Credibility Gap

[jade]

Well the word is out, no 3GHz in a year. At least the update finally came (only 12 months later). But what will this mean in terms of Apple's credibility. Lets talk about other "promises" this year.

1. Xserves will ship at the end of February
2. iPod minis will bea availible in February
3. iTunes will sell 100 Million songs

Will people believe anything Apple says any more. There is nothing more disappointing than overpromising and underdelivering.

[Kickaha]

So they're finally taking a page from MS.

Seems fair, after all the opposite traffic.

[blabla]

Originally posted by jade
Well the word is out, no 3GHz in a year. At least the update finally came (only 12 months later). But what will this mean in terms of Apple's credibility. Lets talk about other "promises" this year.

1. Xserves will ship at the end of February
2. iPod minis will bea availible in February
3. iTunes will sell 100 Million songs

Will people believe anything Apple says any more. There is nothing more disappointing than overpromising and underdelivering.

I have not much value too add, but:

1.True

2.iPods wasnt supposed to be avaliable until april for international customers ? It was pushed back to july.

3. Jobs didnt promise that. 100 million was a goal, but they didnt manage to sell more than 70 million. OTOH, it doesnt matter for the end-user.

[hmurchison]

Doesn't really matter. Consumers have short memories.

[Chris Cuilla]

2 & 3 are a little unfair. First the iPod Mini demand far outstripped their most optimistic expectations. Sometimes that happens with a product. Second, the 100 million songs was a "we're going for a 100 million songs" kind of statement. Not a promise, not even a prediction. It also helps (a lot) to keep in mind that originally...they thought they'd sell a million songs the first year.

Apple is doing alright. No worse than any other company and better in many ways. They are certainly not to be compared to MS is terms of keeping/failing to keep promises.

[jwri004]

When was Longhorn first due out?

[a_greer]

Originally posted by jwri004
When was Longhorn first due out? um...yesterday I think


Apples over-priced and under powered macs at a mere dual 2.5 ghz is a large part of the reason apple market share has dropped to below 1% (http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/tech/news/2623299)

[Mac Voyer]

iMac price hike shortly after introduction.

Death of the CRT. (eMac is perhaps the most successful desktop going.)

Original G5 ship date. Apple didn't just fall behind a little. They lied! They knew full well that VT would be getting all of the shipments and they strung other buyers out with false emails about ship dates and waiting till the last minute to say that it would be another month or two and so on. That was the biggest screw over of pre-order customers I have ever seen. People were buying them out of stores before many pre-orders were shipped.

Apple credibility? How about the way they deny all defects in their products until people are ready to launch a class action law suit? iBook logic boards, white spotted PBs, and iPod batteries quickly come to mind. I am sure that all of you could add to the list if you tried. My point is that Apple has not been associated with credibility for a long time as far as I'm concerned. Whether or not they have as little credibility as MS is a whole other question. If you are just assessing their credibility in isolation, then they get low marks from me.

One more thing...

The iPm does speak to their credibility because they surely did extensive market research to project the acceptance of this product. If they missed it by that much, then it makes it look like they are just shooting in the dark with new products. Therefore, either they knew they were going to be short, or their market research team is as incompetent as their marketing dept.

[Kickaha]

Originally posted by a_greer
um...yesterday I think


Apples over-priced and under powered macs at a mere dual 2.5 ghz is a large part of the reason apple market share has dropped to below 1% (http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/tech/news/2623299)

BZZZZZZZZT,

Reading comprehension is your friend.

Apple's share of global desktop personal computer sales to businesses

[BRussell]

They do have a problem. This is why they don't make forecasts or use roadmaps: It's just not in Jobs' personality to make modest predictions.

[Kung Fu Guy]

It's become a pattern for apple to not meet customer demand when launching new products. They just can't seem to get it together when ramping up to production. As a result, all the delays and impatience amongst customers. No one can predict demand for a smash hit product. But apple has had a string of successes and should now better gaging demand and managing its production.

[Concord]

Originally posted by Kickaha:
BZZZZZZZZT,

Reading comprehension is your friend.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apple's share of global desktop personal computer sales to businesses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You tell 'im Kickaha! Apple's marketshare is way better 1%!

Hell, it's almost 2%!
(1.81% to be precise... :D )

Back to the topic at hand, Apple plays the same marketing games as every other big company in the industry. I've never held Apple to a higher standard than anyone else, so it takes more to disappoint me than this.

Just use (what I like to call) the 70% Rule. Just take whatever marketing babble you hear (from anyone), multiply it by 0.7 and the result is what they'll actually deliver.

