or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Justifying Higher Mac Prices
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Justifying Higher Mac Prices - Page 2

post #41 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by briang5000
Several post have commented on how well Apple has done marketing iPod, iTunes, and let's not forget about Quicktime.

Here's a thought... why not include a promotional
DVD with every iPod that showcases the cool features
of Panther?

Apple could produce some slick 1 minute, 5 minute, 10 minute promo showing people what they could do with a Mac.

Because most iPod buyers are Windows users they may not realize what they could do with a new Mac.

Sure not everybody would watch these, but even if 20% of the people who bought an iPod put it in there
DVD player and watched it they might get some more switchers.

Apple owners who don't need the DVD could give them to
their Windows using friends and open up their eyes to what they're missing.

Awesome idea!
post #42 of 159
Honestly, it is, why doesnt Apple do that?!
People that are passionate about what they do, truly believe in their good cause, have a clear vision and understanding of what they want, those people are heroes.
Reply
People that are passionate about what they do, truly believe in their good cause, have a clear vision and understanding of what they want, those people are heroes.
Reply
post #43 of 159
You guys that argue that Apple needs to justify it's prices are at least a little loopy.

I have to ask why do you not complain that, say SGI or SUN make sub-1000 dollar systems to attract customers.

Look at these:

http://www.sgi.com/workstations/tezro/
http://store.sun.com/CMTemplate/CESe...P&catid=108738

Apple needs to make a good profit in order to even think about competing in the market. If apple follows Dell's lead and starts making cheap boxes, they will die and no more Apple. It is really that simple.
post #44 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Messiahtosh
Honestly, it is, why doesnt Apple do that?!

Because then people will group them in the same category as AOL when it comes to obnoxious advertising.
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #45 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
Because then people will group them in the same category as AOL when it comes to obnoxious advertising.

No, I do not think that would be the case. AOL could never do anything as amazing as the iPod experience. The iPod is on a whole different level, people may be interested in seeing this so called "OS X demo disc."
People that are passionate about what they do, truly believe in their good cause, have a clear vision and understanding of what they want, those people are heroes.
Reply
People that are passionate about what they do, truly believe in their good cause, have a clear vision and understanding of what they want, those people are heroes.
Reply
post #46 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Messiahtosh
Honestly, it is, why doesnt Apple do that?!

yeah, yeah! or they could hand out coasters worth $0.50 for free with every purchase. the coaster could have a nice label printed on it that says something like "Apple Promotional DVD -- Please don't microwave it!"
====
"The Matrix is here, and it's vegan-friendly." (TM) 2004, Trinity Life Systems
Reply
====
"The Matrix is here, and it's vegan-friendly." (TM) 2004, Trinity Life Systems
Reply
post #47 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
Because then people will group them in the same category as AOL when it comes to obnoxious advertising.


oh and who is the biggest Internet service provider in the world again?... oh yeah AOL
_ _____________________ _
1ghz Powerbook SuperDrive yippeeee!!!!
Reply
_ _____________________ _
1ghz Powerbook SuperDrive yippeeee!!!!
Reply
post #48 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
You guys that argue that Apple needs to justify it's prices are at least a little loopy.

I have to ask why do you not complain that, say SGI or SUN make sub-1000 dollar systems to attract customers.

Look at these:

http://www.sgi.com/workstations/tezro/
http://store.sun.com/CMTemplate/CESe...P&catid=108738

Apple needs to make a good profit in order to even think about competing in the market. If apple follows Dell's lead and starts making cheap boxes, they will die and no more Apple. It is really that simple.

Because SGI and Sun do not target consumers!

These days for $800 you either get a tower with a fast processer, 512 RAM and 120gb of hard drive space and CD and DVD or you get an emac with 1/4 the RAM, 1/3 the Hard drive or you can get a 17" CRT and tower with silar specs to the above 256/80gb.

Looking at the consumer market these days, Apple is missing the sweet spot by a mile!
post #49 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by jade
Because SGI and Sun do not target consumers!

