or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple needs G5 says CEO of Europe's Largest Mac dealer
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple needs G5 says CEO of Europe's Largest Mac dealer - Page 4

post #121 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by EmAn:
<strong>

Why would he buy one? He's stated before that he hates Dells and he sells PCs and Macs so why would he get a Dell?</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm sorry I was attempting to make a point. And it did not come off very well.

[quote] Posted by: Stagflation Steve
<strong>
I sell Apple and Compaq (well HP), I hate Dell as much as anyone else here does, they are just a good benchmark</strong><hr></blockquote>

Again sorry not pointing fingers. My mistake.

I was attempting to make the point that an Apple is an Apple and a Dell is a Dell. In other words, we buy a Mac because it is a Mac, the sum of the parts, not the peices. We can go through the parts forever and miss the fact that they make a whole unit. Think of it like selling cars, if I'm allowed to breakdown a car into its' parts, price being a part as well, then you could buy a car that had the best parts for the dollar, usually made by Toyota or Honda. Now there are lots of dollars involved with these transactions, but people still buy many different kinds of cars for many different reasons. I believe that Apple is on the right track with the Apple stores, go to the person that lives in an area that is known for money and attempt to sell to them. If Apple goes after the low end, and by this I mean cheap, then Apple may price themselves right into the poor house. Yes you do have a point on price, but Apple still continues to sell computers, and this has always been the case, always. Apples' have been priced higher, my opinion is that I'm buying quality, and style, and ease of use, and many other things. I'm not buying a CPU when I'm buying an iMac I'm buying a package, a Mac, and if Apple wants to throw in a CPU, I say thanks, cheers. Really if I was to go and buy an iMac I would just buy it and trust that it will do what it was advertised to do.
Now a ProDeskTop is something else and we see the sales suffering and Apple is apparently attempting to do something about it. My roommate is a huge Dell fan and Compaq fan as well. I'm looking at 2 Dells and a Compaq and another Compaq on the shelf. Interesting story, guess who has the only working CD writer?? I have to smile when I think that he loves those machines and still is working on them about twice a year. I have a PowerBook and a Cube. When I hear about slow clock speed and lack of features I wonder what it is being used for, 3D work? I'm a consumer I use my machine for recreational programming and web surfing. I'm getting into photography and making movies about naked swine [I'm sick]. And I know that buyers remorse will kick in and I will want a new machine and I'll go to do some cross fades of a couple pigs and the Cube will be right there, getting done what it needs to. The point here is that the reason I buy and continue to buy Macs is not that I'm a stylish geek, it is that I know that when I buy one it will serve me very well. Maybe the Mac is built to serve, not for me to service it. I know that I will have to pay for that and I continue to do so. I don't think that I'm that different in this respect, think of all of those BMW, Meracdies(spelling I know, phonics), Volvo drivers out there. I think those people just want a car that will serve them well. A last point: My Macs tend to serve me longer than other machines do. I think that I should stop rambling here, pick out some things if you wish to discuss further.

[ 01-01-2003: Message edited by: Brendon ] I'm attempting to make this more readable, which I should have done before clicking post.

[ 01-01-2003: Message edited by: Brendon ]</p>
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
post #122 of 156
Strangely I don't really think of my iMac as a computer. An Apple is an Apple. When PC folk ask me why I like apple my usual response is that I enjoy using them. I usually just say, "well you know they just work for me." And I think thats why we all use apples because they just tend to work the way they are expected to. They do what you think they will and they hold to what they are. I always tell PC users that it's just more fun opening an apple box up. I say, "You can just see that they actually thought out everything carefully ahead of time, as if they were proud of their name." An apple seems worth the money when you open it and put it on your desk. A PC looks like a machine that you had to buy not something that you wanted to buy.
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
post #123 of 156
ack, tp!

[ 01-02-2003: Message edited by: Aquatic ]</p>
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #124 of 156
[quote]Strangely I don't really think of my iMac as a computer. An Apple is an Apple. When PC folk ask me why I like apple my usual response is that I enjoy using them. I usually just say, "well you know they just work for me." And I think thats why we all use apples because they just tend to work the way they are expected to. They do what you think they will and they hold to what they are. I always tell PC users that it's just more fun opening an apple box up. I say, "You can just see that they actually thought out everything carefully ahead of time, as if they were proud of their name." An apple seems worth the money when you open it and put it on your desk. A PC looks like a machine that you had to buy not something that you wanted to buy. <hr></blockquote>

I've never seen anyone write so eloquently about Windows or a PC. When is the last time you heard someone wax poetic about their "box"? The main reason people use PCs it seems is because A) price (this does NOT make them better, in my opinion, more later *cough* child labor *cough*) B) compatibility (again not "better") and C) megahertz, which we don't even need to bother with.

