or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Ship times for 21.5" iMac slips to 2-3 weeks on US Apple Online Store
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ship times for 21.5" iMac slips to 2-3 weeks on US Apple Online Store

post #1 of 110
Thread Starter 
The U.S. Online Apple Store is now quoting estimated shipment dates for the 21.5-inch iMac at two to three weeks, suggesting supply constraints of the redesigned all-in-one continue over a month after the first units reached customers in November.

iMac Ship Dates


The increased ship-by estimates come less than a week after Apple's UK online store saw an identical slip, with previous delivery dates of 7 to 10 business days falling to 2 to 3 weeks.

A report earlier on Friday cited a Chinese news source as saying Taiwanese component suppliers improved production rates of the new iMacs, with mass production of the desktops supposedly ramped up in December of 2012. In Apple's recent quarterly earnings conference call for the first fiscal quarter of 2013, CEO Tim Cook said iMac supply would increase significantly over the coming weeks, but warned that "very strong" demand may keep the company from reaching an optimal supply balance until the second quarter.

Supply issues were first seen in early January, when AppleInsider was first to report that Apple's reseller channel was seeing stockouts of the 21.5-inch iMac model.

Thought to be a culprit in the slow iMac production rates is the complex screen lamination process Apple is using to reduce the desktop's overall thickness. Suppliers were reportedly having problems implementing the technology, leading to low yields. Production was thought to be especially poor with the 27-inch model, which as of this writing is sitting at a ship time of 3 to 4 weeks.

According to Apple, iMac supply constraints were to blame for a 17 percent drop in Mac sales for the last quarter. For the three-month period ending in December, Apple sold 4.1 million Mac desktops and laptops, down from 4.9 million units from the previous quarter and 5.2 million units from a year ago.
post #2 of 110
Well all those folks waiting for the ship times to improve heard they had and ordered enough to sell out the expected stock

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #3 of 110
Ship times remain long. Apple can't keep up with supply. Apple is doomed.

Of course, if the ship times decreased, demand is falling and Apple is doomed.

If the ship times remained unchanged, productivity is not improving. Apple is doomed.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #4 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Ship times remain long. Apple can't keep up with supply. Apple is doomed.

Of course, if the ship times decreased, demand is falling and Apple is doomed.

If the ship times remained unchanged, productivity is not improving. Apple is doomed.

 

so basically Apple is doomed?

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #5 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Ship times remain long. Apple can't keep up with supply. Apple is doomed.

Of course, if the ship times decreased, demand is falling and Apple is doomed.

If the ship times remained unchanged, productivity is not improving. Apple is doomed.

I think that Apple needs to, going forward, be more realistic in pacing new product introductions so as to get demand and supply in better balance. Maybe it's just my perception, but the problem somehow seems to be growing worse every year (it started to get really noticeable with the iPhone 4) -- I don't ever recall Peter Oppenheimer going on along the lines of the (I am paraphrasing) "missing 1.1 million Macs, of which 700,000 were lack of iMacs because of supply problems" before in a conference call with analysts. (My reaction, listening to that, was 'fix the damn problem.').

 

I have a feeling that, given its scale and aggressive global new product introduction reach, supply chain issues are seriously beginning to crop up. And perhaps it's only going to get steadily worse.

 

It could be, in part, because there isn't a good enough "Tim Cook" equivalent paying the kind of attention that Tim Cook was, when Jobs was doing Cook's current job. With all that being a CEO entails, Cook himself is perhaps not able to provide the kind of operations oversight at which he was once so masterful.

post #6 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I think that Apple needs to, going forward, be more realistic in pacing new product introductions so as to get demand and supply in better balance. Maybe it's just my perception, but the problem somehow seems to be growing worse every year (it started to get really noticeable with the iPhone 4) -- I don't ever recall Peter Oppenheimer going on along the lines of the (I am paraphrasing) "missing 1.1 million Macs, of which 700,000 were lack of iMacs because of supply problems" before in a conference call with analysts. (My reaction, listening to that, was 'fix the damn problem.').

