Paul Thurrott's SuperSite for Windows
Home > Type > News > Mac Market Share is Now 3.86 Percent

Mac Market Share is Now 3.86 Percent

Oct. 19, 2009 Paul Thurrott | Paul Thurrott's Supersite for Windows

Apple just released the results of another phenomenal financial quarter, earning $1.67 billion on revenue of $9.87 billion. According to the company, "Apple sold 3.05 million Macintosh computers during the quarter, representing a 17 percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter." This, of course, allows me to report Apple's worldwide market share number with some accuracy. And we can somewhat guess--since Apple doesn't break out US-only sales--what their US market share is as well.

For worldwide market share, the math is simple. PC makers sold 79.48 million PCs around the world, using my standard system of averaging the IDC and Gartner numbers. That means the Mac now has 3.86 percent market share worldwide. I'm guessing that's a lot lower than you were expecting. But math is math, and as I've tried to explain for several years now, strong quarterly sales growth (17 percent in Apple's case) doesn't amount to much actual real world gain when you're already starting from a very small position comparatively.

(For whatever it's worth, the Mac's 17 percent sales growth pales in comparison to the 26 percent growth experienced by netbook maker Acer.)

For the US number, I've seen a lot of silliness about the Mac hitting 10 percent this quarter. (This is a figure Leo repeated last week on "Windows Weekly," and I suspect that's because he gets his "news" from Mac sites.) Apple's US market share is not (yet?) 10 percent, though. Sorry.

At most, the Mac now has 9.1 percent market share in the US. This figure is obtained, again, by using IDC and Gartner's numbers. However, because I have to also use their numbers for Mac sales, it's a bit less accurate.

However you look at it, the Mac is continuing to gain market share. Back in Q1 2009, the Mac owned 3.36 percent of the entire PC market, and 7.49 percent in the US. Today's figures are actually dramatic gains.