Cheers,

C.

[LudwigVan]

Originally posted by a_greer
Apples over-priced and under powered macs at a mere dual 2.5 ghz...

Some don't think so. (http://www.architosh.com/news/2004-06/2004c-0610-newg5-2.phtml)

[AsLan^]

Is it possible that Apple deliberately withholds a product to create an artificial scarcity which allows them to continue charging a premium ?

Perhaps over long term sales, they can move more units if they dont satisfy the demand in the opening release. This could allow the perception of value we associate with Apples products to last longer.

[jade]

Originally posted by LudwigVan
Some don't think so. (http://www.architosh.com/news/2004-06/2004c-0610-newg5-2.phtml)

The 2.5 G5s aren't the problem, what about the 1.25 emacs and imacs. These are slow compared to the PC competition. No BS about the Megahertz Myth.... When your pricing puts you up againts the 2.8 and 3.0 P4s (not to mention the AMD64 floating in the imac price range) Something is wrong.

If you can deliver, don't promise or mention it. Sinple as that...like the powerbook g5s. I wouldn't be surprised if they came out earlier than expected, since Apple is denying they wil be out.

All companies exaggerate, it is a fact of life, but exaggerations and promises are very different things. And apple makes too many of them.

Apple market research is obviously not getting the job down (see ipod minis), Apple had plenty of info with the preorders. Or the powermac fiasco last year.

I am hoping Apple will be able to keep the promise of delivering these 2.5 powermacs, and delivers in quantity in July.

[hmurchison]

I happen the think the eMac now is a nifty little machine.

We can always sit back and view life from the inside looking out. The grass is always greener isn't it? Comparing hardware would be fine if they ran the same OS, however the tradeoffs are too much.

On one hand you can have a fast CPU but driven by a rather bland OS.

Or you can have a slightly slower computer built around an OS that is a pleasure to use. Take your pick.

[AsLan^]

[edited]

was in bad taste (trolling)

[Mac Voyer]

Originally posted by hmurchison
I happen the think the eMac now is a nifty little machine.

We can always sit back and view life from the inside looking out. The grass is always greener isn't it? Comparing hardware would be fine if they ran the same OS, however the tradeoffs are too much.

On one hand you can have a fast CPU but driven by a rather bland OS.

Or you can have a slightly slower computer built around an OS that is a pleasure to use. Take your pick.

That is always the last refuge of the Mac hardware defender isn't it? It just doesn't matter what the hardware comparison is. The other guys don't have Mac OS X. Apple could offer some of you a calculator for $3000 and you would say it was a better value over a dual 5 GHz PC because the Apple product was running OS X. That argument is only good for those who drink the Kool Aid. How many years has it been since a PC desktop was offered in the 1 GHz range? How many years has it been since a budget/consumer PC desktop was offered in the $1500 to $2000 range? Why does it seem Apple intentionally puts in half the graphics ram and 2/3 the HD of the PC? Is there also a graphics myth and an HD myth? They would have a better argument for their processors if other components were kept up to speed with the rest of the industry. But as long as it runs a Mac OS, then what does it matter? Why do some of us seem to harp so much on hardware equivalency? Hint, Apple is a hardware company! No amount of software can change that.

[MajorMatt]

Just because it's the supposed 'last refuge' doesn't negate its enormous advantage.

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by Mac Voyer
That is always the last refuge of the Mac hardware defender isn't it? It just doesn't matter what the hardware comparison is. The other guys don't have Mac OS X.

Isn't though? I use OS X (and Win XP) every day. I hate XP (with a passion). It is horribly clunky and inelegant. While my machine might not the "latest and greatest" for power/performance/GHz/etc. and cheapest to boot...I am quite content and it gets my work done for me...smoothly...without (much) hassle and headache. EVERY time I fire up my old Windows laptop I am reminded of how good I have it with the Mac and OS X. Under powered? It does what I need it to do. Fact is...CPUs probably passed the threshold of what most people really NEED years ago.

Finally...to those that think Apple's credibility it shot...okay, fine, don't do business with them. No one is forcing you (unlike MS where in many cases I AM forced to use their products). You don't like what Apple is doing...don't do business with them.

[a_greer]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
....Fact is...CPUs probably passed the threshold of what most people really NEED years ago. Well, I disagree, 5 years ago, most people, basic home users, were only doing email and some web surfing, but now people are compressing their home music librarys for the iPod, and Itunes, and <$300 digital cameras have made digital photography a reality for the home user, and video is comeing along quickly, and imho, in 5 years home users will be doing HD on the home desktop.