 

 

Yup.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

 

I have a feeling that, given its scale and aggressive global new product introduction reach, supply chain issues are seriously beginning to crop up. And perhaps it's only going to get steadily worse.

 

 

Perhaps Apple is asymptotically approaching the limit of available skilled labor. The more iPhones, iPads they make, the less they are able to deliver difficult to manufacture Macs

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

 

It could be, in part, because there isn't a good enough "Tim Cook" equivalent paying the kind of attention that Tim Cook was, when Jobs was doing Cook's current job. With all that being a CEO entails, Cook himself is perhaps not able to provide the kind of operations oversight at which he was once so masterful.

 

Perhaps. But deciding to launch the iMac before it was production ready was a decision made at the executive level of management. Did they launch it prematurely because Tim Cook's replacement misled his boss into believing everything was ready? Or did they become so complacent that they believed they could fix everything on the fly? I can't help but think that they brought this on themselves, and could have delayed the launch by 3 months. As it was, they took the unusual tact of launching it well after announcing it. Don't remember the last time there was such a delay with a Mac.

post #7 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I think that Apple needs to, going forward, be more realistic in pacing new product introductions so as to get demand and supply in better balance. Maybe it's just my perception, but the problem somehow seems to be growing worse every year (it started to get really noticeable with the iPhone 4) -- I don't ever recall Peter Oppenheimer going on along the lines of the (I am paraphrasing) "missing 1.1 million Macs, of which 700,000 were lack of iMacs because of supply problems" before in a conference call with analysts. (My reaction, listening to that, was 'fix the damn problem.').

I have a feeling that, given its scale and aggressive global new product introduction reach, supply chain issues are seriously beginning to crop up. And perhaps it's only going to get steadily worse.

It could be, in part, because there isn't a good enough "Tim Cook" equivalent paying the kind of attention that Tim Cook was, when Jobs was doing Cook's current job. With all that being a CEO entails, Cook himself is perhaps not able to provide the kind of operations oversight at which he was once so masterful.

Maybe, but if they do that, the story will be:
Apple new product introductions slow down. Apple is doomed.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #8 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Maybe, but if they do that, the story will be:
Apple new product introductions slow down. Apple is doomed.

 

Exactly.

 

I imagine that Apple is spending a lot of cash on a massive automation/plant and machinery push, so we should see improvements going forward.

 

Is being unable to meet demand as bad as having no demand? That depends.

Will they buy a PC instead? Chances are they won't.

Will they buy a cheaper Mac? Well, yes; they might.

 

And at the end of the day, this is money that isn't showing up on the profit sheet.

post #9 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Ship times remain long. Apple can't keep up with supply. Apple is doomed.

Of course, if the ship times decreased, demand is falling and Apple is doomed.

If the ship times remained unchanged, productivity is not improving. Apple is doomed.

 

Do you ever have anything to contribute to the conversation besides your tongue in cheek "Apple is doomed" nonsense? Maybe it was funny a couple months ago, to god knows who, but now it's just gotten ridiculous. We get it, you're a master of dry sarcasm. Accept this slow clap, and change up the routine.

post #10 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Perhaps. But deciding to launch the iMac before it was production ready was a decision made at the executive level of management. Did they launch it prematurely because Tim Cook's replacement misled his boss into believing everything was ready? Or did they become so complacent that they believed they could fix everything on the fly? I can't help but think that they brought this on themselves, and could have delayed the launch by 3 months. As it was, they took the unusual tact of launching it well after announcing it. Don't remember the last time there was such a delay with a Mac.

 

What's disturbing to me about this debacle is Tim Cook's much lauded claim to fame was his status and skill as "the logistics guy." This is three launches now under his watch that have been unable to meet demand because the production process just wasn't ready. He can blame anyone he wants, but if he was truly the "logistics guy" everyone says he is, this nonsense should have been nailed down before these products went on sale.

post #11 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post

Do you ever have anything to contribute to the conversation besides your tongue in cheek "Apple is doomed" nonsense? Maybe it was funny a couple months ago, to god knows who, but now it's just gotten ridiculous. We get it, you're a master of dry sarcasm. Accept this slow clap, and change up the routine.

