or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Mac sales continue to slide in Q2 as overall PC market rebounds
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mac sales continue to slide in Q2 as overall PC market rebounds - Page 3

post #81 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elijahg View Post


Such as the Xserve, which was pretty much essential for schools. A couple of those in a rack was all you needed for the biggest of schools or universities, but now you have Mac Pros rolling around on their sides instead. Amazingly, the early 2009 Xserve is benchmarked faster than the new trashcan Mac Pro in some cases.

You can't even put PCI-e cards in the new Mac Pro, how does one use industry standard fibre RAID arrays?! ...Oh yeah, you have to throw those out and get ThunderBolt ones at twice the price.
I agree too. Especially over here in the UK, the prices of Macs are going up and up. Yes Apple needs to make a profit, but you don't need 40% profit to make a premium product. There's paying for quality, then there's extortion.
And if they really are declining, what is your explanation? Cannibalisation from iPad? Surely that's a bad thing, since the iMacs are $1000+ and the iPads are $399+. If it was all iPad cannibalisation, surely the PC sales would be falling too?
There's really no need to get aggravated and attack someone.

You answered your own question, Lorin isn't buying a new one because of the expense. In 2013 I bought a top of the line 27" iMac which cost over £2400 ($4100). Luckily I didn't have to pay for it, but had I been paying I would never have bought it. It's just way too expensive compared to a same spec PC, which would have been half the price. So in this very small sample size survey, in which you presumably would buy a new Mac at any price point, but Lorin and myself wouldn't, that makes 66% of people in our mini survey failing to buy a Mac because of the price. I know many more who always quote price over anything else as the main reason they won't buy a Mac, especially in the UK where prices are even more than in the US.

Back in the early Intel era, you got much more bang for your buck, and even more so in the late PPC era when the Mac Mini was $499. Now the ageing base model is $599, which in comparison to a PC is pretty poor. Yes PC support costs are much higher, but the initial purchase price for a Mac is too high.

The 2007 iMac was $1199, and had upgradable RAM, a DVD burner, 2ghz CPU. The current cheapest iMac is $1099, with soldered on RAM, sans DVD burner, and with a CPU that's not all that much faster than the 2007 model. For over $1000, that really isn't good value at all.

Dell's 27" AIO is similar to Apple's base 27" model (though lacking a dedicated GPU); but it's $200 cheaper, and you don't have to pay for phone support nor for a DVD drive. Of course non-AIO PCs are even less, with Dell's small PC starting at $249 (granted with a crap CPU) but with the same specs otherwise for which Apple charges $599. Alternatively, Dell's $599 PC has twice the RAM and twice the HDD space that Apple's Mini has.
I really can't understand why the rest of Apple allows Johnny Ive to continue with his OCD on thinness. Eventually we'll have Macs that just have a painted picture on the screen coz there won't be enough space for anything inside 1wink.gif

Apple's iPhone battery woes would be solved if the iPhone 5/5s was a few mm thicker, I'm sure many more people would take better battery life over a phone that's 6mm thick instead of 8. I certainly would.

Same with the iMacs (and Mac Pro to a certain extent). Nigh on impossible to take apart, and so thin it compromises on features. Who the hell needs a thin desktop? I hear people every day complaining how they wish their desktop was thinner... /s
They used to, until their price bumps pushed them out of that market.
It uses hugely fewer resources and fuel to put a new HDD/RAM/GPU into the computer rather than throwing the whole thing out and getting a new one every couple of years. My Mac Pro was going strong for 7 years with incremental upgrades until its PSU went pop.
No, the memory on the cheapest smaller iMac isn't upgradable. It's soldered on. Apple prides themselves on design, but they can't design in a door like on the 27" model to access the memory? That's the worst design conceivable. It also takes a whole lot longer than 10 minutes to take apart the latest (late 2012 onwards) iMacs. The screens are glued in. It really isn't a "non-issue".

The later iMacs have a custom firmware on the HDD preventing upgrades, unless you want the fan going at 2000RPM all day.

Considering Apple doesn't even make the Xserve, I not familiar with really any schools using Xserves unless they've previously had it. Most use Mac mini servers (such as mine). There really isn't much you can do in a school that severely taxes a Core i7 processor. Even now, unless you have the last gen Xserve, Server isn't even supported. 

 

Comparing Dells to Apple's offerings is like comparing apples to oranges. No, its not the same. Try again! If you don't like Apple's offerings, then go somewhere's else and buy your cheaper, better Dell. You get what you pay for. 

 

Nobody cares about taking their computer apart. They just want to take it out of the box and use it. Maybe you do, but you can 5 or even 50 other people you can think of isn't the majority of the computing world. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post
 

 

I'm gonna stick to my guns here and continue trying to be civil despite your obviously provocational language, and just ask, have I done something to offend you? Is there some reason you need to insult me to state your position?

 

Biting my tongue...

 

 

In a market that has seen dramatic reductions in prices, "staying the same" is tantamount to "increasing" because the difference in price between a reasonable alternative and a Mac is growing. Mac prices may be staying the same, but the price of alternatives is falling.

 
 

 

You just finished saying you don't consider expert reporting credible, now you're asking me to provide it. Why? So you can say you don't believe it?