Discuss this Article 94

rr0de74@live.com
on Oct 20, 2009
"Of course, someone as intelligent as Mike knows that Apple does split out the Macs segment of revenue, profit, margin, etc... in each of its quarterly filings so he KNOWS that Apple IS profitable in its Mac market and has been so since the Internet Bust, but in order to spin some nonsense he will blather on with a few sentences that make no sense hoping you are an idiot that will be confused by his handwaving." Of course Mike does. That is why never answered my question. He had to throw up this crap and hope it stuck. @wlow3 best post here. It greatly magnifies Paul's attempt to use one statistic to paint his agenda. Why Paul even post about this stuff I dont know. He comes off like a 5th grader try to tease an adult. I wish I had a link handy to one of Paul's 2004 columns about how Apple was going under. Lol!!
UnnDunn
on Oct 20, 2009
Here's my take on this: I don't care about market cap, revenues, EPS or any of that nonsense. Leave that to the economists and CNBC-watching types. As a consumer, the most important thing to me is marketshare of PCs versus Macs, because such marketshare directly influences how popular each platform is to developers, which in turn influences the range of software and hardware available to each platform. I own a mid-2008 MacBook. I like my MacBook. But in using it, I can never shake the feeling of being somewhat trapped inside a world created by Steve Jobs. Why can't I have Blu-ray? Why does my $1200 MacBook have a 6-bit color display, with dithering so bad it makes it useless for any graphics work? Why is iTunes my only realistic choice for downloading music? Why in the blue blazes do I only have 1 trackpad button??? Where are all the @#$%! games!? It boggles my mind how Apple get away with charging premium prices for machines with less capability, but they do, and that's great for them. But having owned a Mac and felt its restrictive shackles, Apple's fantastic quarterly financials aren't going to convince me to buy another one.
gfryesc1
on Oct 20, 2009
I'd say that the Laptop Hunter ads accomplished apple's goal for them, it further cemented the Mac as a premium brand. People clamor and aspire for luxury items that are stylish and pricy. Even trendy liberal windbag Paul pops out his macbook pro when he's swilling coffee at starbucks... probably praying and hoping someone notices he's running windows on it to give him a chance to rant about how much he hates Apple.
yoshipod
on Oct 20, 2009
"It boggles my mind how Apple get away with charging premium prices for machines with less capability, but they do, and that's great for them." I would argue that in general, those of us who use OS X, choose to do so, and pay that premium, because what Apple offers, not because we want to "look cool". I don't really care if I can get a PC with slightly better specs for a few dollars less, because running OS X more than makes up for it. For example. I play World of Warcraft. Many of the people that I play with online are constantly struggling with their windows based PCs. They are always having issues with the game running properly. Microphone not working with Vent, some driver issues with the graphics card causing the game to crash, etc. The people I know who play on a Mac running OS X, for some reason never seem to have these problems. Yes this is anecdotal evidence, but I see this type of thing everyday. I work at a major university and see Faculty, Staff & Students using every type of computer and OS out there. The ones who seem to have the most problems are running Windows. Rare is the OS X problem that is not quickly fixed. This is why most Mac users pay that premium. A little more cost up front, a lot less cost in the long run.
Delmont
on Oct 20, 2009
UnnDunn, I hear that same comment from quite a few Mac owners. And that after the "hype", they would not buy another Mac to be hamstrung.
LuxZg
on Oct 20, 2009
I'm kinda too tired to read and check if anyone commented this, but, with Apple's prices, how come you can compare their market share to "everything else" just based on their revenue? I mean, average Apple product is at least 2x (if not 3x) of the price of an average PC product. Not to mention a lot of PCs are sold not as white box, but as components (which are than sometimes asembled by the shop in a quick and dirty manner, or by buyers themselves). Taking those into consideration, I'd say that Mac numbers (in pieces of units sold) are more like 1% of global market. Not that it's huge difference, if it's 3%, 4% or 1% :) But still, this is way too far from precise information to actually give percentages with double digit precision (??), isn't it?
Dude1313
on Oct 20, 2009
Apple Market share eh? What is the number of PCs that MS makes? Oh that's right 0%.
yoshipod
on Oct 20, 2009
"Well, here's the real kicker. MSFT seems to think it's 1995 and PCs cost $4000. See, at that price they make a lot of money because they can bury an expensive OS in it. But it's 2009, and PCs cost $599 or less. MSFT cannot make nearly the money on Windows 7 as they could Win95 14 years ago." I don't think that is correct. I doubt that Microsoft charges less for Windows 7 than it does for Windows XP. Its purely the PC hardware manufacturers that are working to lower the prices of computers. So while the average cost of PC has been coming down, I think that the cost of Windows is rising and the overall percentage of what the OS is in relation to the rest of the PC is skyrocketing. PCs are half the price of what they cost 10 years ago. Do you think that the cost of Windows has been cut in half? Microsoft is letting the hardware manufacturers battle each other over razor thin margins, but they reap all the rewards.