Ironic Maxims Are Doomed™


Better?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #12 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Ironic Maxims Are Doomed™


Better?

 

I like it.

post #13 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post

 

What's disturbing to me about this debacle is Tim Cook's much lauded claim to fame was his status and skill as "the logistics guy." This is three launches now under his watch that have been unable to meet demand because the production process just wasn't ready. He can blame anyone he wants, but if he was truly the "logistics guy" everyone says he is, this nonsense should have been nailed down before these products went on sale.

 

Unfortunately, Cook doesn't run Apple in a vacuum.

 

The rumours surrounding the new iMac had reached the national press which meant Apple was probably seeing a massive slowdown in sales much earlier than they would have liked. In an ideal situation then he probably would have delayed the launch until he had enough production capacity to meet demand. If he had then sales would have been a lot worse. When you head up a company then you're often faced with two choices that are less than ideal. In my opinion, he made the right choice.

 

Also bear in mind that the new iMacs are built using pretty state-of-the art manufacturing techniques which probably haven't been tried at this level of production before.

post #14 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayz View Post

Unfortunately, Cook doesn't run Apple in a vacuum.

The rumours surrounding the new iMac had reached the national press which meant Apple was probably seeing a massive slowdown in sales much earlier than they would have liked. In an ideal situation then he probably would have delayed the launch until he had enough production capacity to meet demand. If he had then sales would have been a lot worse. When you head up a company then you're often faced with two choices that are less than ideal. In my opinion, he made the right choice.

Also bear in mind that the new iMacs are built using pretty state-of-the art manufacturing techniques which probably haven't been tried at this level of production before.

Looking at Apple's history they like to innovate in an area that can grow to most of their other products. We first saw it with the original MBA with the aluminum unibody but now it's the grown to include pretty much every aluminum product include the Mac mini and Apple TV remote control shells, and the iPhone 4/4S antenna frames and iPhone 5 casing. It's quite astonishing.

I'm not sure if the iMac production issues are because of the friction-stir welding, the bonding process of the displays and/or something else entirely but I am convinced that Apple's investment into perfecting this process are not limited to the iMacs. I think they have some major longterm plans for whatever radical innovations are causing the delays.

PS: I think the same people that have been Apple is stupid for trying new things with the iMac are the ones that are saying Apple hasn't innovated in years. Can they have it both ways?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #15 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayz View Post

Unfortunately, Cook doesn't run Apple in a vacuum.

The rumours surrounding the new iMac had reached the national press which meant Apple was probably seeing a massive slowdown in sales much earlier than they would have liked. In an ideal situation then he probably would have delayed the launch until he had enough production capacity to meet demand. If he had then sales would have been a lot worse. When you head up a company then you're often faced with two choices that are less than ideal. In my opinion, he made the right choice.

Also bear in mind that the new iMacs are built using pretty state-of-the art manufacturing techniques which probably haven't been tried at this level of production before.

Of course if they'd done a simply refresh of the old style iMac earlier in the year they could have easily met demand and launched this revision when it was ready. Of course sales were slowing down the machine was a ridiculous 18 months old.

Apple screwed up in a HUGE way on this.
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
post #16 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Of course if they'd done a simply refresh of the old style iMac earlier in the year they could have easily met demand and launched this revision when it was ready. Of course sales were slowing down the machine was a ridiculous 18 months old.

Apple screwed up in a HUGE way on this.

Again, what if there goal wasn't simply to meet demand of one product segment within one product category of one quarter but something bigger? Did they still screw up in a HUGE way? It's possible but there isn't enough evidence to say that is what happened. All we can say is that Apple hasn't sufficiently met iMac demand in several months.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #17 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Ship times remain long. Apple can't keep up with supply. Apple is doomed.

Fact is that they sold less Macs this quarter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Of course, if the ship times decreased, demand is falling and Apple is doomed.

Can you quote anyone actually claiming that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

If the ship times remained unchanged, productivity is not improving. Apple is doomed.