A). You have to love good ol' Dell child labor. Seriously, who do you think builds your computer? Or anything you buy?

Plus, matsu apparently hasn't heard of the economies of scale. --maybe someone else pointed this out but I couldn't get past the first page...I skipped to Algol's little Mac poem

B) compatibility. Mac users are a creative and "different" lot so we don't go along with the herd mentality, for starters. We're independent, and also, we are more inquisitive/informed to know about things like samba, VPC, or M$ Remote Desktop Connection. Macs do a pretty good job being compatible if you are resourceful.

This thread turned into an Apple "apologist" thread from the looks of it. Until Apple gets bigger, the simplest way to explain their prices is the economy of scale. matsu! Plus, Macs being better and Apple as a company being better (in certain aspects.) For example Apple is a greener company than most PC companies.

I think with OS X market share will slowly go up to around 10%, then who knows, depending on M$ anti-trust trials. This will help make Macs cheaper, as well as new technology and management improvements at Apple. 2003 is going to be good.

Plus girls like my iBook. Dude...
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #125 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by Stagflation Steve:
<strong>

The problem remains, you are calculating an artificially low margin into the equation, the overall gross margin would be much greater were the sales of Apples highest margin products not so poor.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Their gross margin is higher than Dell's yes.

That leads into what I'm guessing is one of your reasons for hating Dell: They cut out distributors and retailers, so they need a significantly lower gross margin to net a given profit margin than Apple (or HPaq, or Gateway). Apple doesn't really have that option: Apple needs retail, since they're the alternative and so people need to try them out. Retail means distribution, and both distributors and retailers need to make money. Which means Apple has to factor their profits into the prices of the machines.

[quote]<strong>It doesn't cost Apple $700 more to make the 17" iMac than it does to make the 15" iMac, there is a much higher margin on the 17" iMac than there is in the 15" iMac</strong><hr></blockquote>

The computer industry is a lot like the automotive industry in that regard: The baseline model is sold not far above cost (to the dealer, not the manufacturer), and money is made on options whose profit (not gross) margins range from fat to mind-boggling. $300 for cruise control indeed. In this regard Dell is no different.

[quote]<strong>As for the question of lowering the price to $1549, I think if Apple were to get the 17" iMac above the psychological 1 Ghz high watermark I think that would be adaquate for that particular model, however Apple would have to make the same sacracife on the lower end LCD iMac to see double the sales.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I still think, given the razor-thin difference between 15" and 17" LCD component prices, that the 17" will take over the current price points and the 15", if it still exists, will drop to a new low pricewise. That should goose sales nicely, I'd think.

[quote]<strong>But that has to be dynamic, they can't leave the same model standing out in the wind all year long while PC's move ahead in performance and fall in price.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Absolutely. Given that they don't, generally, I can only imagine that they ran into an unforeseen difficulty enhancing the current model - TiBook revisions were slow in coming at first, too. And, of course, the eMac needs a significant overhaul even more, since it's suffering from the Apple 17" CRT Curse.

I'm expecting a significant update to both lines. Not just in ways the consumer would notice, but also in the plumbing. That's the only explanation I have for letting what really is their flagship model (from a branding point of view) stagnate for a year.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #126 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by jwdawso:
<strong>
1) Elasticity of price
Lowering a Mac price will sell more units, but how many? Stag - how much lower would the price have to go to sell more Mac's such that the total gross margin will be greater than the current total gross margin? I would expect that the more Mac's sold will drive down some component costs, but let's not grossly over-estimate this.

CTG = (C#MacSold * Price) - (C#MacSold * cost)
NTG = (N#MacSold * LowerPrice) - (N#MacSold * (cost - smallSavings)

CTG - Current Total Gross
NTG - New Total Gross
Total Gross - (price - component costs) * units sold

Stag - what would be your educated guess at solving the NTG equation? Is there a solution where NTG &gt; CTG? According to JLL's attempt previously, there is no solution for NTG &gt; CTG.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Ofcourse it can be solved, JLL just doesn't want to because it would completely destroy his argument,

For the sake of simplicity lets just say some mac costs $500 to make and Apple is trying to sell it for $1200.