 

The "proof" is self-evident. A fairly decent starter machine can be had from HP for about $500 (CAD). You can't get a Mac for under a grand (again, CAD). If you want a 15" screen the cost of entry doubles.

 

I'm not saying the $500 HP is equivalent to an 11" Air, because obviously it's not. The point I'm making is that I don't believe MOST people will pay twice as much to get the advantages of the Air. They'll settle for the $500 machine because it's good enough, the same way they buy Hondas instead of Mercedes. And despite all the pontificating to the contrary here, that $500 HP *WILL* be just fine for the vast majority of buyers.

 

There's a huge segment of the market Apple has chosen to ignore, and I think it's a mistake. You can think whatever you want.

 
 

 

My wife's new machine was $2000 because that's the least expensive 15" machine Apple makes! A comparable HP was half that (same RAM/CPU/drive/screen size, better res). For that same $1000 we could also get an Air, but only with an 11" screen. Unless she decides she's happy with a smaller screen (never gonna happen) our choices are to buy something other than Apple or pay TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS BASE PRICE! At that price we're probably not going to be getting a new machine every time a cool new feature comes along.

 

Once you get into the top-teir machines like mine the differences are not as great. Mine was about $3500 with all the BTO options (~$4000 with AppleCare and taxes). At that time Asus had a machine with slightly better screen, drive, RAM, ports and CPU for about $500 less. You have to admit, that's a pretty healthy premium for the "Apple experience." Today it's harder to compare because there are so few competitors for a high-end MBP, so I guess Apple can essentially charge whatever they want.

 

 

 

I hope you're right!

 
 

 

…and with that final insult, I've had enough.

 

Nothing I've said is insulting anyone. I'm sorry that pissing and moaning is considered provocative to you. If I wanted to be insulting I could have said you're a fuc$*&^ idiot for thinking this, but I didn't, did I? Lets not be children here. We're all adults. 
 
No, the article is SPECULATING that Apple sales have slid as shown in the quote from the article below. There's no hard evidence of Apple's sales in the US. 
Quote: AppleInsider Article
 According to IDC's preliminary results for the most recent June quarter

 

I'd like to see some kind of proof that people think Macs are expensive. You have yet to provide any evidence supporting this. Just because you keep saying it, doesn't make it true. 

 

Quote:
 

The "proof" is self-evident. A fairly decent starter machine can be had from HP for about $500 (CAD). You can't get a Mac for under a grand (again, CAD). If you want a 15" screen the cost of entry doubles.

 

I'm not saying the $500 HP is equivalent to an 11" Air, because obviously it's not.

 

So first you say that proof is self-evident, but then after that you say its not equivalent. You just invalidated your own argument haha. Nothing more to say here. 


Edited by macxpress - 7/10/14 at 9:52am

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #82 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist View Post

Apple also hasn't been advertising the Mac much in the last couple of years. The Mac vs. PC ads, which were incredibly effective, have been gone for a few years. With those hundreds of billions, you'd think Apple could spare some change for a decent Mac campaign.

 

I'd like to see more Apple ads...they could have gone after Microsoft again after the Windows 8 fiasco, but they opted to focus on iOS devices instead. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post
 

Agreed.  We need some metric for measuring how many people are using macs.  I have a 3 year old MBA and a 6 year old Mac Pro and I keep thinking about upgrading but they work just fine.  And when I do upgrade, they will be passed on to others in the family, not thrown away.  Apple's true market share could be several times the number of sales.

 

This was one of the points I was getting at. When you buy a Mac it will last a very long time. You can still use a 2007 Mac with OS X 10.10 Yosemite. Many times, all you have to do is upgrade the RAM and if you feel frisky, just slap an SSD in place of the hard drive and its like a whole new Mac. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by KennMSr View Post

Come on Mickey, shipments are NOT sales, these marketing data reporting companies bend the data to their clients benefit. Remember the ZUNE, those same firms touted how it was outshipping the iPod and was going to take over the mobile media player market, only to find out it is exactly what they said, shipments out stripped those of the iPod only to languish on the shelves of retailers, to be later blown out or returned to MS. Internet use data is a better metric of market share. Of course that could be skewed as well, since I use my iPhone and iPad to browse the internet 95% of the time rather than my MBA or iMac.
 
Exactly!

Edited by macxpress - 7/10/14 at 9:52am

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #83 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Similar, but I doubt it's the same as they started using in Late-2009 as they have worked to make the panels thinner and machines more power efficient. In 2008 they weren't using IPS or LED backlit panels, and had a lower PPI. Even if we look at the the 27" ACD, which looks to be the same panel, that didn't come out until 2010.

Since 2008 isn't even in the running for being the exact same display here is Late-2009 from iFixit compared to Late-2012, only 3 years. Does the new panel look thinner to you?

 

I recall panels similar to what is used in the 27" thunderbolt display starting to trickle out in late 2009, but I do mean the tail end of it. I also disagree with branding technology that way like it all makes drastic leaps year over year. That was my earlier point. It does look thinner though. So far in terms of panel SKU ifixit and tftcentral suggest it's the same one as they have used since the inception of 27" models, but the backlights and screen treatments have obviously been updated. People assume newer is better far too often. The best display I've seen to date is still the CG211, but they don't make those anymore.

post #84 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

Considering Apple doesn't even make the Xserve, I not familiar with really any schools using Xserves unless they've previously had it. Most use Mac mini servers (such as mine). There really isn't much you can do in a school that severely taxes a Core i7 processor. Even now, unless you have the last gen Xserve, Server isn't even supported. 