See my reply to your first paragraph.
post #18 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

PS: I think the same people that have been Apple is stupid for trying new things with the iMac are the ones that are saying Apple hasn't innovated in years. Can they have it both ways?

Changing existing products is not my definition of innovation. The iPod was innovation since it disrupted the market; the iPhone was innovation since it did the same; the iPad created an entire new market where people thought there wasn't one, so that too was innovation to me; the Retina MacBook Pros and new iMacs, however, are not innovation to me because they're both full of compromises without creating any new markets or disrupting existing ones. An awesome thing Jobs did was to simplify Apple's product line, and Cook is destroying that in an irrational bid for profit.
post #19 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

 

Yup.

 

 

Perhaps Apple is asymptotically approaching the limit of available skilled labor. The more iPhones, iPads they make, the less they are able to deliver difficult to manufacture Macs

 

 

Perhaps. But deciding to launch the iMac before it was production ready was a decision made at the executive level of management. Did they launch it prematurely because Tim Cook's replacement misled his boss into believing everything was ready? Or did they become so complacent that they believed they could fix everything on the fly? I can't help but think that they brought this on themselves, and could have delayed the launch by 3 months. As it was, they took the unusual tact of launching it well after announcing it. Don't remember the last time there was such a delay with a Mac.

Well, Samsung is shipping more items and they don't seem to have a problem in their supply chain...

post #20 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I think that Apple needs to, going forward, be more realistic in pacing new product introductions so as to get demand and supply in better balance. Maybe it's just my perception, but the problem somehow seems to be growing worse every year (it started to get really noticeable with the iPhone 4) -- I don't ever recall Peter Oppenheimer going on along the lines of the (I am paraphrasing) "missing 1.1 million Macs, of which 700,000 were lack of iMacs because of supply problems" before in a conference call with analysts. (My reaction, listening to that, was 'fix the damn problem.').

Yup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I have a feeling that, given its scale and aggressive global new product introduction reach, supply chain issues are seriously beginning to crop up. And perhaps it's only going to get steadily worse.

Perhaps Apple is asymptotically approaching the limit of available skilled labor. The more iPhones, iPads they make, the less they are able to deliver difficult to manufacture Macs
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

It could be, in part, because there isn't a good enough "Tim Cook" equivalent paying the kind of attention that Tim Cook was, when Jobs was doing Cook's current job. With all that being a CEO entails, Cook himself is perhaps not able to provide the kind of operations oversight at which he was once so masterful.

Perhaps. But deciding to launch the iMac before it was production ready was a decision made at the executive level of management. Did they launch it prematurely because Tim Cook's replacement misled his boss into believing everything was ready? Or did they become so complacent that they believed they could fix everything on the fly? I can't help but think that they brought this on themselves, and could have delayed the launch by 3 months. As it was, they took the unusual tact of launching it well after announcing it. Don't remember the last time there was such a delay with a Mac.

Actually, I firmly believe they pre-announced to show it off before supply chain leaks did. There was a leak of the internals, but nothing showing the incredible new design.

They knew when they would ship units and they hit their publically stated targets. The 1.1 million miss was all the people that didn't but a new Mac for two months waiting. Now they have a huge backlog they are workin through. They probably do have the kinks worked out by now, but 1+ million unit backlog in orders/demand plus new ongoing demand will kick your butt every time. I don't need an iMac, but damn I want one. I'm waiting for a 27" display with this tech/design. 1smile.gif
post #21 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post


Changing existing products is not my definition of innovation. The iPod was innovation since it disrupted the market; the iPhone was innovation since it did the same; the iPad created an entire new market where people thought there wasn't one, so that too was innovation to me; the Retina MacBook Pros and new iMacs, however, are not innovation to me because they're both full of compromises without creating any new markets or disrupting existing ones. An awesome thing Jobs did was to simplify Apple's product line, and Cook is destroying that in an irrational bid for profit.

 

 

Steve was at Apple until 2011.  As these devices take a couple of years to plan and put to market and any company worth its salt has a plan that goes several years forward, Steve is still all over the current Apple lineup.