And lets say Dell has a system that is better than the Apple system and they are selling it for $700, consumer psychology puts the Macintosh at a disadvantage because the PC is perceived to be the better value and Dell sells 10 computers.

Now lets say Apple only sells 2 computers and they take their $1400 margin and just sit back and watch Dell eat them alive.

Now, Apple likes their $700 margin on each machine, but that margin hurts sales as they are viewed as a poor value by the consumer and rightfully so.

Now some people fell Apple is in the same league as BMW and Versachi, I personally think that is a load of shit, but for the sake of argument lets say that is true.

If Apple were to lower their price to match Dell at $700 to earn the same gross margin of $1400 they would have to sell seven macs where before they had to sell two.

But factor in the snob tax and lets say the Mac is $800 instead of $700 they would only have to sell 6 Macs to get their $1400.

Obviously these are artificial numbers, but that doesn't matter because they are just an illustration.

CTG = (6) * ($800) - (6) * ($500)
NTG = (6) * ($800) - (6) * ($500) - Savings

Obviously calculating the exact savings is difficult however it has been said in manufacturing that each 50% increase in production costs 20% less than the last one.

If Apple were making only two computers and they increased their production to three computers, the oppertunity cost of each $500 cost computer would fall to $400 (remember this is JUST A MODEL, not an actual computer were talking about) and if production was increased to 6 computers the oppertunity cost would fall to $360. Eventually this reaches a point of null returns,

But for the sake of the model

NTG = (6) * ($800) - (6) * ($500) - ($140)

[quote]Originally posted by jwdawso:
<strong>2) Production costs.
Don't forget that Production costs can actually rise as more units are produced. This can happen when having to use less efficient manufacturers to produce needed components. For instance, more iMacs may require another source for flat panels, which might require new development engineering costs.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Production costs do rise with growth, but they don't rise in lock step with growth, if Apple builds a factory and builds a single iMac, it doesn't cost as much to make the second iMac.

As for flat-panels, Samsung and LG are the largest supliers in the world and Apple is probably their smallest major customer, I don't think they would have trouble dealing with additional demand from Apple.

[quote]Originally posted by jwdawso:
<strong>Let me add a couple of things -
1) Apple's costs are high due to various reasons. I'm sure some of the costs could be lowered through smart management. For instance, sell all Silicon Valley capital assets and move to Austin!</strong><hr></blockquote>

Apple owns most of their facilities in California, I don't think that is breaking the bank and in the current market, there aren't many people other than maybe homeless squatters who would want Infinite Loop.

[quote]Originally posted by jwdawso:
<strong>
2) Stag - I am really interested in your thoughts on price versus units sold. Also - what premium would people pay for a Mac such that sales would double/triple?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Remember, at the moment Apple sales are almost statistically irrelivent, so any increase in sales would look like an earthquake.

I think Apple could still demand and receive a premium on the iMac and G4 Powerbook as expensive toys, however as a flagship product the current iMac is the most impractical system imaginable.

I think Apple is in a very good position with the iBook, they seem unable to do any wrong there, but while the laptop market has been growing 10 years straight, it is still quite small compared to desktops, I think if Apple were to produce a basic desktop tower, something along the lines of the old 6500 series and priced it within 20% and got it above the psychological 1ghz barrier we would see alot of movement.

I think with a basic tower alone Apple could take 5% or more just selling to existing mac users what they have been screaming for since 1998.
Stagflation
stag·fla·tion
Sluggish performance growth coupled with a high or rising prices
Reply
Stagflation
stag·fla·tion
Sluggish performance growth coupled with a high or rising prices
Reply
post #127 of 156
"I think with a basic tower alone Apple could take 5% or more just selling to existing mac users what they have been screaming for since 1998."

Steve, I've been reading your excellent posts across the many threads.

I agree 100% with your theories on Apple.

Let's face it, Apple have always liked 'fat' profits. They put it before 'Marketshare/critical mass/and Mind share/.' In the end, their short termed greed cost they WAyyy more money in the long run as M$ and the IBM clones have proven.

They managed to price their way to their current world wide marketshare... Yeah. They're selling more Macs...but they're sliding as further than they climb as part of the whole cake. So, more Mac users in the world? Yes. BUT wayyyyy more PC users. I'd hardly call Apple's current line up, on a bang for buck basis, as competing. I'll exclude the iBook from that generalisation.

