🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1989Sep5.193948.14894@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> abstine@image.soe.clarkson.edu (Arthur Stine) writes:
>From article <2534@shaffer.UUCP>, by jon@shaffer.UUCP (Jon Doran/60000):
>> In article <16655@ut-emx.UUCP>, nghiem@walt.cc.utexas.edu (Alex Nghiem) writes:

-- stuff deleted --

>> OK, so IBM is not winning any popularity contests.  And I agree
>> that there is plenty of room for improvement...  But IBM is
>> ranked 4th in workstation sales.  I'm not sure if this is by
>> unit or by sales.
>> 	1.  HP	(includes Apollo Div)
>> 	2.  Sun
>> 	3.  ???
>> 	4.  IBM
>> 
>the ??? would be DEC. The percentage of installed systems that I've seen
>mentioned in recent trade-rags in something like:
>
>1 HP/Apollo = > 30%
>2 Sun ~ 30%
>3 DEC ~ 23%
>4 IBM ~ 2%
>

The current ranking of U.S. workstation vendors for the 1988-89 analysis period
is as follows: 

   NOTE - 1)  These rankings are restricted to Workstation products.
          2)  Nnumbers in parenthesies denote the ranking, for a specific
              category, that differs from the general ranking (Installed based).

                    Installed             Units              Revenues
                       Base              Shipped        (Equipment/services)
  
1.  Sun           128,000  33.1%      69,000  37.2%      $1,462 M   32.7%
2.  Apollo         83,010  21.5%  (3) 29,010  15.6%  (4) $  654 M   14.6%
3.  DEC            72,500  18.8%  (2) 41,600  22.4%      $  993 M   20.9%
4.  HP             54,200  14.0%      24,275  13.1%  (3) $  669 M   15.0%
5.  Intergraph     17,727   4.1%       9,895   5.3%      $  329 M    7.4%    
6.  SGI            12,105   3.1%       4,555   2.5%      $  199 M    4.5%
7.  IBM             8,500   2.2%       3,900   2.1%      $   82 M    1.8%



-- 
Philip E. Johnson                    UUCP:  usenet!ingr!b3!sys_7a!phil
MY words,                           VOICE:  (205) 772-2497
MY opinion!