UnnDunn
on Oct 20, 2009
@yoshipod --- "This is why most Mac users pay that premium. A little more cost up front, a lot less cost in the long run." --- Except... that isn't true, at least not for a savvy computer enthusiast. In fact, in my experience, the opposite is true, because when you have a problem with your Windows PC, there are tons of resources to help you solve it, whereas when you have a problem with your Mac, you basically have to run to the Genius Bar or Tekserve, both of which will gouge you on out-of-warranty repairs. Heck, in NYC the Genius Bar is typically booked up 2-3 days in advance, and that's despite there being 4 Apple Stores in the five boroughs. My example is as anecdotal as yours, and just as valid.
UnnDunn
on Oct 20, 2009
@Delmont --- "I hear that same comment from quite a few Mac owners. And that after the "hype", they would not buy another Mac to be hamstrung." --- I'm a computer enthusiast, so I'll probably wind up buying another Mac at some point "just because", but it won't be because of any delusion I may have of the Mac being "superior".
tayme
on Oct 20, 2009
@UnnDunn - "I'm a computer enthusiast, so I'll probably wind up buying another Mac at some point "just because", but it won't be because of any delusion I may have of the Mac being "superior"." That has been my point for a long time here. You state it perfectly. But, you will now be lumped in as a "Mac Fanatic" by certain people on this site. --tayme
yoshipod
on Oct 20, 2009
"Except... that isn't true, at least not for a savvy computer enthusiast." You are making my point. Someone who is an enthusiast or that likes to tinker with their machines will no doubt likely choose a Windows based PC. They can certainly extract more value out of that. However, most people are not that interested in tinkering or learning all the ins and outs of computer management. They just want a machine that works and is easy to troubleshoot. For many people this is why they choose to pay that premium for a Mac. That is the value OS X holds for 3M people this fiscal quarter. More people using Windows does not really mean there are more resources to go to when there is a problem, since most of them don't know what to do. I constantly see students struggling with their Windows laptop and one person after another trying to fix it. Plenty of other users out there to help, but none of them seem to know how to fix the problems. And trust me, these are some of the smartest people in the world. Not computer or IT experts, just very smart researchers. As for the Genius Bar, where does a Windows user go for a free troubleshooting resource? Best Buy? Maybe the new Microsoft Store? We will see how long the wait is there.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
UnnDunn " I don't care about market cap, revenues, EPS or any of that nonsense. Leave that to the economists and CNBC-watching types." Of course not and that's not what Paul's article is about in any case. The reason it came up here was an attempt by the Mac Faithful to change the subject. Understandably, they don't like admitting that even with all their ranting about how Mac is now really taking over from Windows the truth is that: Apple's growth rate continues to be in the same magnitude as a rounding error Even in the quarter where their bright and shiny new Snow Leopard is out while Windows users are waiting to buy PCs with Windows 7, Windows PCs outsell Macintosh by about 24:1. It's no wonder they want to change the subject. What IS odd is that they think that a vendor's high profit margins are good for their consumers and aren't a sign that they're paying way too much. It reminds me of people who go into a car dealer and think the person with the "Sales Rep of the Month" plaque got that award from the dealer for getting customers the best deal rather than for doing the best job at wringing out the last dime from the customer's pockets.
Dude1313
on Oct 20, 2009
That's because chasing market share for the sake of chasing market share is a futile endeavor. Ask Dell.
Waethorn
on Oct 20, 2009
"You lump them because you try to make this a Microsoft vs Apple thing." That's exactly what Apple does though.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
BladRnr "And it was commented (Mike Galos) that Apple doesn't pay any less for PC components than anyone else. " No. I didn't say that. If you're going to create a straw man to argue against, at least don't pretend you're quoting me. I said nothing about component costs. Period. I talked about how R&D costs on a product don't change significantly based on the volume sold. I said was that "it costs the same to develop a computer or an app or a OS that sells 1M units as it does to develop one that sells 20M. The up front costs don't really change when your unit sales [do] and you have to charge much, much more per unit just to break even on the R&D costs (or, in Apple's case since it's a bigger expense - on the Advertising budget)" In short with smaller sales you have to spread the upfront R&D costs among less products sold so you have to charge back more of that cost per unit.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
BladRnr "Thinking out loud: why didn't Dell develop a Linux OS of their own ten years ago" Answering out loud: Because they didn't want to own a tiny fraction of a product that 99% of the planet has never wanted even after decades of hype. Or perhaps it's because they realize that even their current 11.4% of 95% is a LOT more than the entire Linux and Mac OS desktop market combined.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