Deferred Gratification.

So, Apple chose the hard way.

I did read a Macworld story that Apple are buying more Taiwanese components to make their products more price sensitive. They'll have to as PCs enter 'toaster commodity' status.

I'm glad to hear Apple are seeing the light somewhat belatedly. They DON'T have to be cheaper or as cheap as x86 land. But 10-20% with the same specs would be okay.

But 50% more for last year's spec? Takin' the p*ss and Apple loyalists are footin' the bill. Without question, Apple is taking their loyal users for granted as .Mac and Jag' payments proved.

I'm intrigued by the greater investment Taiwainese tech' to bring prices down. I wonder...what will San Fran' and 2003 bring..?

Two things. Sell a 1 gig tower for £999 inc VAT. Lemon Bon Bon starts sweating. Drive prices down on low end iMac flat screen to £850 inc Vat, Lemon Bon Bon starts sweating. Sell an iCube for £499 sans Monitor. Lemon BOn BOn breaks down into a gibbering wreck and hands over his wallet to Gordon Harwoods Computers...

The most annoying thing about Apple is just how close they have always been. They aren't that far away now. We're talking a hundred quid or so. The economies of scale to drive down price.

Maybe the retail stores will help in this respect. Especially if they can open maybe a hundred stores in the USA and 50 world wide. I'd stick at that.

Lemon Bon Bon
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
post #128 of 156
Twice recently I have heard this from friends, well, from a friend and from a family member:

"I would love to use a Mac, hell I was always a Mac user from way back when . . .but I just got a very powerfull computer for less than a thousand dollars . . . I can't afford to be a Mac user anymore"

HEY APPLE ARE YOU PAYING ATTENTION!!!!!
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #129 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by pfflam:
<strong>

HEY APPLE ARE YOU PAYING ATTENTION!!!!! </strong><hr></blockquote>

They obviously don't care.
post #130 of 156
Well I'll keep buying Macs and so will everyone else here, even Matsu. Admit it
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #131 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by Stagflation Steve:
<strong>
Ofcourse it can be solved, JLL just doesn't want to because it would completely destroy his argument,</strong><hr></blockquote>

And yet you come up with a calculation containing made up models at made up prices.

140% gross margin

How about doing it all over again with REAL EXISTING PRODUCTS which was my point: Apple can't sell 80% more Macs by lowering their gross margin by $300 on EXISTING MODELS.

Using the 17" iMac and your competing Dell:

For the sake of simplicity lets just say some mac costs $1400 to make and Apple is trying to sell it for $2000.

And lets say Dell has a system that is better than the Apple system and they are selling it for $1200, consumer psychology puts the Macintosh at a disadvantage because the PC is perceived to be the better value and Dell sells 10 computers.

Now lets say Apple only sells 2 computers and they take their $1200 margin and just sit back and watch Dell eat them alive.

Now, Apple likes their $600 margin on each machine, but that margin hurts sales as they are viewed as a poor value by the consumer and rightfully so.

Now some people fell Apple is in the same league as BMW and Versachi, I personally think that is a load of shit, but for the sake of argument lets say that is true.

If Apple were to lower their price to match Dell at $1200 to earn the same gross margin of $1200 they would have to go to the bank and take a loan.

But factor in the snob tax and lets say the Mac is $1500 instead of $1200 they would 'only' have to sell 12 Macs to get their $1200.

600% increase in sales - Yay! Apple will have 30% of the market - a piece of cake!

[ 01-02-2003: Message edited by: JLL ]</p>
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #132 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by Aquatic:
<strong>Well I'll keep buying Macs and so will everyone else here, even Matsu. Admit it </strong><hr></blockquote>

Well Matsu doesn't even own a Mac...

post #133 of 156
Uhh okay, other than plagerizing me what is your point?
Stagflation
stag·fla·tion
Sluggish performance growth coupled with a high or rising prices
Reply
Stagflation
stag·fla·tion
Sluggish performance growth coupled with a high or rising prices
Reply
post #134 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by Stagflation Steve:
<strong>Uhh okay, other than plagerizing me what is your point?</strong><hr></blockquote>

That Apple in no way can four-six double their market share by lowering gross margins - I've only said it four times in this thread now.

[ 01-02-2003: Message edited by: JLL ]</p>
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #135 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by JLL:
<strong>

That Apple in no way can four-six double their market share by lowering gross margins - I've only said it four times in this thread now.