These days for $800 you either get a tower with a fast processer, 512 RAM and 120gb of hard drive space and CD and DVD or you get an emac with 1/4 the RAM, 1/3 the Hard drive or you can get a 17" CRT and tower with silar specs to the above 256/80gb.

Looking at the consumer market these days, Apple is missing the sweet spot by a mile!

$800 on a Dell tower will get you more like 256MB ram, a 40 GB hard drive, and a CD-RW and a 17" monitor. Where the eMac really falls behind is the 1GHz G4 on a slow bus, compared to a 2.8-3GHz P4 on a fast bus.

We have to wait until the eMac update to see if apple is missing the mark or not. If they keeps the same pricing and put in a 1.6 GHz G5, the PCs at the same price range will still outperform the eMac buy a good margin. If apple puts in a 2.4 GHz G5, it would be the clear winer (hey, I can wish).

Most likely we will see a 2GHz model that will perform on par with the PCs in the same price range.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing
Reply
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing
Reply
post #50 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Res
Where the eMac really falls behind is the 1GHz G4 on a slow bus, compared to a 2.8-3GHz P4 on a fast bus.

Nah, not really. Those cheap PCs are usually celerons. The Dell 2400 mentoined a number of times in this article, when configured for $500 comes with a 2.4 Celeron P4 on a 400MHz bus. So it is not as if these budget PCs are coming with 2.8-3.2 P4s with HT on an 800MHz bus...
post #51 of 159
People just should look what they get when they are buying Mac. People will get a lot of great software. Dell doesn't contain iLfe etc...
post #52 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by jade
Because SGI and Sun do not target consumers!

These days for $800 you either get a tower with a fast processer, 512 RAM and 120gb of hard drive space and CD and DVD or you get an emac with 1/4 the RAM, 1/3 the Hard drive or you can get a 17" CRT and tower with silar specs to the above 256/80gb.

Looking at the consumer market these days, Apple is missing the sweet spot by a mile!

Hey, if apple is not worth the money that you pay, buy a PC, in fact, buy two. Then you will have two big paperweights (especially if you are going to be running a windows product on it.). The market will force apple to do what they must. Apple sells an all around superior product. Simple minded and easily distracted people concentrate on specs which constantly change. There will always be someone ahead in one area or another. Such is the computer game.

As long as there is a demand for a superior product that encapsulates easy user interface, stability, and elegance in design, I suppose Apple will be there to provide for it, and I suppose you will be there complaining about how Apple should be more like a PC. The funny thing is, the entire computer industry would like to be as profitable and have as high a product recognition as apple.

Their are so many areas where PC's should be like apple and not the reverse. I would hope that you go on PC forums and complain about the usability, reliability and security issues that plague the PC owning experience.

If you really want apple's prices to get reduced. Go buy one and recommend it to everyone around you. Stop spending your time worrying about specs and more time enjoying using an apple product. The more apple sells the cheaper it will be to make, thus making it easier to own the best personal computer in the world.
post #53 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by jade
Because SGI and Sun do not target consumers!

SGI and Sun do target consumers. Just not the same ones that Dell is after (in their low end). There are all sorts of different consumers. Believe it or not, some consumers aren't looking for any type of computer - that's how varied they are.

If Apple wanted the consumers you're thinking of, they'd sell PC's.
cygnuhchur
spotbug is dead. Long live spotcatbug!
Reply
cygnuhchur
spotbug is dead. Long live spotcatbug!
Reply
post #54 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Res
Right now Apples low end computer is the $799 eMac, and it is pretty much a bad joke of a machine. It comes with 128 megs of RAM (that's the joke part), and 1 GHz G4 on a slow bus. Top it off with a slow video card, and what you get is kind of pathetic by todays standards. The current eMac is at the end of it's life cycle folks, we all know it, and it is really starting to show.

Shortly we will see the next version of the eMac/iMac line, and if Apple aggressively ups the specs, the market share will follow.