Blad "Why do you continue to beat the market share drum? " Um, this is an article on market share. The question is why do YOU insist on trying to change the subject? A little sensitive that Apple's still under 4% after all those years of Saint Steve being back?
Dude1313
on Oct 20, 2009
BladRnr- You hit the nail in the head. Anyone who thinks that the PC manufacturers are going to be content with MS raking in all the profits while they are fighting for meager amounts of "profit" is fooling themselves. For better or worse that is why they hitched their wagon to the Windows in the 90's worked well then, not so much now. I highly doubt HP and Dell will continue to be in bed with MS if the market (especially) home continues to shift to netbooks. Which incidentally, how will that best value/cost benefit the OEMs? It wont. To all- Oh yeah Apple is worth more then HP and Dell combined? Continue with the thoughts its just an aberration. Why is this important because only in a black and white world is market share the only thing that matters. By that logic anything that doesn't have the largest market share is a failure. Example Pepsi has been #2 to Coke for decades. Does that mean Pepsi is going out of business anytime soon? Apple on the other hand is chugging along quite nicely which despite what others might suggest. Despite some saying they don't innovate, blah blah blah, Apple has their hand on the pulse of the consumers while everyone else is out flailing about. Point being Apple is going from strength to strength. MS? Well there is always the hope their stores will be a hit. And no, I'm not talking about having a computer store. Rather its hardly original to "copy" an Apple store, down to (nearly) everything that an Apple store has. I for one look forward to seeing the results, no not Thursday with the huge "crowds" but weeks/days/months/years down the road. Should be interesting.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
Blad (and by extension Dude) 'The fact is Apple is laughing all the way to the bank." Absolutely. And the fact that the people Apple is laughing at are here proudly bragging about overpaying so that Apple's profit per unit sold is exceptionaly high makes the joke even funnier.
argraphics
on Oct 20, 2009
Question for Mike Galos ? Im not trying to take a shot at you but what do you do for a living? I see you post a million comments and than get wrap up in these silly arguments.. That goes for a few other cats here but im just asking for some reason you stick out...Do you have a job or wife or something?
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
Blad You really can't read, can you. Here. I'll make it simple. If company X spends $100M to develop product Y and sells 4M units they have to include $25 cost per machine as R&D costs to cover the expense. If company X spends $100M to develop product Y and sells 100M units they have to include $1 cost per machine as R&D costs to cover the expense. Whether company X sells 4M units or 100M units they still spent $100M to create product y. $100M = $100M 4M < 100M $25 > $1 If that's too hard for you to follow, perhaps you should put down that computer for a while and get a 4 function calculator.
sjaak327
on Oct 20, 2009
I for one, still hope I would be able to spend a fair amount of money on a computer, as in a way it is NOT a luxury product, it's a necessary tool. Of course along those lines, you end up buying a Dell, or a HP or whatever floats your boat. I have to admit, that people that actually buy apple products are probably after that luxerious trendy bit. As what other reason would they have to spend significantly more for comparable hardware ? It cannot be OSX, altough a nice OS, it is mediocre compared to both Vista and Windows 7. (but of course many mac users already run windows, since they seem to be unproductive without it..)
danieldecker
on Oct 20, 2009
@UnnDunn - "I own a mid-2008 MacBook. I like my MacBook. But in using it, I can never shake the feeling of being somewhat trapped inside a world created by Steve Jobs. Why can't I have Blu-ray? Why does my $1200 MacBook have a 6-bit color display, with dithering so bad it makes it useless for any graphics work? Why is iTunes my only realistic choice for downloading music? Why in the blue blazes do I only have 1 trackpad button??? Where are all the @#$%! games!?" You do realize you are seriously under utilizing your multi-touch trackpad, right? 2 finger tap for right click, tap and a half for click-to-drag, pinch to zoom, 2 finger scroll. This "Why in the blue blazes do I only have 1 trackpad button???" has zero bearing on the debate, because it is patently false. As an "enthusiast" you should better learn to use the technology at hand, these features even work in Windows under Boot Camp.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
Blad "No, I asked why market share matters. " Actually, you didn't. But here are a few reasons: Larger market share decreases expenses per unit sold and thus allow for more profits, more development resource for future versions or add-on products or a combination of both. Larger market share increases the 3rd party ecosystem that increases the flexibility of the product and thus both increases the usefulness of the product and increases market share even more. Larger market share improves the liklihood of the product being relevent in future years thus both increasing customer confidence and decreasing development costs of n+1 products since the existing product serves as a jumping off point rather than a false start.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