[ 01-02-2003: Message edited by: JLL ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

It's been more than adaquately explained why they can now it is your job to prove why they can't,

Thusfar outside shameless apple apologism you seem unable to provide an answer.

[ 01-02-2003: Message edited by: Stagflation Steve ]</p>
Stagflation
stag·fla·tion
Sluggish performance growth coupled with a high or rising prices
Reply
Stagflation
stag·fla·tion
Sluggish performance growth coupled with a high or rising prices
Reply
post #136 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by Stagflation Steve:
<strong>

It's been more than adaquately explained why they can't now it is your job to prove why they can't,

Thusfar outside shameless apple apologism you seem unable to provide an answer.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Get real!! Do you really expect Apple to be able to sell 5,872,000 a quarter of the existing models just by lowering their gross margins by $300 per model?
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #137 of 156
It made Dell the largest PC vendor in the world didn't it?

And $300 is just the average discount that would be required to make the LCD iMac competitive, the Power Mac G4 would need a much much much larger discount.

It doesn't address the need for a more practical desktop or tower system
Stagflation
stag·fla·tion
Sluggish performance growth coupled with a high or rising prices
Reply
Stagflation
stag·fla·tion
Sluggish performance growth coupled with a high or rising prices
Reply
post #138 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by Stagflation Steve:
<strong>It made Dell the largest PC vendor in the world didn't it?

And $300 is just the average discount that would be required to make the LCD iMac competitive, the Power Mac G4 would need a much much much larger discount.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You're focusing on price alone. There are other factors that customers look at when choosing a computer.


[quote]Originally posted by Stagflation Steve:
<strong>It doesn't address the need for a more practical desktop or tower system</strong><hr></blockquote>

I agree.
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #139 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by Stagflation Steve:
<strong>

It's been more than adaquately explained why they can now it is your job to prove why they can't,

Thusfar outside shameless apple apologism you seem unable to provide an answer.

[ 01-02-2003: Message edited by: Stagflation Steve ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Not picking but what is your point Steve?? I don't mean with this particular post but in general. Are you really going on and on about Apple selling computers that are much more expensive than the rest?? When has this not been the case?? If the computers are much more expensive and folks won't buy them then the Apple stores are a great way for them (Apple) to get this message. I think that what you getting at is that you do not agree with the way the executive team is leading Apple. If this is the case surely you have a better plan to effectively to make this argument. In other words you could be preaching to the choir. What I think that you are advocating is Apple should lower their margins to the point that they are making around 10% not 30%, and that way they could sell more computers and the laws of market size will take over and then they will make more money, it will just be spread out over a much bigger market. Is that right? If that is the case then perhaps some time in the future, but not right now. When Apple starts to see significant revenue from all that software they purchased and the stuff they already had, and they have a good desktop offering, is the only time they should consider lowering prices. While your argument is compelling, it may as well be short sighted, and narrow in focus. Currently I say ride out the storm, don't change what isn't screaming to be changed. Continue to improve the software portfolio, and continue to improve the overall package (iApps and devices), which is what they are doing, while they wait for the desktop situation to improve.
Have you ever thought about pinning a letter to the Apple board, and or the executive team?? They are the ones impowered to take action on your argument, at least it would not be wasted time, because you could convince everyone of us that Apples' prices are out of line and what, nothing. I say Amen brother, go forth and take your argument on high!
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
post #140 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by JLL:
<strong>You're focusing on price alone. There are other factors that customers look at when choosing a computer.</strong><hr></blockquote>

That was true back when a PC was $3000 and a Mac was $3500.

However today PC's are so cheap, that price becomes the only issue.
Stagflation
stag·fla·tion
Sluggish performance growth coupled with a high or rising prices
Reply
Stagflation
stag·fla·tion
Sluggish performance growth coupled with a high or rising prices
Reply
post #141 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by Stagflation Steve:
<strong>However today PC's are so cheap, that price becomes the only issue.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Given Apple's current market share, I'm convinced that a Mac and a comparable PC costing about the same would still mean that the majority leaves the shop with the PC.
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #142 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by JLL:
<strong>

Given Apple's current market share, I'm convinced that a Mac and a comparable PC costing about the same would still mean that the majority leaves the shop with the PC.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think if more people went to Apple Stores and not places like CompUSA and they got to actually use a Mac that might not be the case.
post #143 of 156
While reading through the last ten posts of so I thought to look back and check the original topic name. After doing so, I realized that we are just a little off topic. Apple can not afford to lower prices at this time. If apple lowers prices and the right effect is not achieved they are going to have a hell of a time raising them again. In other words what they are doing now is working well enough and as usual apple will take no chances.