I used to think that the eMac was the loss leader for Apple. I suspected that Apples manufacturing process was not efficient enough to produce that particular machine at a more attractive price. But the more I got to thinking about it, I began to consider that my original hypothesis was incorrect.

As you mentioned, Res, the eMac is a mishmash of outdated and inefficient computer parts. The Ram is OLD 133MHz SDRAM. The video card is ONLY 32MB, and isnt actually produced anymore in that configuration (64MB is now the standard for the ATI 7500 retail). The CRT, while flat glass, is NOT a Trinitron, and therefore cannot cost more than any OTHER flat CRT, which currently retails at < $100. The G4 processor (entry-level) is only 800MHz. And while the case is custom-made for the eMac, Id find it difficult to believe that Apple HASNT recouped its costs for any custom molding after 2 years time.

So, Apples manufacturing process wouldve had to have been AWFULLY inefficient to make a 2-year-old computer with 3+ year-old parts cost MORE than a comparable PC with (often) BETTER hardware. Even more so, it wouldve been hard to believe that EVEN WITH a pitiful manufacturing process, Apple would have BARELY been making money off the machine. And then, it hit me.

What if the eMac was the PRIMARY source of profit in the Macintosh line? Yeah, it sounds ridiculous, but hear me out. The Apple financial results only state the percentage of machines sold, and the percentage profit margin on ALL SALES. It (to my knowledge) does NOT indicate how much profit margin Apple makes on EACH MACHINE. And thats where your other statement fits in:

Quote:
Would any of us really be complaining about Apple's pricing if the $799 eMac came with a 2GHz G5 on a fast bus, and a Radeon 8600XT?

It occurred to me that Apple is REALLY giving good value on some of its PowerBooks and PowerMac towers: BIG processors; BIG graphics cards; BRAND NEW enclosures. Most likely, those are the computers that yield the LEAST profit (per machine) for Apple.

So, what if the eMac was INTENTIONALLY kept stagnant so that Apple could temper some of the profits lost to its cutting-edge machines? If thats true, it would seem to follow that a 'headless' Macintosh would present the same financial conundrum: Yes, we can make a profit off each machine, but not ENOUGH profit to offset the losses on other machines. Moreover, this philosophy would fit very well in line with Apples precedent of profit BEFORE market share.

All this, of course, is hypothetical. Ive no knowledge whatsoever of Apples profit margin breakdown on EACH computer sold.

Just a few random thoughts from an Apple stockholder whos currently using a Windows machine.

-Antithesis
post #55 of 159
Quote:
The reason she doesn't is because Apple is and always has been terrible at marketing. In fact, Apple is pretty darn bad at all things business related. Maybe now that Steve has a few more grey hairs, things will get better. Don't count on it though.

What utter crap Faeylyn. Nearly as good as your 'Apple to split into two divisions' nonsense
post #56 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Antithesis
What if the eMac was the PRIMARY source of profit in the Macintosh line? Yeah, it sounds ridiculous, but hear me out. The Apple financial results only state the percentage of machines sold, and the percentage profit margin on ALL SALES. It (to my knowledge) does NOT indicate how much profit margin Apple makes on EACH MACHINE.

However, Fred Anderson has repeatedly cautioned analysts in conference calls that higher sales of iMacs and eMacs depress margins, while higher sales of PowerMacs and PowerBooks support them. It's not hard to conclude from that that the consumer machines are lower margin than the professional machines.

Apple's most profitable machine per unit, currently, is the PowerMac, followed by the PowerBook. The least profitable unit is probably either the baseline eMac or the 12" iBook.

However, Apple doesn't do "loss leaders." Everything makes a profit. It's just a question of how much.
"...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 #57 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Faeylyn
The reason she doesn't is because Apple is and always has been terrible at marketing. In fact, Apple is pretty darn bad at all things business related. Maybe now that Steve has a few more grey hairs, things will get better. Don't count on it though.

Um... look at the bottom line, the profit, and number of profitable quarters in the past 2 years. From Apple press room:

For the quarter, the Company posted a net profit of $63 million" (Q1,04)

And marketing isn't working?