Edited by Bergermeister - 1/26/13 at 3:46am

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #22 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post

Changing existing products is not my definition of innovation. The iPod was innovation since it disrupted the market; the iPhone was innovation since it did the same; the iPad created an entire new market where people thought there wasn't one, so that too was innovation to me; the Retina MacBook Pros and new iMacs, however, are not innovation to me because they're both full of compromises without creating any new markets or disrupting existing ones. An awesome thing Jobs did was to simplify Apple's product line, and Cook is destroying that in an irrational bid for profit.

The kind of refinements they are doing on the iMac are unprecedented: the friction-stir welding and the screen bonding. They're a risk when it comes to large-scale production, because they're difficult and they've never been done before by anybody on that scale. Cook and Ive et al.take risks when they do this sort of thing, and they should be appreciated for that, even if sales are constrained in early phases.

But these refinements, which are innovations in manufacturing and design, are way too subtle for critics like yourself, so you get to complain and question the competence of the management. Meanwhile, anyone with two eyes and some aesthetic sense takes one look and decides that life would be much better with that computer than without it, even if it means waiting for it
post #23 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Again, what if there goal wasn't simply to meet demand of one product segment within one product category of one quarter but something bigger? Did they still screw up in a HUGE way? It's possible but there isn't enough evidence to say that is what happened. All we can say is that Apple hasn't sufficiently met iMac demand in several months.

 

true, but that demand is likely to be..tiny.

 

Take 2011 Q4 numbers...5.2mill macs..yes?

 

Apple acknowledge that 75-80% of the computers they ship are notebooks, which is c.4mill units.

 

That leaves 1.2 mill units in a Quarter between 3 models..worldwide

 

split

 

600k iMac

400k Mini

200k Pro

 

?

 

so...6000 Imacs a day..give or take.

 

in the grand scheme of things....a bit pathetic.

 

it also shows that the poor Mac sales in Q4 2012 weren't all about iMacs.

 

They should have been able to hit c.4m with notebooks alone.

post #24 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

The kind of refinements they are doing on the iMac are unprecedented: the friction-stir welding and the screen bonding. They're a risk when it comes to large-scale production, because they're difficult and they've never been done before by anybody on that scale. Cook and Ive et al.take risks when they do this sort of thing, and they should be appreciated for that, even if sales are constrained in early phases.

I appreciate it when people take risks to accomplish useful goals, which this was not. They changed the design for the sake of it, not to accomplish any objective goal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

But these refinements, which are innovations in manufacturing and design, are way too subtle for critics like yourself, so you get to complain and question the competence of the management. Meanwhile, anyone with two eyes and some aesthetic sense takes one look and decides that life would be much better with that computer than without it, even if it means waiting for it

This is not a question of sensibility but rather of practicability. The new designs accomplish absolutely nothing in terms of usability or practicability, they do not have an objective goal; they do not actually improve anything; but they come with compromises; therefore they can not be called innovation. The manufacturing process may be innovative, but the manufacturing process is not a product, therefore it is outside the scope of this debate. Furthermore, Apple used to be known for using EXISTING technologies in innovative ways, not for creating new technologies and using it to produce the same products.
Edited by Vaelian - 1/26/13 at 4:13am
post #25 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Steve was at Apple until 2011.  As these devices take a couple of years to plan and put to market and any company worth its salt has a plan that goes several years forward, Steve is still all over the current Apple lineup.

While he might have contributed to the current product like, you can not claim that he would have given it the green light to go into production in its current state.
post #26 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


PS: I think the same people that have been Apple is stupid for trying new things with the iMac are the ones that are saying Apple hasn't innovated in years. Can they have it both ways?
Nah, they'll just say thin isn't innovation. 1smile.gif
post #27 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post

An awesome thing Jobs did was to simplify Apple's product line, and Cook is destroying that in an irrational bid for profit.
What's your basis for this comment? One of the reasons Apple's stock got hammered this week is because profit was basically flat YOY and margins were compressed. If Cook was just looking for pure profit they would have updated the internals of the existing iMacs and nothing more.
post #28 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post

 

What's disturbing to me about this debacle is Tim Cook's much lauded claim to fame was his status and skill as "the logistics guy." This is three launches now under his watch that have been unable to meet demand because the production process just wasn't ready. He can blame anyone he wants, but if he was truly the "logistics guy" everyone says he is, this nonsense should have been nailed down before these products went on sale.