\tAlso it is important to realize that apple does not want to play Dell's game. They could not win a price war with the PC's. Apple competes with features and not with price. If you want a computer buy a PC, but if you want a beautiful, easy, and fun to use computer buy an apple. It's the same way with many things. If you want a car by a Kia, but if you want a fun, fast, beautiful, well made car buy a BMW or similar.

\tAs far as the original topic name goes: lets get back on topic.
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
post #144 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by Algol:
<strong>

As far as the original topic name goes: lets get back on topic.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Okay, we need the G5, aka IBM 970.

Seriously though, I also have a question that is on topic, sort of. I understand Apple added AltiVec code to OS X, to speed it up. That makes sense with the sluggish G4. But once OS X is fast enough, it is, well, fast enough. So what speed G3, without AltiVec, would make OS X fast enough? I know that is a subjective guess.

The reason I pose this question is because someone mentioned that AltiVec would not benefit performance of most applications as much as a really good floating point unit. I don't even know whether that is true, but It did get me thinking about the choices for a low end processor, for say an iBook. If we have an IBM 970, with 64 bits, AltiVec and a good FPU, at the high end, what is the best choice for the low end? Maybe a G4 like chip (AltiVec) is not needed at all? The middle Macs might use a slower 970, eventually.
post #145 of 156
"But once OS X is fast enough, it is, well, fast enough. So what speed G3, without AltiVec, would make OS X fast enough? I know that is a subjective guess."

1 gig 'Gobo' G3/simd/200mhz bus. Panther 10.3 will offer up further efficiency savings no doubt...and add to that the higher base of ram we'll get of maybe 256 megs...and look to the new reliance of Quartz Extreme to take an expanded OS drawing role in the next year. Where it look like IBM 'may' be going with the G3...it doesn't look like Apple will need Moto' at all. Apple's software strat' has leaned increasingly to open/more standards supported.

I think the next step of that evolution will be hardware based. 'Options'. So if we don't have an exclusive IBM deal, we may have IBM, Moto', and even 'AMD' instead!

So, I think in the next year Moto' will be relegated to the consumer line. Which, with 1.8 gig processors by the end of 2003? Makes for a fair iMac cpu. Add in Rio in 2004 and you've got decent performance in a Mac that would leave the current 'power'Macs standing.

For the Pro' line, you're talking 970. Duals. Quads for new workstation line for the Pixar worker...etc.

X-serve .9 970s from single up to octo. Enterprise/business sales are on the upward incline for Apple.

.9 shrink sees the 970 as the first 64 bit cpu to hit the Powerbook.

2004. Apple broadens it's CPU strategy to salvo M$ 'Palladium' boat out the water. Apple releases a 'Hammer' machine with superior/compatible Appleworks 7/8 that takes on 'Office' and comes standard with iapps that run 'x86' or maybe...something similar... It will prove to be Apple's best chance for growth in decades.

Palladium could inadvertently give Apple a backdoor entrance into the x86 market. Put that in yer 'Switch' campaign and smoke it! Where would AMD fit in? Cheap chips. In x86 Enterprise/business contracts...cheap edu' boxes... When's Palladium due? 2004/5/6?

That's plenty of time for Apple's developers to get over the 'carbon' recompile for 'X'. Fat binaries for Apple's Marklar strategy.

I think Apple's next goal will be cocoa so Apple will become CPU independent in the years to come.

The 'Moto'/Ati reliance that held Apple's hardware back won't be allowed to happen again.

"The reason I pose this question is because someone mentioned that AltiVec would not benefit performance of most applications as much as a really good floating point unit. I don't even know whether that is true, but It did get me thinking about the choices for a low end processor, for say an iBook. If we have an IBM 970, with 64 bits, AltiVec and a good FPU, at the high end, what is the best choice for the low end? Maybe a G4 like chip (AltiVec) is not needed at all? The middle Macs might use a slower 970, eventually."

As the 970 moves, quickly to .9 and is somewhere between 1.8 and 3 gig...what surprise for an iMac flat with 1.4-1.8 gig 970?

Add in the fact that the 980 is ( in Moto terms...) on the heels of the 970 then the Towers will get the 980 in 2004 leaving the consumer line with .9 970 clocks.