As the consumers use changes the cpu, ram, hdd, and os need to keep up, thus MHZ still matter.

[Kickaha]

Sadly, I think that's more true on the Mac side than the PC side - the poor Windows folks still have software that makes those tasks more difficult than they need to be, in general, and they're more likely to be the email/web/text editing people simply because they can't figure out how to do anything more advanced. iLife OTOH makes it easy, therefore proportionally more users will actually use the power at their disposal.

Ironic, ain't it?

But, on the flip side, I do everything but the video editing on a 350MHz G3, and find it *adequate*. It's not fast, it's not snappy, but it does the job, and still does it well. I also have a 1.25GHz G4, and find that to be simply wonderful for everything I've thrown at it, including a small amount of video editing. If I did it professionally, I'd certainly want the latest and fastest, but for occasional use? Average consumers simply don't need that kind of power, it's wasted on anything lesser. (Well maybe not Word, that's such a resource hog anyway... ;) )

[a_greer]

Originally posted by Kickaha
Sadly, I think that's more true on the Mac side than the PC side - the poor Windows folks still have software that makes those tasks more difficult than they need to be, in general, and they're more likely to be the email/web/text editing people simply because they can't figure out how to do anything more advanced. iLife OTOH makes it easy, therefore proportionally more users will actually use the power at their disposal.

Ironic, ain't it? wow, it is so true, and so damnd sad,

note to apple, iLife for windows at $99.99 and bundle a demo or lite edition on new HP computers...

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by a_greer
Well, I disagree, 5 years ago, most people, basic home users, were only doing email and some web surfing, but now people are compressing their home music librarys for the iPod, and Itunes, and <$300 digital cameras have made digital photography a reality for the home user, and video is comeing along quickly, and imho, in 5 years home users will be doing HD on the home desktop.

As the consumers use changes the cpu, ram, hdd, and os need to keep up, thus MHZ still matter.

Okay. Fair enough. But there isn't a Mac you can buy today that won't do these things quite well. Sure a Dual 2.5GHz G5 PowerMac will do them faster than an eMac. But an eMac can do it just fine.

I guess I think that people get caught up on "performance" way too much, which isn't bad in an of itself except for that fact that they boil it down to some simplistic metric...dollars-to-GHz or something like that. To me "power" is about what I can get done in a given day. Sometimes that is about GHz. More often it's about stability, integration, ease-of-use, software quality (i.e., no "blue screen of death" or "DLL hell" or "suddenly my printer driver doesn't work because, well, I updated IE!" kind of crap.)

Oh well, just my $0.02 (after taxes and inflation).

[jade]

I love how everytime someone mentions price and performance, it turns into a discussion about why OS X is better than Windows.

For me the point of this thread is the effect Apple under delivering will have on potential customers. Apple has very significant market share challenges, and there are many issues affecting Apple's low sales. When customers cannot trust Apple to keep their promises, will they purchase something else?

Of course we can argue all day about whether or not the people drinking the koolaid are brainwashed, but Apple can't rely on the koolaid drinkers alone.

What happens to Apple's sales when they can't deliver new products in qunatity, when customers hold off on their purchases pending imminent revisions that never happen, or when Advertising councils refute Apple's performance benchmarks?

For many of Apple's key customer targets, blind faith isn't enough.

[ThinkingDifferent]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla

I guess I think that people get caught up on "performance" way too much, which isn't bad in an of itself except for that fact that they boil it down to some simplistic metric...dollars-to-GHz or something like that. To me "power" is about what I can get done in a given day. Sometimes that is about GHz. More often it's about stability, integration, ease-of-use, software quality (i.e., no "blue screen of death" or "DLL hell" or "suddenly my printer driver doesn't work because, well, I updated IE!" kind of crap.)


Amen brother. Last week at work I had MS project installed and poof, my MS Office toolbar disappeared and the Taskbar won't autohide anymore. Small things do make a difference. Boy was I missing my outdated 550 MHZ TiPB.

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by jade
For me the point of this thread is the effect Apple under delivering will have on potential customers...When customers cannot trust Apple to keep their promises, will they purchase something else?

Hasn't seemed to affect MS much.