That's what I said... Apple no longer makes the Xserve, despite it actually outperforming the 2013 Mac Pro. Using a Mac mini as a server in a high traffic environment is just laughable. It's simply too slow. Since you ignored most of my argument seemingly because you don't really know what you're talking about, how do you explain away the lack of industry-standard PCI-e Fibre cards to connect RAIDs?

Our Macs were Media Studies machines, with simultaneous iMovie edits on 40 or more Macs at the same time. afpd was often using most of the 8 CPU cores. A Mac Mini would melt under those circumstances.
Quote:
Comparing Dells to Apple's offerings is like comparing apples to oranges. No, its not the same. Try again! If you don't like Apple's offerings, then go somewhere's else and buy your cheaper, better Dell. You get what you pay for. 

Since it's the same CPU, GPU, memory and HDD, there is a lot that's the same. Obviously the Mac is better quality, but since its specs are half that of the Dell, is double the price really justified? Especially since the Dell is repairable whereas the Mac isn't. If the Dell packs up in two years and the Mac lasts four, it's still better value to get the Dell, since the new one would be better specced than the Mac.

It's a lot easier to compare Macs to PCs since the Intel switch, since before it was a different CPU architecture which may well have been more expensive (or not) to make.
Quote:
Nobody cares about taking their computer apart. They just want to take it out of the box and use it. Maybe you do, but you can 5 or even 50 other people you can think of isn't the majority of the computing world. 

Really. Why then can you go to a local store and pick up extra memory, graphics cards, hard disks and DVD drives? If it was such an elitist activity, surely these parts wouldn't be available at many local stores?

You really need to get your head out of the sand and know when you're wrong/beaten. Blindly arguing for Apple doesn't make you seem intelligent or well informed; just completely ignorant.
post #85 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elijahg View Post


That's what I said... Apple no longer makes the Xserve, despite it actually outperforming the 2013 Mac Pro. 

 

 

Citation needed...I would love to see how this is occurring!

 

Quote:
 Really. Why then can you go to a local store and pick up extra memory, graphics cards, hard disks and DVD drives? If it was such an elitist activity, surely these parts wouldn't be available at many local stores?

You really need to get your head out of the sand and know when you're wrong/beaten. Blindly arguing for Apple doesn't make you seem intelligent or well informed; just completely ignorant.

 

There are stores that still sell floppy discs too, that doesn't its main stream. I bet your mom or sister couldn't care less about taking the PC or Mac apart to upgrade it. You're just thinking about how Apple can cater itself to your work environment. That doesn't mean everyone else wants this. Just because you want it, doesn't mean everyone else does. 

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #86 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

Citation needed...I would love to see how this is occurring!
Because Xserves had enough room to get rid of heat and have more than one CPU. Johnny's obsessive smallness designs win out over power and function once again.

http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks

Click on 32-bit multi-core.
Quote:
There are stores that still sell floppy discs too, that doesn't its main stream. I bet your mom or sister couldn't care less about taking the PC or Mac apart to upgrade it. You're just thinking about how Apple can cater itself to your work environment. That doesn't mean everyone else wants this. Just because you want it, doesn't mean everyone else does. 

No it's not mainstream, but like people that fix their own cars; it's pretty common. Just because you don't know how to yourself, doesn't mean barely anyone does.

Surely Apple should be trying to cater to the needs of their customers? That's usually how businesses are run. I don't know any pro user that asked for a smaller Mac Pro, especially with the compromises Apple made. But of course not everyone needs it. Just like how not everyone will pay extortionate prices for a Mac when a PC is half the price, and costs half as much to fix.
Edited by Elijahg - 7/10/14 at 1:00pm
post #87 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elijahg View Post


No it's not mainstream, but like people that fix their own cars; it's pretty common. Just because you don't know how to yourself, doesn't mean barely anyone does.

Surely Apple should be trying to cater to the needs of their customers? That's usually how businesses are run. I don't know any pro user that asked for a smaller Mac Pro, especially with the compromises Apple made. But of course not everyone needs it. Just like how not everyone will pay extortionate prices for a Mac when a PC is half the price, and costs half as much to fix.

 

32-bit? Seriously? LOL!!!!

 

Anyways, if you look at the score, the Mac Pro blows it away, even in 32-bit multicore. Longer bars are better son. Regardless, who cares about 32-bit performance when everything you want to do is 64-bit? 

 

Apple can't cater to everyone and it knows more than you do, what its customers want. Just because it doesn't doing what you and/or your work place wants, doesn't mean they're not doing what customers want. I just love how just because you want something you think everyone wants to it too. 

 

How do you know that Pro customers didn't ask for something different? What makes you think this? Because its something you didn't want? 

 

Go buy a PC then if thats what you want and stop bitching about what Apple isn't doing for you. The world doesn't revolve about you. 