Blad Here. I'll do it one more time. I did NOT say anything about comparing "company x" vs "company y". I said that increased volume decreases the amount of R&D costs that have to be charged back per unit. That's true at Apple That's true at Microsoft That's true, for that matter, at ANY company that develops and sells products.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
Blad "I guess it's a crime Lotus sold you a car that was more expensive. " No. I willing paid extra for a niche product. And I have no problem with Mac OS X users paying extra for a niche product. The difference is that I don't brag about how much extra Lotus charged me compared to a Toyota or pretend they really are the same price or brag about Lotus' unusually high profit margins. (On the other hand, I AM amused that my Lotus costs about 1/2 as much when I bought it as a Porsche with the same performance and worse handling)
Dude1313
on Oct 20, 2009
Since we are talking about HARDWARE market share how about this one: Microsoft: 0%
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
Dude Actually, we're talking about market share for computers sold with Windows versus computers sold with Mac OS. That the latter category has been reduced to only one vendor doesn't change. But, hey, maybe Steve Jobs will make the announcment today that he's changed his mind about licenseing and other vendors will be able to bundle Mac OS. (What do you think, 10,000,000:1 odds against?)
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
What really surprises me is that with the Apple Store down, the Mac Faithful are here rather than hitting refresh on the Apple fan sites to find out what today's "It's the Tuesday before a new Windows comes out - we have to try to control the news cycle" announcements are all about.
Avro
on Oct 20, 2009
@sjaak The funny thing is I don't need Windows for any productivity at all. My main Application for work isn't even available on Windows. Like many Mac Users I use Windows and Boot Camp for one thing: GAMES That actually is a case where market share matters. And don't forget you can have the best market share there is and still go broke....
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
Avro "you can have the best market share there is and still go broke...." Absolutly true. (But it's a lot easier to go broke with really bad market share)
Avro
on Oct 20, 2009
Lose $10 per unit, but make it up on the volume ;-) (Acer?) Apple doesn't look like they are going broke any time soon!
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
" But, hey, maybe Steve Jobs will make the announcment today that he's changed his mind about licenseing and other vendors will be able to bundle Mac OS." Guess not. Just catch-up processor upgrades and a wireless mouse.
Logjamming
on Oct 20, 2009
" But, hey, maybe Steve Ballmer will make the announcment today that he's changed his mind about copying software from others and monopolizing the market" Guess not. Just another catch-up operation system, accompanied by tupperware commercials that invite you to host a W7 launch party. Microsoft will release its copied OS, Apple releases a 27" bigger than HD screen with quad-core processor and exemplary sales numbers. When will Microsoft release some decent hardware, besides the odd keyboard and mouse? Oh, apart from the infamous and expensive Failure-360 box. Microsoft is even more hilarious than Richard Pryor was in his best days. And so is this blog.
WebGuy3000
on Oct 20, 2009
Don't forget, the Windows PC industry also has pretty decent margins - they're just divided up a little differently. Microsoft's gross profit margin (based on Q1 09) is just below 80%. Their hardware partners' gross profit margins are, shall we say, less. There's money being made on all those inexpensive PCs, but not necessarily by Dell, Acer, et al. This is why it's ultimately kinda unproductive (IMHO) to compare Apple with the rest of the industry as if they have the same business model. They don't.
tayme
on Oct 20, 2009
@mikegalos - "The difference is that I don't brag about how much extra Lotus charged me compared to a Toyota or pretend they really are the same price..." I don't remember anyone here doing that about Apple products, either. But, in your aluminum foil head dress wearing world, you seem to think that anybody that chooses an Apple product is an evil cult member. --tayme
jecouch66
on Oct 20, 2009
@BladRnr - The spyware and virii that you despise windows for is not on your Mac for one reason: market share. If you think that trend will continue when Apple marketshare is above 30% you are deluding yourself. Someone else was talking about more folks having hardware issues with their PC's than with the Mac. This would seem obvious as Apple has full control of the hardware for Mac, while MS has to make windows compatible with vastly greater numbers of hardware items. That doesn't make windows any less worthwhile in my opinion. Comparing the two isn't comparing apples to oranges (ha!). You're far more likely to have hardware compatibiliy with a Mac and therefore less issues. Not sure why that isn't obvious to anyone. But that also means you are more limited in your options. That is good for some, not good for others. Which brings me to this point: why there is so much animosity between the windows and apple folks? I'm a windows guy because it works for me. But if the Mac worked for me, or I needed to use it for a job related function I wouldn't hesitate to buy one. A lot of you seem at each other's throats (well, mostly Mikes). Just put your facts out, let him put his, and agree to disagree without being hostile. I think we'd all be happier.