Well. I have never managed the simultaneous manufacturing and shipping and sales of 75M+ units of anything before. So I am not qualified to criticize anyone for not managing to do more. My point was not about logistics of manufacturing but rather about timing of the launch. I can (sort of) appreciate that the iMac turned out to be harder to make. But why didn't they delay the launch?

 

Also, iMac volume was done 700k. That doesn't quite explain the drop of over 1M in Mac sales.

 

It is also ironic that, right on the heels of a rumor about iMac production problems being solved, shipment delays continue.

post #29 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post

Do you ever have anything to contribute to the conversation besides your tongue in cheek "Apple is doomed" nonsense? Maybe it was funny a couple months ago, to god knows who, but now it's just gotten ridiculous. We get it, you're a master of dry sarcasm. Accept this slow clap, and change up the routine.

Then don't read my posts. Problem solved.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #30 of 110
Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post
Do you ever have anything to contribute to the conversation besides your tongue in cheek "Apple is doomed" nonsense?

 

You realize why we do it, right? We do it to preempt posts from people like you who actually believe it. Not for humor beyond the fact that it's a longstanding cliché.

 

We do it so that you (fine, "they") don't embarrass themselves and instantly discredit everything they'll ever say in the future. So, in a small way, they're welcome for that. Not that they won't reveal themselves anyway, but still.


Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post
They changed the design for the sake of it, not to accomplish any objective goal.
 

Too bad humor isn't an effective combatant of depression; I'd be genuinely happy by now after all this nonsense. lol.gif


Edited by Tallest Skil - 1/26/13 at 7:14am

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #31 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post

I appreciate it when people take risks to accomplish useful goals, which this was not. They changed the design for the sake of it, not to accomplish any objective goal.

Have you gone and looked at it? It really is a beautiful design. Almost 10 lbs lighter. Dude, do you only look at the electronics when you look at "goals"?
post #32 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post


I appreciate it when people take risks to accomplish useful goals, which this was not. They changed the design for the sake of it, not to accomplish any objective goal.
This is not a question of sensibility but rather of practicability. The new designs accomplish absolutely nothing in terms of usability or practicability, they do not have an objective goal; they do not actually improve anything; but they come with compromises; therefore they can not be called innovation. The manufacturing process may be innovative, but the manufacturing process is not a product, therefore it is outside the scope of this debate. Furthermore, Apple used to be known for using EXISTING technologies in innovative ways, not for creating new technologies and using it to produce the same products.

Well, of course an ugly Windowz box sitting under your desk and a brick monitor made off two slabs of plastic slapped together have the same functionality and usability, from your point of view.

 

These unfounded and biased accusations of lack of innovations are really getting old and annoying.

post #33 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N. View Post


Have you gone and looked at it? It really is a beautiful design. Almost 10 lbs lighter. Dude, do you only look at the electronics when you look at "goals"?

 

 

And the screen is amazing.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #34 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N. View Post


Have you gone and looked at it? It really is a beautiful design. Almost 10 lbs lighter. Dude, do you only look at the electronics when you look at "goals"?

 

The key functional advance is the reduced screen glare.  Otherwise the thinness gimps the iMac as far as internal drives and video card options.

post #35 of 110

meanwhile, I walked into an Apple Store yesterday, bought one and walked out.

I could have bought one the night before when I doing some comps, they checked stock then and they still had what I was looking for.

 

So it would appear that they are making sure the B&M stores have stock over the Online Store.

 

I'd be interested to see what the actual turn-around times are for ordering from the Online Store for stock vs a BTO with something like the Fusion Drive option (which I wanted but but was not willing to wait for despite the store techs saying that getting a Fusion Drive would only add a couple of days to the wait for in-store because they were actually pre-built in certain configs as far as they knew).

post #36 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I think that Apple needs to, going forward, be more realistic in pacing new product introductions so as to get demand and supply in better balance. .