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #88 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

32-bit? Seriously? LOL!!!!

You really should stop posting. You're making yourself look very foolish indeed. If you had the slightest clue, you'd realise that 64-bit processing adds little to the CPU speed, the Geekbench scores improve by a few percent on the 64-bit tab. So LOL!!!! back to you.
Quote:
Anyways, if you look at the score, the Mac Pro blows it away, even in 32-bit multicore. Longer bars are better son. Regardless, who cares about 32-bit performance when everything you want to do is 64-bit? 

It hardly "blows it away". The very best Mac Pro is scored at twice the Xserve, which for a three year gap is pretty poor.

The lesser specced Mac Pros are slower than the Xserves. Look at non-Mac computers on that list and you'll find many that are 10 times the speed of the Mac Pro.
Quote:
Apple can't cater to everyone and it knows more than you do, what its customers want. Just because it doesn't doing what you and/or your work place wants, doesn't mean they're not doing what customers want. I just love how just because you want something you think everyone wants to it too. 

How do you know that Pro customers didn't ask for something different? What makes you think this? Because its something you didn't want? 

Go buy a PC then if thats what you want and stop bitching about what Apple isn't doing for you. The world doesn't revolve about you. 

Apple is continually reducing the number of people it caters for simply by removing features from their Macs. The software is great, the hardware specs: not so much.

I know pro customers didn't ask for something different because on here, on Apple's forums, on Macrumors people have been slating the new Mac Pro and pining over the old one. People are also switching away in droves from Mac Pros to Hackintoshes of all things, and to Windows. With that and Apple gradually ditching its Pro software, there're a dwindling number of reasons to justify buying an overpriced Mac Pro versus a PC. Despite your apparent knowledge to the contrary, it seems the market agrees with me, and that's why Mac sales are declining.

You say you "love" how I think everyone should want the same as me, it seems more like you're rather worried Apple won't keep catering to your narrow minded view so you're rather desperate to ensure they don't change how they operate. Increasing the options to upgrade a computer doesn't restrict who can buy it, but decreasing them certainly does.

This argument is obviously rather pointless, as you ignore the points I make and just keep beating on about the same thing. It seems by how you type, your age is somewhat less than the majority and therefore I'm the second one who's leaving you with your own rather inward-looking views.
post #89 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post
 

So first you say that proof is self-evident, but then after that you say its not equivalent. You just invalidated your own argument haha. Nothing more to say here. 

 

Really? REALLY?! THAT'S what you got from what I spent all that time explaining? Nothing about fitness for purpose or unserved markets? Wow.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post
 

Nothing more to say here. 

 

Yeah, that's probably best.

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #90 of 120

Today I landed in (yet another) real-world example of how Apple's single-minded approach to design and product offerings, combined with luxury-product pricing, leaves me in a quandary.

 

My daughter's hand-me-down 2007 MacBook Pro is on its last legs. The keyboard is dead, the screen is failing and for unknown reasons it's getting slower and sloowwwer and soooowwwwwerrr over time. It's her birthday so I'd like to replace it, but Apple doesn't make a computer I can afford to give her. An Air at a thousand bucks has inadequate storage. By the time you get a screen big enough for general purpose use and enough storage that you can actually keep some content on it, the price is into Pro territory.

 

They still have the old 13" MBP for $1200, but I was a little surprised by what I get for that price, so I popped over the BestBuy.ca. I narrowed the search to 4GB RAM, 500GB hard drive and Intel i7. What I got back was a bunch of 15" machines from Dell, HP and Asus ranging in price from around $500 to $850. They're the kind of thing you'd expect -- integrated graphics, no AC wireless, nothing particularly remarkable about them unless you like touchscreen which several of them offer -- pretty generic stuff. The point is, so is the 13" Mac. There's nothing particularly remarkable about IT either. It's aluminum rather than plastic and it runs OSX instead of Windows, so those are advantages, but it has a smaller screen which is a DISadvantage. For that I pay twice as much?

 

Then I remembered that this is the post PC era. Maybe I should get her an iPad instead. There I pay $800 for a tiny screen and only 128GB of storage. Hm.

 

Last week I gave her a USB thumb drive with a couple hundred tracks from various contributors. If she had an iPad instead of a laptop, how would we do that? Hm.

 

She uses her computer to manage the pictures and songs on her phone. If she had an iPad, how would she do that? Hm.

 

She's not a professional photographer, but she does like to bring stuff into Elements and create composite works. How would she cut out individual items in a photo using an iPad? There's no mouse or stylus so how does one do detailed work? Hm.

 

I can't think of a more generic, typical example of an "average" user than my daughter, and it doesn't look like an iPad is set to replace a computer for her yet. Supplement, sure. Replace, uh uh.

 

Stuff like THAT is why I say Apple computers are too expensive. That doesn't mean I don't WANT Apple computers -- I do, otherwise there would be no issue, I'd just buy her an Asus -- but holy HELL they make it hard to afford. It's disappointing to realize that the cost of supplying a very average user with unremarkable needs an Apple product costs so much more than perfectly reasonable alternatives. The Apple offerings that are affordable are so compromised as to make them undesirable (IMHO). Who wants a tiny little 11" screen for their primary computer? Again, as a supplemental machine for specific purposes, sure, but for everyday use? And 128GB of storage? Do people not watch movies or listen to music or take photos?