Can you spell 'awesome' consumer machine?

I've never been more excited by Apple in years. The next two years look very intriguing.

I'm very intrigued by Marklar. I'm growing more sure that THEY ARE going to DO it...but the real question is...'how'?

'Options'? In 2003-4, Apple's going to be loaded with 'Options'.

Lemon Bon Bon

[ 01-03-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
post #146 of 156
Well it doesn't look like any new iMacs, eMac, nor new FP screens are coming out this expo. <a href="http://www.Thinksecret.com" target="_blank">www.Thinksecret.com</a> They are always right. SO I guess that means no G5 for awhile still. Damn!
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
post #147 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by Algol:
<strong>

Well it doesn't look like any new iMacs, eMac, nor new FP screens are coming out this expo. . .

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Now you are the one who is off topic. Oh well. There is one statement in the link that looks a little strange to me.

"Historically, Apple has often delayed announcing new products to clear out inventory of products," one un-named source said. "This is not an unusual decision. We're being told this decision was made long before Christmas in anticipation of low sales levels moving into the December buying period."

If Apple anticipated low sales in the Christmas buying period, and they wanted to clear inventory of some models, why wouldn't they have a short term price reduction on those models or other such promotion? Now that Christmas buying is over, it will take even longer to clear them out. Speculation: it is a smoke screen from Apple? I hate the pre-show roller coaster rides.
post #148 of 156
NO wait just one minute! The topic name is "Apple needs G5 says CEO of Europe's Largest Mac dealer" and I said, "Looks like they won't get the G5 for awhile yet." How is this off topic.
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
"People don't want handouts! People want hand jobs!" ~ Connecticut governor William O'Neil at a political rally, followed by riotous applause
Reply
post #149 of 156
Sneaky. You did get G5 in there. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

[ 01-03-2003: Message edited by: snoopy ]</p>
post #150 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by snoopy:
<strong>

Now you are the one who is off topic. Oh well. There is one statement in the link that looks a little strange to me.

"Historically, Apple has often delayed announcing new products to clear out inventory of products," one un-named source said. "This is not an unusual decision. We're being told this decision was made long before Christmas in anticipation of low sales levels moving into the December buying period."

If Apple anticipated low sales in the Christmas buying period, and they wanted to clear inventory of some models, why wouldn't they have a short term price reduction on those models or other such promotion? Now that Christmas buying is over, it will take even longer to clear them out. Speculation: it is a smoke screen from Apple? I hate the pre-show roller coaster rides.</strong><hr></blockquote>

"Speculation: it is a smoke screen from Apple? I hate the pre-show roller coaster rides."

If it is a smoke screen then it is the first time that Apple has tried this of late, don't know about long history. I do hope you are right though. And don't you mean that you love to hate the pre-show roller coaster rides, just like the rest of us.
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
post #151 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by Ed M.:
<strong>PC OEMs don't do the R&D... Remember, Apple does the OS, the hardware, the design of all the cases and mobos, the chip sets, the packaging, the marketing....etc. etc.... They literally *touch* everything, including the power supplies. The list goes on.

Dell, Gateway and others simply "repackage" components, mobos included, along with the Windoze OS...

The Dell’s, Gateways, and Compaqs of the world are specifically positioned to be low cost providers of repackaged components. None of them have to amortize software (OS) development costs (as well as many other R&D costs) in their prices. Apple does. As you can see, the PC market is extremely cutthroat with absolutely no brand-loyalty. People will simply buy the *cheapest* machine with the highest perceived *number* ratings / specs. during any given week. This is killing Gateway and it looks like Gateway is going to be the next to do a belly-up.

Apple at least provides a means to differentiate their products from the vast majority cookie-cutter Wintelon PC systems. But I would have guessed that this argument has been debated to death already. It's incredible that there are still a bunch of people out there that just don't get it.