Their stuff is in so much demand that it likely wouldn't help. If they delay international rollouts they lose sales in those areas or have issues (if its a mobile device) with resellers trying to grab from where it is available. Even if they has been able to make those 1 million iMac units they would still possibly have supply issues because there might be 1.2 million wanting them.

Also don't forget that the online store and its figures don't count for everywhere. That's just that channel. Who knows about the in store stock since they have personal pickup turned off on the iMacs right now.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #37 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


Perhaps. But deciding to launch the iMac before it was production ready was a decision made at the executive level of management.

It's also classic Steve Jobs. Steve abhorred the notion of anyone announcing a product before Apple did. Yes there were rumors but nothing that could be deemed official like FCC papers or such. Steve had no issue with announcing somethng months before release so Apple was the first to give the official word.

These iMacs were different enough that the same notions would apply. Folks at the factory making the prerelease stock wouldn't be able to help themselves about leaks to make a few extra bucks. So announce first and then put them into production. Tim was open and honest that there would be supply issues and I applaud him for that frankness*. And I understand the reasons. Both lack of stock piling which was never really Apple's thing and details like the displays are hand calibrated. If going slow and steady means I get a unit that is prefect the first time, I'm personally okay with that and don't want them to change a thing

*Compare this to HP, who announced their Slate tablet. Started preorders and even sold out. Only for everyone to find out that they only had 5k produced, without mentioned limited stock at any time. The other 10k folks that ordered one were informed their orders would take as much as six months to deliver because HP didn't have access to the production line or needed components to make more and wouldn't for at least 3 months.
Edited by charlituna - 1/26/13 at 8:33am

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #38 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post

 

Do you ever have anything to contribute to the conversation besides your tongue in cheek "Apple is doomed" nonsense? Maybe it was funny a couple months ago, to god knows who, but now it's just gotten ridiculous. We get it, you're a master of dry sarcasm. Accept this slow clap, and change up the routine.

 

Somebody has to counter the bullshit artist posers (you?) who act like marketing and manufacturing experts telling Apple what it must to survive, making comments about business practices they know absolutely nothing about, extrapolating conclusions from bullshit rumors. Of course Apple helps this "artistry" by keeping mum on what's really happening and that makes the bullshit proliferate like fruit flies in a lab experiment.

post #39 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post

What's disturbing to me about this debacle is Tim Cook's much lauded claim to fame was his status and skill as "the logistics guy." This is three launches now under his watch that have been unable to meet demand because the production process just wasn't ready. He can blame anyone he wants, but if he was truly the "logistics guy" everyone says he is, this nonsense should have been nailed down before these products went on sale.

I know of one launch that Apple said would be slow because of production issues (mostly likely that the units need a slower process to ensure quality) and several where issues have been rumored.

I wouldn't use the latter to judge him since there's no proof. And remember, it might be his watch as CEO but that doesn't equal him being the 'logistics guy' anymore. If you want to judge that you need to go back to when he was that guy

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #40 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Ship times remain long. Apple can't keep up with supply. Apple is doomed.

Of course, if the ship times decreased, demand is falling and Apple is doomed.

If the ship times remained unchanged, productivity is not improving. Apple is doomed.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaelian View Post


Fact is that they sold less Macs this quarter.
Can you quote anyone actually claiming that?
See my reply to your first paragraph.

 

Quote anyone saying that? Really. People make those claims all the time right here in AI, in this very thread. The "Cook debacle" (post #10) says it in so many words. Another take on the long ship times is that Apple intentionally limits supply to create the illusion of demand. That little canard is trotted out on a regular basis too. Analysts continually link decreased shipping times to a fall off in demand. It couldn't possibly be that  Tim Cook really is good at balancing supply and demand. The point of the sarcasm is that no matter what Apple does or doesn't do the jerk punditry out there, and right here in the AI forums, will find a way to doom the company with it.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Ship times for 21.5" iMac slips to 2-3 weeks on US Apple Online Store