 

I just don't get it. For what it cost to set up my daughter, my wife, and me with new Macs, I could buy a new car.

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #91 of 120
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post
Hm.

 

Because it’s a different product for a different use case.

 
 ...how would we do that?


You wouldn’t, because that’s not legal anyway.

 
 She uses her computer to manage the pictures and songs on her phone. If she had an iPad, how would she do that?

 

iCloud. Don’t be obtuse.

 
She's not a professional photographer, but she does like to bring stuff into Elements and create composite works. How would she cut out individual items in a photo using an iPad?

 

Apps. Don’t be obtuse.

 

For what it cost to set up my daughter, my wife, and me with new Macs, I could buy a new car.

 

Is a K-car really a car? :lol: 

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #92 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 
Because it’s a different product for a different use case.

 

But that was my point: I don't think you could find a more generic example of a computer user than her. If the iPad doesn't fit HER use case, what use case DOES it fit?

 

I'm not trying to be a smart-ass, I'm serious.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 
You wouldn’t, because that’s not legal anyway.

 

Whoops, be careful what you assume. This was perfectly legal. We are the copyright holders.

 

Now that we have that out of the way, how DOES one share files with an iPad user?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

iCloud. Don’t be obtuse.

 

I haven't been able to find any information on how one uses an iPad and iCloud to manage music and photos on a Galaxy phone. If you have any advice, I'm all ears (eyes?).

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 
She's not a professional photographer, but she does like to bring stuff into Elements and create composite works. How would she cut out individual items in a photo using an iPad?

 

Apps. Don’t be obtuse.

 

Don't be a dink. WHAT apps? How? Adobe has apps for iPad, but try using one to cut out a cute little kitty in one photo and paste it into another. Not a particularly specialized or unusual activity, but one that's clearly better and more easily accomplished on a computer than an iPad, yes?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

For what it cost to set up my daughter, my wife, and me with new Macs, I could buy a new car.

 

Is a K-car really a car? :lol:

 

 

I've owned TWO, yes two, 1982 Chrysler LeBarons in my life. It was marketed as a luxury car but it was really just a Plymouth Reliant with some padded vinyl on the roof and nicer seats. We called the first one "The Couch." When it died and I got another, almost identical one, we took our inspiration from Apple and called it… "The Couch."

 

EDIT: P.S. Love your new sig!

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #93 of 120
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post

But that was my point: I don't think you could find a more generic example of a computer user than her. If the iPad doesn't fit HER use case, what use case DOES it fit?

 

Different from a mouse/keyboard combo; sorry for the ambiguity.

 
We are the copyright holders.

 

Sorry, you don’t see that very often. :lol:

 
Now that we have that out of the way, how DOES one share files with an iPad user?

 

E-mail, iMessage, downloading from the Internet, AirDrop with other iDevices, AirDrop with Macs come iOS 8…

 
on a Galaxy phone.
 

 

Okay, that’s like saying “I need you to build me a skyscraper here” and then telling the person after the fact that there’s still a mountain standing there. :p

 
WHAT apps? How? Adobe has apps for iPad, but try using one to cut out a cute little kitty in one photo and paste it into another. Not a particularly specialized or unusual activity, but one that's clearly better and more easily accomplished on a computer than an iPad, yes?

 

I dunno. I can’t imagine that there isn’t ONE app for iOS with an alpha channel. That’s a simple thing.

 
EDIT: P.S. Love your new sig!

 

Relic’s pretty great.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #94 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

I dunno. I can’t imagine that there isn’t ONE app for iOS with an alpha channel. That’s a simple thing.

 

I'm sure you're right. The challenge lies in the user interface. One can make very precise selections with a mouse or stylus, but a fingertip is just too blunt an instrument for that kind of activity.

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #95 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Is this corporate purchases beginning to pick up? I struggle to think why people would by a Windows machine for personal use in this day and age. Granted, I am biased and live in an Apple dominated computer world. I know very few people that use PC's. It used to be very different.

When Apple brings out its IOS driven clamshell Air, life will change forever, once again. Believe it.

I know only one person with MBP... and he lives in South Africa. Granted, I'm in New Zealand (so this might be regional trend) and most my friends are also gamers, so Windows machine is no brainer... but I know more than enough people whose gaming starts and ends with FB games, who are also on Windows machines. I guess this is just not Mac part of the world.

Odd trend also - among casuals (non-gamers) I know, appetite for touch-enabled laptops seems to be going wild. Personally I don't see importance of touch screen in machine with physical keyboard and touchpad, but I might be in minority here.
post #96 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post
 
Odd trend also - among casuals (non-gamers) I know, appetite for touch-enabled laptops seems to be going wild. Personally I don't see importance of touch screen in machine with physical keyboard and touchpad, but I might be in minority here.

 

A common objection to it is the "Gorilla arm" meme, the theme being that holding your hand up to the screen for any length of time will be uncomfortable. I think people who make that argument forget that the touchscreen isn't INSTEAD OF the mouse and keyboard, it's IN ADDITION TO them. It gives the user the choice of interacting in whichever way is most comfortable for a given task.