--
Ed M.</strong><hr></blockquote>

the above claimings are not the facts!!! hp and ibm do have their r&d and do most of things themselves. who told you that there is no loyalty in pc market? if so, why people keep buying dell or gateway? beside my mac, i buy dell while my brother-in-law keeps buying pc workstation from hp. why? because they not only have cheaper product but also have good, i mean very good, product. my dual mmd powermac is screaming like a hell while my brother-in-law's hp vectra(sp?) is so quite i keep asking him whether it is dead or not. by the way, he has 2 hp pc workstations with ghz pentium 4 and the price for 2 is the one i paid for my dual mmd powermac.

yes, apple does its own os, but it does not spare them for scrutiny. the industrial trend is that you have to keep the cost low and product stable in order to sell. apple could against this. but it will be troubling.

i know little bit of printing industry. now, there are only couple of fine private printing firms in this country. yes, they do every process by themselves and get everything the best. the books they sell are around one grand to ten grand, of course, and are in limited number of issues. their customers are loyal and small collectors since they lose the big market to bigger and leaner firms like wiley, etc. if you look their work, it is breath-taking and keep wondering how a book could be made like that. it is an art, not just a common sense of a _book_.

you could keep arguing that apple does this or that. but as long as it could keep cost down without sacrifice on quality, apple will be ok. otherwise, you and i both know the result. for me, i really don't want to see apple to end up to a private fine computer maker...

[ 01-08-2003: Message edited by: mellanox ]

[ 01-08-2003: Message edited by: mellanox ]</p>
post #152 of 156
[quote]Originally posted by JLL:
<strong>

No they don't. You pay that (including a profit for Dell) and it's even specified on your price list.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Huh?

Matsu is correct.

If I buy a Mac, I pay for Apple hardware R&D and Apple software R&D.

If I buy a Dell, I pay for Dell hardware R&D and a Windows License Fee which includes MS R&D and MS profit.

That's the comparison that should be made. Negelecting the Windows license fee makes the comparison faulty. It's a 3rd party R&D expense that still gets passed on to the consumer.
post #153 of 156
It would be really great if Macs were priced more competitively. Why they are not is a very good question. A DP 1GHz G4 would most likely sell well for $1200.

Mr. Steve is not so narrowminded, shortsighted, or foolish to set prices on a whim. At any given moment Apple is an innovator and industry leader in new technology, while at the same time it lags woefully behind in product performance and market share.

I think the reasons are complex (not that they don't need to be addressed by Apple). And, argument based on speculation is not getting us anywhere. IMHO.
post #154 of 156
So by dropping their prices by $300 they would suddenly sell thousands more and gain market share from the flood of pc switchers would now like the $300 cheaper macs?
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
post #155 of 156
What am I, some kind of lightening rod for anti price-competition whining?

Look at it this way and tell me if prices don't matter. Best selling model, the only model whose sales don't go limp as a cold tuna 2-3 months after releases/refreshes? The iBook. Anyone wanna guess why? I bet you I can tell you what the best selling Powerbook model is going to be, now that a price/feature competitive version exists, hint, it's also the cheapest Powerbook.

Don't give me "economies of scale," and the "you must have no business sense" BS apple apologist defense mechanism. All the "economies of scale" lemmings need to learn the term "Diminsihing returns" they do eventually kick in: Dell has scale, but so does Apple, or any of the top 5-6 system builders, and at the end of the day Dell's ability to build a cheaper machine based on favorable component/assembly costs DOES NOT add up to more than 200 on the absolute most expensive of machines. We went through it once before for people who care to look it up, and on the lower priced models Dell is capable of shipping and building the machine for, maybe, 70 USD less than say Apple or anybody else.

Basically, yes, nobody can build a machine quite as frugally as dell, but they can get pretty close, certainly close enough to make you wonder why a machine ought to cost 50%, or even 100% more.

No one is asking Apple to crank out loss leaders, just to stay within 200USD of the competition. When they have done that, they've been very successful. You think they've sold iBooks at a loss? I don't.

[ 01-08-2003: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #156 of 156
Yea but you are neglecting the biggest factor, demand. Dell sells 2-3 fold what Apple sells, so they can inreturn sell it 2-4 fold less. Simple economics, low demand charge high, high demand charge low. Until Apple reaches a certain plateu, it will always be slightly higher. True, one way to get there would be to lower prices. However, looking at what Apple is doing is smart as well- The iPod gets the Apple brand fixed into everyone's mind, everyone wants OS X but don't want to pay to upgrade or switch to more expensive hardware. The iApps make X more appealing as with mac platform as a whole. The iBook is priced right, the iMac is very close and the pBooks are right there as well. (don't argue specs for price as we can't do jack about speed) So Apple gets a few products to tempt those with an iPod who know about OSX or have seen the ads or Apple stores.

Once the pro machines get the 970, I'm sure we will see a better pricing scheme and features and speed to boot. So I do see clearly now the rain has gone.
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple needs G5 says CEO of Europe's Largest Mac dealer