"Apple shipped 829 thousand Macintosh® units during the quarter, up 12 percent from the year-ago quarter, as well as 733 thousand iPod® units, up 235 percent from the year-ago quarter. "

Things are looking up. Someone who is bad a business does not have almost five billion in cash in the bank. And they have done it with a single-digit slice of the computer market.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #58 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Amorph
However, Fred Anderson has repeatedly cautioned analysts in conference calls that higher sales of iMacs and eMacs depress margins, while higher sales of PowerMacs and PowerBooks support them. It's not hard to conclude from that that the consumer machines are lower margin than the professional machines.

Well, that would pretty much blow a hole through my theory, then.

Still, I'm left wondering WHAT Apple's doing to make the eMac so darned expensive to manufacture. Somehow, 1+1 just ain't equaling 2.

*shrugs*

Oh, well. I appreciate the clarification, anyways.

-Antithesis
post #59 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by vinney57
What utter crap Faeylyn. Nearly as good as your 'Apple to split into two divisions' nonsense

A company that has typically had the best hardware/software (i.e. best product) in the industry for the past 15 years and only has a mere 3% marketshare pretty suggests Faeylyn's statement is pretty accurate. If you can't sell the best product in an industry there is someting wrong with your business philosophies.
post #60 of 159
X X,

Sorry for the car analogy again but surely the same could be said for BMW no? Or Mercedes? Many would that these are the best 'products', yet they don't have the numbers that Ford or GM sell. Would you say these are bad at business? It's pretty basic economics. The best products cost more to manufacture, and as such rules out x% of the buying population.
post #61 of 159
The average consumer doesn't even consider macs when purchasing a new computer... because its like choosing a Denon receiver over a Pioneer / Kenwood / Sony / Panasonic receiver. The Denon is usually more powerful and nicer than any of those other receivers. But the name is not out there like it can be. I really don't think the problem is pricing as much as the name.

The problem I have with apple is they keep the same prices for months. The PowerMac has been out for 7 months now... prices are STILL the same. That is definitely a problem that needs to be dealth with. It doesn't make sense to buy 7 month old hardware for the same price as it was the day it was released. Apple needs to have price drops in their products... not just when new products come out but as they deteriorate as a value on the market also.

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #62 of 159
Regards to the eMac being a joke...

I think apple went out on a limb with this computer. If you guys recall, Apple wasn't even going to release it to the public. just to teachers / schools / students. What do these people do? Just a lot of internet / text editing / drawing / etc. They are not pro users and would not need a hardcore pro machine in most cases. People wanted a cheaper mac and thats why apple released it to the public. Now if you're an educational buyer you can score an emac for $749.00. Not a huge discount... but thats not too bad for a machine that can run Panther with a ram upgrade.

I believe this is the oldest machine on apple's list of computers. It will be upgraded soon and it might be easier to justify the cost.

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #63 of 159
Hasn't the iPod become a major source of revenue for Apple? It would make sense for them to pour their advertising $$ into keeping it on top... especially in the wake of other manufacuturers coming out with players just as good at significantly cheaper prices.

I think the idea of sticking an OS X demo CD in there with the iPod is a great idea. I'd willing to guess the majority of Windows users don't even know what the difference is between a Windows machine and a Mac. I was talking to someone on the phone duing a conference call last week and I mentioned I just got my first Mac... and he asked me if "there's any difference between a Mac and any other PC... like Dell, or Toshiba". Most Windows users probably don't even know what an "operating system" is. They have a computer... and use Windows... doesn't everybody? I think if they had a chance to see that they're experience really can chance with OS X... it might make them at least say "Wow... I wish I could have my computer run like that". It would need to be an interactive demo... not just a video. It would need to be something to give folks a real feel for X.