 

It's my experience that just by leaning the screen back a little further and sitting a hair closer, it's quite comfortable pinching and swiping and pressing on the screen itself. Quite similar to holding an iPad. Others' mileage may vary.

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #97 of 120
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post

the touchscreen isnt INSTEAD OF the mouse and keyboard, it's IN ADDITION TO them. 

 

Which is why it is failing across the board.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #98 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by BestKeptSecret View Post

As for people who feel Macs are expensive - well, there is an old saying - if you ask for the price of a Rolls Royce, you cannot afford it.

That's the old saying. Since RR was sold to Volkswagen and then to BMW (who were already making engines and other parts for RR), it really doesn't have the same appeal as it used to; today it is more brand and specific design than unique quality. If I'd be asking for RR price, it would be because I want to see what can Merc, Bentley, BMW... offer me for that price; and they could probably offer more.
post #99 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post

the touchscreen isnt INSTEAD OF the mouse and keyboard, it's IN ADDITION TO them. 

 

Which is why it is failing across the board.

 

Is it? That little foray I took into Best Buy showed a lot more machines with touch than the last time I looked. Maybe even more with than without, though I can't say that for sure since I didn't actually count. Obviously it could just be that if one brand adds it, every other manufacturer defensively adds it to their own products, but it could also be that people like it and want it and the increase in product availability is in response to demand.

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #100 of 120
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post

That little foray I took into Best Buy showed a lot more machines with touch than the last time I looked. 

 

Sure did. That little foray I took into Best Buy in 2007 showed a lot more netbooks than the last time I looked, too.

 
Obviously it could just be that if one brand adds it, every other manufacturer defensively adds it to their own products

 

They know where technology is going and what Apple will be doing by 2020, but they think they can get there smoothly without having any platform in between to ease the transition. That’s what you get when you’re not actively doing anything, instead waiting to see what the actual industry innovator does first.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #101 of 120

GNU/Linux systems are getting so easy to use that Dell, Lenovo, Acer, ASUS, and maybe even HP will start promoting Ubuntu as a full function OS. Right now Ubuntu has just as many great features and even more software than are available for OS X. It might not be the well known software but it functions just fine. When I owned a Windoz machine I used Open Office for my word processor not Microsux Office. Any of you who use Ubuntu will have seen that Yosemite has borrowed many features that were in Ubuntu for years.

 

When this happens price will definitely factor into buying decisions even more than now. GNU/Linux OSs are doing as much and more than OS X is now. With manufactures behind something like Ubuntu the quality of the experience will be much better than it is now as a free download without hardware tweaks.

 

Chromebooks are coming on strong. Ubuntu really won't be necessary if the speed of online apps and product venders grows. With high speed internet spreading, it is possible for people to use online apps that work in browsers to do all sorts of office related work. Owning super fast desktop machines won't even be necessary in a few years. Televisions will be connected to the web and all people will need is a way to interface with them using wireless keyboards and track pads. When that happens OS X, Windoz, and even GNU/Linux OSs will be obsolete for the average person. Businesses will be the last to upgrade because they'll still have desktop monitors.

 

Chrome OS and perhaps iOS will be the way people connect to the world, though HP has a new OS in development with a new architecture they call The Machine. Who will really need a desktop machine or even a laptop as they are today when 4K TVs will be in every home with 100 Mbps download speeds available from satellites? Chromebooks are the future for clam shell devices. Thin clients are the future, even for Apple. So Apple needs to get off of their high overpriced horse if they want to continue to exist in the changing world of the internet.

post #102 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post
 

Who cares?

 

I do. Apple has been known to drop stuff that isn't profitable enough, i.e. even though it makes money, it doesn't make ENOUGH money. If the Mac continues to slide, it won't be long before Tim says "screw it" and focusses the company's attention on just being the preeminent mobile manufacturer. I don't wanna go back to using Windows.

 

I agree with those who suggest that price is a factor. I'm hanging onto an aging machine even though I'd kinda like stuff like USB3 and solid-state storage just because the cost of entry is so bloody high. I use the machine for content creation so the Air, with its little screen and comparatively anemic guts, isn't a good option. By the time I load up a new one with comparable guts I'm up over three grand (pushing four after AppleCare and tax).

 

Now let's say Apple put a little less Excellentium into each model. That would have two benefits for Apple. First, my aging machine would have failed by now, forcing me to buy a new one. Second, the price of a new one would not be so high that I would have waited this long and would already HAVE a new one (maybe even two by now).

 

I know it's not a popular opinion, but I honestly think Apple's pricing strategy WRT Macs is self-destructive. I can't prove it without convincing Apple to try my approach though, so I guess we'll never know.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post
 

Still, Apple makes 35% to 45% of all profits in the PC industry, depending on who you read.

Not bad for a single company with only 5 PC lines.

(Mac mini, iMac, Mac Pro, MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, in case anyone needed a refresher.)

 

Sources:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/192273/article.html

http://fortune.com/2013/04/16/pie-chart-of-the-day-apples-oversize-share-of-pc-profits/

http://www.infoworld.com/t/macbooks/pcs-decline-its-apple-thats-making-real-money-pcs-216573

 

That information is a year-and-a-half old (four years in the case of the first link). According to today's article that's no longer true. That's the point.

