price point because of what the M1 demonstrated.
I agree that practical ARM64 Workstations will be more feasible now, but there's still a large gap.
There's a whole market of refurbished 1st world componentes. I talk a lot with people from LATAM and they're are used to buy 2nd hand Xeons with Chinese motherboards for their prosumer market.
They even sell packs of Xeons + motherboard + Memory (it was DDR3 recently, IDK how much that changed).
In many countries people hacked early 2000s games and there are communities maintaining such games because many people has not the means to play the last titles. Nor money to pay for subscriptions and such. They pirated the whole ecosystem.
This is pretty common in Russia and Turkey too. I guess in other countries it is too.
I do have websites in Spanish and try to make them lightweight and avoid JS because I know some of my visitors will have a hard time with it.
As long as Apple is not selling cheap devices, no chance that this changes.
I'm very far from SV salaries for example, and although I can afford an Iphone or Imac, It's just a dangerous slope for my pockets.
There are many countries poorer than mine.
We are talking about the most valuable company in the world, and the M1 release was covered enthusiastically the world over. The notion that it's US-only is absolutely preposterous.
Apple is a significant player in mobile in the entirety of the West. Canada, the UK, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands. And it's PC saturation is virtually the same in Canada and Europe as the US. Even in European media it is incredibly common to see Apple devices (phones and PCs) as the placeholders.
Apple even has 20% of the mobile marketshare in China. That's incredible. It has 60%+ in Japan.
The corporation buying a fleet of low-end PCs for seat warmers aren't going to buy Apple (nor are they buying Surface Pros. They're buying the junkiest HP or Dell they can get). But there are as many "artsy" people, or people who care about the experience, in other rich countries as well.
Further I don't think you understand what "significant" marketshare is. Even 10% marketshare is significant, where the actions of that market player is impactful. But Apple is pushing way above that almost everywhere.
I surely do, whatever Porsche and Ferrari do have very little repercussions on the automotive market, if you want a comparison.
Whatever you hope the position of Apple is doesn't correlate with reality.
Aside: Ferrari has between 0.01% - 0.1% marketshare in a given year in the richest countries, and that is your example why Apple -- at 20% or so in most of the world's economies -- is irrelevant. That is some perilously embarrassing nonsense. Hyundai, in contrast, has 7% marketshare in the US and is considered a pretty big player.
Apple has 17% (and dropping) of the mobile market share in Europe and around 9% in computing.
There aren't many other richer economies in the World.
Ferrari is worth now more than General Motors and Ford, so market share and net worth are not comparable.
Their market share is small because they make a luxury limited edition product.
They limit their production capacity to around 10 thousands cars/year (all sold in pre order), Apple is trying to sell as many devices they can.
There are no Ferrari Store where you can buy a Ferrari and drive it home half an hour later.
It's not a small difference.
Last but not least, there is a lot more competition between car manufacturers, even in the most expensive segments, Apple devices are only made by Apple.
Hyundai, for example, had a net income of over 3 trillion in 2019, Apple net income is measured in tens of billions.
I guess Bangkok holds 28% of Thailand population then.
https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/thailand
Also the issue being discussed here are Apple computers with M1, even less than those 28%, in case you also want numbers.
Don't say
"the issue being discussed here are Apple computers with M1"
when your comment said
"Please list tier 2 and tier 3 countries where there is a significant market share of Apple hardware."
Source? That means one in every five has an iPhone in China.
Microsoft devices are already out-fashioned by apple. The Windows UX is also subpar comparing to Apple. Now the hardware is also gonna completely fall behind.
If all the young people get mac's for their home computers, will the next generations use Windows at workplace?
Im talking about 10-20 years landscape for Windows and Office.
While they're more expensive to buy new than many Windows laptops, the general sentiment from those I've spoken to seems to be:
* It's worth the extra money for more reliable operation and fewer worries about malware.
* Buying used is much less of a lottery. They tend not to have hidden problems.
* Selling used means you actually get some return to put towards your next device.
I see people using Office and Chrome or Safari - and not much else.
I can't see the M1 making a lick of difference here. Home users aren't going to double their budgets to afford an Apple machine, especially one which can't even play most games.
If I were to switch to a Mac mini I would pay about $350 less than it cost me to build my main workstation/gaming machine. According to the benchmarks and real-world tests, I'd gain quite a bit in performance over my Ryzen build, with a fraction of the power consumption which is currently 120W idle, 310W maxed out as measured by my UPS. Per real world tests, the M1 mini never goes above ~35W and stays cool and quiet even when maxed out on stress tests. Given the fact I no longer play games much at all beyond WoW and a few indie titles, and my non-gaming workflow is 100% doable on macOS, I'm sorely tempted to switch even with my reservations about Apple as a company.
> ...especially one which can't even play most games.
No one buys a Mac for AAA games, that's a fact and probably won't change immediately. With that said, Blizzard has day one native Apple Silicon support for WoW, and the benchmarks indicate the performance (depending on the game engine) sits somewhere between the GeForce 1650 and 1660 for most of the games tested so far. That covers pretty much all non-AAA titles on the performance side, leaving portability as the only real issue. I've seen tests done with Steam games and most macOS native x86_64 games make the transition via Rosetta2 quite nicely.
Not to mention, M1 Macs can now run most iOS apps natively which opens up a horde of games to the platform immediately, including popular titles like Minecraft, Fortnite, and CoD.
On the flip side, the PC market is less and less relevant as phones have become the primary computing platform in the last 10 years.
> Now the hardware is also gonna completely fall behind.
This may happen. For efficiency/battery life, it already has. But a handful of synthetic benchmarks where the M1 outperforms high-end AMD desktop chips in single core seems to have overshadowed the cases where those same desktop chips (and even some comparable 15W mobile APUs) outperform the M1 in other tasks.
Or the huge segment of PC gaming.