So far as Apple making offering in the sub-$1000 range... Why should they? It's not an especially profitable market to lose out on. The one thing Apple tends to not do (and hopefully will continue to not do) is cut corners. If ya buy a Mac... even the cheapest one... you're getting a decent machine with decent performance, and typically excellent build quality. You get the cheapest Dell (or other PC manufacturer) and you're getting crappy on-board video... probably no firewire... and if you do get firewire... it's the little 4-pin non-powered (and useless) port. You'll get Windows which is a hefty chunk of the total price right there. Dell still (I don't get this at all) offers their base machines with 128MB. Nothing for nothing... XP runs like crap even with 256MB. To be honest... A friend told me his girlfriend got a new Dell and it only had 128MB of memory. I actually didn't believe him. Why would you even sell a machine running XP with 128MB of memory? It just makes your product look like crap.

So it boils down to "you get what you pay for". Apple's computers are priced within reason. Their low end machines... are good machines at competetive prices... their high end machines... like everyone elses high end machines... are priced somewhat higher. Granted... no one here would say that Apple's accessories or peripherals are reasonably priced though... you'd be nuts to buy your memory from Apple for example.

I've only had my first Mac (an iBook) for a few months now... after 20 years exclusively with PCs. I picked up the iBook because of the price. It was a notebook I liked (in terms of it's tiny size)... and the price was low enough that I didn't mind spending the $$ just to be able to try out the OS. I now use my iBook exclusively over my 2.4GHz P4 Vaio notebook and I'm already considering going with a Powerbook after their next upgrade.
post #64 of 159
You know, its rare that I encounter a post that proves my points so well. Equally unique is the fact that the person making the points thinks s/he isnt.

Lets start with the end of your post:

Quote:
Originally posted by Joey
I've only had my first Mac (an iBook) for a few months now... after 20 years exclusively with PCs. I picked up the iBook because of the price. It was a notebook I liked (in terms of it's tiny size)... and the price was low enough that I didn't mind spending the $$ just to be able to try out the OS. I now use my iBook exclusively over my 2.4GHz P4 Vaio notebook and I'm already considering going with a Powerbook after their next upgrade.

Okay. You bought your first Apple product based (at least partially) on price. Good, now lets go to the start of your post:

Quote:
So far as Apple making offering in the sub-$1000 range... Why should they? It's not an especially profitable market to lose out on.

So, YOU bought your first Apple based on price, but someone else WONT do that in the sub-$1000 range? I think youve just answered your own question of why.

Now to quell some misnomers:

Quote:
You get the cheapest Dell (or other PC manufacturer) and you're getting crappy on-board video... probably no firewire... and if you do get firewire... it's the little 4-pin non-powered (and useless) port.

Im puzzled by why you think this is useless? Ive used my Firewire camcorder on the non-powered ports many times. It seemed perfectly useful for me.

Quote:
Dell still (I don't get this at all) offers their base machines with 128MB. Nothing for nothing... XP runs like crap even with 256MB. To be honest... A friend told me his girlfriend got a new Dell and it only had 128MB of memory. I actually didn't believe him. Why would you even sell a machine running XP with 128MB of memory? It just makes your product look like crap.

Um, you DO realize that the base eMac comes with only 128MB of memory, dont you? Furthermore, Id take XP with 256MB ANYDAY over only 256MB running OSX. Just a personal preference, I know, but in my experience, OSX absolutely needs copious amounts of memory, whereby XP runs better with more of it.

Just my $0.02,
-Antithesis
post #65 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Antithesis
Still, I'm left wondering WHAT Apple's doing to make the eMac so darned expensive to manufacture. Somehow, 1+1 just ain't equaling 2.

Well, they don't exactly have massive economies of scale going for them. If eMacs were selling half a million per quarter the situation might look different. The 60W(? it's a big sucker) amp in the eMac probably doesn't help matters.