 

Wait for the ARM Mac; then you'll get your wish of a much cheaper Mac.

iPad a Dream.
Reply
iPad a Dream.
Reply
post #103 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

Count me as one of those people that have not bought a replacement iMac (mine's a late 2009) until I see the next refresh.

Lots of people are waiting on Apple to do a decent upgrade to all of its Mac products. here are a few things Apple has done that are worthless:

1. made the iMac thinner
2. made the iMac next to impossible to upgrade.
3. ignored the Mini and the fantastic potential the latest chips could have on that platform.
4. updated the AIR and didn't bother to update the SSD to higher capacity devices at each price point. This actually boggles the mind.
5. left the line up in limbo with some platforms supporting TB fully and others not.
6. ignored competing i86 hardware that would have been a good fit in the Mini.
7. ignored the display market.

 

All points wrong or irrelevant. You need an upgrade to wizard70.

iPad a Dream.
Reply
iPad a Dream.
Reply
post #104 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

What is it with people from the UK always complaining that the Mac is not PC enough? If you want to buy a PC, there are plenty of them out there. If you want to think different, there's the Mac.

 

We're a nation of dullards, sad to say.


Edited by Benjamin Frost - 7/12/14 at 2:01pm
iPad a Dream.
Reply
iPad a Dream.
Reply
post #105 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyB89 View Post
 

I think it boils down to price. Personally I've seen little growth in Apple. I used to be wowed by their new product announcements and they used to have the best overall designs, even though they were expensive.

 

Now, PC manufacturers have caught up in design, especially in the ultrabook category and win on design and features. I like Mac OS and Apple hardware (currently own a 2011 iMac 27") but Apple is just falling behind. I just bought a mid-tier Lenovo U430 Touch and I love using Win 8.1 and the touch screen is actually incredibly useful.

 

Case in point, the MacBook Air. Why on Earth would anyone buy a 13" MBA when the MBP is 150 more and has much better specs with little sacrifice in battery life? Why does the MBA not have a retina screen yet? Why does Apple continually keep shooting itself in the foot on features and what it packs into the box?

 

The iMac line, I like. Most of Apple's desktops are pretty bang on. However their notebook lines are suffering from stiff PC competition that offers amazing design, better specs and cheaper prices. Heck my U430 is built as sturdy as a MBP for half the cost.

 

I would never use a PC simply because it has better specs.

If "specs per dollar" were all that you care about, we have nothing in common.

 

But to address your question, I'm Mac user because I want to run Mac OS X and be part of the Apple ecosystem. I made the decision to convert fully in 2006. "Converting" meant making the choice to stop using Windows and Microsoft Office. Once I made the decision to run OS X, it doesn't matter how "specy" a U430 or any PC is. I like dealing with one company who is responsible for the hardware and operating system, and who offers genius bars in every Apple Store, for support and warranty needs.

 

Your inability to understand, or your unwillingness to accept my priorities does not in any way invalidate my choice as irrational or stupid. They only seem that way because your priorities are different.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #106 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post
 

We're a nation of dullards, sad to say.

 

Windows seems to have many vocal fans in the UK.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #107 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

I would never use a PC simply because it has better specs.
If "specs per dollar" were all that you care about, we have nothing in common.

But to address your question, I'm Mac user because I want to run Mac OS X and be part of the Apple ecosystem. I made the decision to convert fully in 2006. "Converting" meant making the choice to stop using Windows and Microsoft Office. Once I made the decision to run OS X, it doesn't matter how "specy" a U430 or any PC is. I like dealing with one company who is responsible for the hardware and operating system, and who offers genius bars in every Apple Store, for support and warranty needs.

Your inability to understand, or your unwillingness to accept my priorities does not in any way invalidate my choice as irrational or stupid. They only seem that way because your priorities are different.

Where on earth do you get off assuming I don't understand your priorities? I never once questioned them. I'm speaking of my experience and my opinion on Apple's pricing strategy. I never challenged yours or anyone else's reasoning for why they want to use a Mac.
post #108 of 120
Besides that, I use to be all Apple ecosystem. Then Apple stopped innovating, their products became boring and I choose to buy products that meet my needs and have better value.
post #109 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

 
We're a nation of dullards, sad to say.

Windows seems to have many vocal fans in the UK.

Cause and effect in action.
iPad a Dream.
Reply
iPad a Dream.
Reply
post #110 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post
 

 

32-bit? Seriously? LOL!!!!

 

Anyways, if you look at the score, the Mac Pro blows it away, even in 32-bit multicore. Longer bars are better son. Regardless, who cares about 32-bit performance when everything you want to do is 64-bit? 

 

In the case of X86 processors and their 64 bit implementation, it shouldn't change the difference between one and another by much. The 64 bit version requires a paid license. Because of that the results are averaged over fewer machines. Some people quote the 32 bit benchmarks for that reason. There was no reason to be rude.

post #111 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
 

In the case of X86 processors and their 64 bit implementation, it shouldn't change the difference between one and another by much. The 64 bit version requires a paid license. Because of that the results are averaged over fewer machines. Some people quote the 32 bit benchmarks for that reason. There was no reason to be rude.