jecouch66
on Oct 20, 2009
@webguy - "This is why it's ultimately kinda unproductive (IMHO) to compare Apple with the rest of the industry as if they have the same business model." Ohh, that's what I was saying in a far more winded, spelling challenged way. :)
yoshipod
on Oct 20, 2009
@Bladnr "All I know is Ballmer was specific when he said that he wanted PC prices to rise because he felt they were too low. And from everything I have read Win7 on a Netbook was around the $10-15 range. It would be very hard for Dell to charge $499 for a PC and then shovel $100 to MSFT just for the OS. MSFT can't be making that kind of margin at that price point." Unfortunately for OEMs that does not appear to be the case "The current price of Windows XP OEM version is only around US$25-30, but the latest quotes from Microsoft for the netbook version of Windows 7 is around US$45-55 and therefore first-tier vendors are unable to transfer the cost to the netbooks’ sales price due to the fierce competition. The first-tier notebook vendors are still negotiating with Microsoft hoping to bring the price down." http://netbookboards.com/2009/06/15/windows-7-may-cost-45-55/ So on a $500 retail Netbook running Windows 7, its quite possible that 10% of the cost of the retail price of the computer is just for the OS. That is up from about 5% for XP. What happens when the cost of the Netbook goes to $400 or $300? Its the retailers and hardware manufacturers who are losing out on this, not Microsoft.
yoshipod
on Oct 20, 2009
@jecouch66 "Someone else was talking about more folks having hardware issues with their PC's than with the Mac. This would seem obvious as Apple has full control of the hardware for Mac, while MS has to make windows compatible with vastly greater numbers of hardware items. That doesn't make windows any less worthwhile in my opinion. Comparing the two isn't comparing apples to oranges (ha!). You're far more likely to have hardware compatibiliy with a Mac and therefore less issues. Not sure why that isn't obvious to anyone. But that also means you are more limited in your options. That is good for some, not good for others." You hit the nail right on the head. This is why Mac owners are happy to pay that premium. None of the Mac users I know complain about being limited by having fewer options for their computers. They just want a reliable machine that will work well and allow them to accomplish what they want to do. Everyone wants the fastest machine they can get, but most Mac users don't care if they can get slightly faster PC hardware, since they know their overall experience on the Mac will be faster and more productive. In the end that is what matters the most. That is why we pay the premium. Because we know its really not a premium, but a discount.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
Blad I have an Elise. (Even I'm not quite insane enough for an Exige). I will say that getting in and out has been a good motivator for keeping my girth down!
mikegalos@msn.com
on Oct 20, 2009
tayme You haven't seen people on here saying a Mac costs the same as a PC or people brag about how much more Apple makes on each computer they sell? Reading comprehension problem or did you just not understand the analogy?
tayme
on Oct 20, 2009
@mikegalos - "You haven't seen people on here saying a Mac costs the same as a PC" Nope - I have seen people talking about market share and margins for Microsoft and Apple; but no where on here have I seen anybody say that the per unit cost of a Mac PC is the same as the per unit cost on a Windows PC. In past threads, I have seen people putting up costs of some high end Windows PCs in comparison to Mac PCs, where in fact, they were able to show that some Windows PCs cost the same or more than some Mac PCs. "people brag about how much more Apple makes on each computer they sell" Not sure where that came from. I didn't make any reference to that...but yes, in many cases the profit margin on a per unit Mac PC is higher than the profit margin on a Windows PC. "Reading comprehension problem or did you just not understand the analogy?" No problem with reading comprehension here...but you seem to have a problem with the truth and bending it to fit your needs. Again, something that seems to be customary to the current batch of liberals in power in the U.S. and the fans that they have following them. --tayme --tayme

Please or Register to post comments.

Related Articles

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use
Apr. 18, 2013
Article

What I Use: On the Road 21

Every so often, I publish an updated version of my “What I Use” document, which details the technology products and services I actually use day-to-day. Since I’m currently on my third business trip in five weeks, this is perhaps an ideal time to discuss the technology products I rely on when I travel and a few related points....More
Mar. 6, 2013
Article

What I Use: March 2013 33

Lots of changes since November, including a new PC-based home server running Windows 8, several new smart phones, new PCs and tablets, new cloud backup, Office 365 Home Premium and a nice doubling of my Internet speeds courtesy of Verizon FIOS....More
WinSuperSite.com
Related Penton Sites
Copyright © 2013 Penton Media, Inc