;)

[hmurchison]

Originally posted by Mac Voyer
That is always the last refuge of the Mac hardware defender isn't it? It just doesn't matter what the hardware comparison is. The other guys don't have Mac OS X. Apple could offer some of you a calculator for $3000 and you would say it was a better value over a dual 5 GHz PC because the Apple product was running OS X. That argument is only good for those who drink the Kool Aid. How many years has it been since a PC desktop was offered in the 1 GHz range? How many years has it been since a budget/consumer PC desktop was offered in the $1500 to $2000 range? Why does it seem Apple intentionally puts in half the graphics ram and 2/3 the HD of the PC? Is there also a graphics myth and an HD myth? They would have a better argument for their processors if other components were kept up to speed with the rest of the industry. But as long as it runs a Mac OS, then what does it matter? Why do some of us seem to harp so much on hardware equivalency? Hint, Apple is a hardware company! No amount of software can change that.

What you call "refuge" I call the truth. Mac user enjoy the program for it's OS. We love the consistency and care that go into the average Mac application. We realize that although UI changes aren't as sexy as adding 100mhz the perceived speed is much faster. Apple is not a hardware company, they've always been distinguished by their software. Anyone telling you otherwise really doesn't know the platform.

Everytime you hear someone complain about eMacs and their relative value to a PC they are, as Kickaha mentions, boiling everything down to one metric. Generally these people don't understand much about computers and feel better for about themselves by simplifying things.

There is nothing that i'm missing out on by purchasing an emac that i'm gaining by buying a PC. Err well I would be sidestepping beacoup viruses and the like ;)

[a_greer]

Credible or not, Apple better hurry and inovate something because it looks like M$ is catching up... (http://www.creativemac.com/2001/02_feb/images/dave51-composite.jpg) :lol:

[the cool gut]

Originally posted by jade

What happens to Apple's sales when they can't deliver new products in qunatity, when customers hold off on their purchases pending imminent revisions that never happen, or when Advertising councils refute Apple's performance benchmarks?

As far as availability goes, this is a problem with ALL manufacturers. It doesn't matter if its a Playstation 2 or a Tickle-Me-Elmo doll. Everyone has the same problems with supply and demand.

[a_greer]

Originally posted by the cool gut
As far as availability goes, this is a problem with ALL manufacturers. It doesn't matter if its a Playstation 2 or a Tickle-Me-Elmo doll. Everyone has the same problems with supply and demand. yes, that is econ 101, but how can apple be loosing market share faster than the Bears loose the playoffs and STILL under project market demand so drasticly?

[hmurchison]

Originally posted by the cool gut
As far as availability goes, this is a problem with ALL manufacturers. It doesn't matter if its a Playstation 2 or a Tickle-Me-Elmo doll. Everyone has the same problems with supply and demand.

Having supply and demand issues is preferrable. In fact wallstreet seems to actually increase your rating when this happens. It's when supply catches up to demand that things change. They often say
"it's better to have and empty warehouse with lots of backorders than a full warehouse with no order"

LOL Apple has the largest collection of Fortune 500 Armchair CEO on the planet. Every one is convinced they know what's best for Apple.

[soulcrusher]

People want more than what they need, it's not exclusive to the computer world.

Examples? Many.

-Penis enlargement pills.
-Cars that can hit 300km/h.

[talksense101]

The only problem with Apple is that they don't acknowledge problems and deal with it. The iBook faults and the security bugs are the latest examples. This makes Apple look like a bunch of arrogant kids. However, I don't think any of the originally quoted three examples are an issue. Their product designs continue to lead the market.

[jade]

Originally posted by a_greer
Credible or not, Apple better hurry and inovate something because it looks like M$ is catching up... (http://www.creativemac.com/2001/02_feb/images/dave51-composite.jpg) :lol:

I didn't think Microsoft got very far on their branded computers

[Chris Cuilla]

Originally posted by talksense101
The only problem with Apple is that they don't acknowledge problems and deal with it. The iBook faults and the security bugs are the latest examples. This makes Apple look like a bunch of arrogant kids.

This is baloney. I'm sorry, but they seem to be pretty prompt in responding to security issues. You have to remember, when something like that is reported, they have to verify it, then they have to figure out exactly what's causing it, fix it and test it (probably in variety of ways on a variety of configurations.) They have actually been pretty good with this.

Regarding the iBook issue, I cannot really comment, but I would say don't necessarily go by what you hear on boards like this. These are atypical audiences. I don't know that a) it was a widespread problem, and b) that Apple didn't make good on fixing it as quickly as they could.

I'm not trying to be an Apple apologist, but cut them a little break. I don't really think Apple is deliberately trying to screw people (I could be wrong). And they are human so they screw up (I know I'm not wrong about that).