 

Regardless, the 64 bit tests killed which if you're using a Mac Pro, it certainly does matter. If it didn't then there wouldn't have been the push to 64-bit. And don't BS me and say it was only for the 4GB barrier either. We should all know better.  I wasn't rude....if you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. 

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #112 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post
 

 

Regardless, the 64 bit tests killed which if you're using a Mac Pro, it certainly does matter. If it didn't then there wouldn't have been the push to 64-bit. And don't BS me and say it was only for the 4GB barrier either. We should all know better.  I wasn't rude....if you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. 


The spread in benchmarks is fairly similar regardless of whether you look at 32 or 64 bit, as long as you look at multi-core benchmarks. Anyway I credit you for your linguistic progress from teenage colloquialisms to 70s cliches.

post #113 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyB89 View Post

Besides that, I use to be all Apple ecosystem. Then Apple stopped innovating, their products became boring and I choose to buy products that meet my needs and have better value.

You left the sarcasm tag off.

Tell me what other company is innovating?
post #114 of 120
Quote:
Quoted by: Elijahg 

Amazingly, the early 2009 Xserve is benchmarked faster than the new trashcan Mac Pro in some cases.

 

Quote:
Quoted by: Elijahg
 
It hardly "blows it away". The very best Mac Pro is scored at twice the Xserve, which for a three year gap is pretty poor.

 

So first you say its not faster, but then you say it is faster but ONLY twice as fast...so which is it? You need to get your story straight before you post. Considering processors haven't really gotten much powerful over the years (just more efficient) its rather impressive. 

 

I don't care if the last gen Xserve had 8 cores (2xquad CPUs) and the new Mac Pro has 12 cores with 1 CPU. Considering they can fit a 12 core processor in a small design is very impressive along with dual workstation GPU's. If its slower then its not Apple's fault your software sucks and totally relies on the CPU to do the work. Get better software. 

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #115 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyB89 View Post

Besides that, I use to be all Apple ecosystem. Then Apple stopped innovating, their products became boring and I choose to buy products that meet my needs and have better value.

 

What company is putting out better products than Apple at the moment?

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #116 of 120
Originally Posted by AndyB89 View Post
Then Apple stopped innovating...


Five posts? Better quit while you’re behind. Way behind. Leave now, and never come back. *gollum gollum*

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #117 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post
 

 Who wants a tiny little 11" screen for their primary computer?

I do. Portability.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #118 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyB89 View Post

Besides that, I use to be all Apple ecosystem. Then Apple stopped innovating, their products became boring and I choose to buy products that meet my needs and have better value.

Sounds likely.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #119 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post


That's the old saying. Since RR was sold to Volkswagen and then to BMW (who were already making engines and other parts for RR), it really doesn't have the same appeal as it used to; today it is more brand and specific design than unique quality. If I'd be asking for RR price, it would be because I want to see what can Merc, Bentley, BMW... offer me for that price; and they could probably offer more.

100% true.

I recently had a look at a maxed out Mercedes for my needs, an energy-efficient berline, not a sports model. Went upwards of €160k.

That's more than a Lamborghini Huràcan, and the high end Mercedes models go into out-this-world-pricing territory.

As for RR themselves, I've been a great fan of the brand's design through the 70 to early 90, but they now look like generic fat berlines. Bentleys look far more luxurious. Also, RR's emphasis had been on bespoke for decades, and now bespoke is a small part of their website. Hell, it's not even on the main page... What on the main page is "preowned". http://www.rolls-roycemotorcars.com

 

Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bentley, and RR, anyway, all belong to german groups. Why not buy the real thing, if you want german engineering?

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #120 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post


So first you say its not faster, but then you say it is faster but ONLY twice as fast...so which is it? You need to get your story straight before you post. Considering processors haven't really gotten much powerful over the years (just more efficient) its rather impressive. 

I don't care if the last gen Xserve had 8 cores (2xquad CPUs) and the new Mac Pro has 12 cores with 1 CPU. Considering they can fit a 12 core processor in a small design is very impressive along with dual workstation GPU's. If its slower then its not Apple's fault your software sucks and totally relies on the CPU to do the work. Get better software. 

I said the 2009 Xserve is faster than the base 2013 Mac Pro, the very best 2013 Mac Pro is only twice as fast as the 2009 Xserve. I can't make it much clearer than that.

If Apple put two 12 core CPUs in the Mac Pro as they could with the old design (or the Xserve design) the speed increase would be many times faster than the 2009 Xserve as opposed to just twice as fast. Doubling the speed in 6 years isn't much of an improvement in the grand scheme of things. Read up on Moores Law.

Most applications are CPU bound. Very few other than video editing programs use the GPU, as GPUs are highly parallel and not suited to most tasks.

Yes it's impressive that Intel, not Apple, have been able to fit 12 cores onto one CPU. It's impressive that Apple can cool a CPU in a fairly small space, though that's not what Pros were asking for. They were asking for a more powerful desktop, size was far from their primary concern.

It does seem you're ignoring most points and burying your head in the sand when anyone says something you can't counter.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Mac sales continue to slide in Q2 as overall PC market rebounds