There are also two technological oddments which either are or will become a problem: Old memory tech tends to get more expensive once it's so old that hardly anyone uses it (try buying RAM for a PowerMac 8600), and the G4 is not a cheap CPU, because of Motorola's mediocre yields (and regardless of its comparable performance). Apple's surely not paying full price, but still, I'd be surprised if it was anything like the $25 Apple was paying for the 233MHz G3s that went into the first iMacs. I'm certain Intel is blowing Celerons out the door for much less than Motorola is asking for G4s - and less than they're asking Apple.
"...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 #66 of 159
I guess I wasn't entirely clear when I said sub $1000 range. The thread is generally talking the $500-$600 range... I should have been more specific. My point being offering a good product at a reasonable price... basically saying that I don't think Macs are overpriced for what they are. I'd also say that people like me... while their are others... are more the exception than the rule. Very few people with perfectly happy PCs are going to go out and buy a Mac just to try out the OS. So it would be silly for Apple to go into the lower range just to suit that group.

I guess my experiences with an un-powered port are different than yours. As in... it's useless if you use any firewire device that is port powered. So, again... I should have been more specific... it's useless to me. I have several port powered USB devices that I can't use on my Sony Vaio notebook because it has an unpowered firewire port. That's actually how I discovered the difference. To be honest... if something is going to call itself "firewire" it should conform to the standard.

I can't really comment on the eMac's base memory or it's performance with it. If it runs like crap with 128MB of memory... then it should have more also. I was commenting on the Dell only having 128MB because that was where my experience was. If the same holds true with the eMac then my comments would hold true to that machine also.

I did notice you're references were typically geared towards the eMac in general. I don't really consider the eMac when I refer to Apples line. It's really not indicative of the rest of the line.
post #67 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by your_ad_here
X X,

Sorry for the car analogy again but surely the same could be said for BMW no? Or Mercedes? Many would that these are the best 'products', yet they don't have the numbers that Ford or GM sell. Would you say these are bad at business? It's pretty basic economics. The best products cost more to manufacture, and as such rules out x% of the buying population.

That's fine. I like car analogies. It wouldn't be an Appleinsider form without them cropping up sometime. I can understand your arugment, but without debating on that analogy let's take the iPod...

Apple designed it from the ground up, from my understanding, thus it should cost more than their competitors, say Dell. However, due to their very successful marketing/business decision in regards to the iPod, it is the #1 selling player on the market, I think. Also, in numerous reviews, it has been ranked the best or one of the best. So, by properly marketing, etc. the best MP3 player in the market, in terms of design, ease of use, etc. it has achieved, what one would expect, the #1 standing despite costing more than its competitors.

Pesonally, I think Jobs has done a very good job in some areas and poor job in others. As Apple moves away from the problems they've had in the past with performance and are afforded more options with their hardware, I would hope that they become a bit more liberal in some of their decisions.

Regards!
post #68 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by X X
That's fine. I like car analogies.

The only problem with car analogies is, they are not appropriate for the computer world. BMWs and Mercedes' can drive on the same roads than Fords and Hondas. If the marketshare of Apple decreases further, more and more software companies might come to the conclusion: Wy bother? This might lead to serious problems:

Today, many people have workflows where several products are involved. What if some critical software will not be updated (or released at all) because there is not enough money to earn to justify the development? Apple cannot create an iApp for everything.
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." --Douglas Adams
Reply
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." --Douglas Adams
Reply
post #69 of 159
GSpotter,

Fair point, but this wasn't a discussion about Apple marketshare and software issues. I only used the car analogy to emphasis the fact that not everything that is the best in its particular field is necessarily the biggest seller.\
post #70 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by X X
However, due to their very successful marketing/business decision in regards to the iPod, it is the #1 selling player on the market, I think. Also, in numerous reviews, it has been ranked the best or one of the best. So, by properly marketing, etc. the best MP3 player in the market, in terms of design, ease of use, etc. it has achieved, what one would expect, the #1 standing despite costing more than its competitors.

That's what one would expect on a more-or-less level playing field. Macs have a long legacy of being ignored or dismissed as options - it doesn't really matter what Apple does if people think they need Windows to "run the Internet."

That's not a situation you want to be in, marketing-wise.

Quote:
As Apple moves away from the problems they've had in the past with performance and are afforded more options with their hardware, I would hope that they become a bit more liberal in some of their decisions.

The Apple Store does not need to take any steps in the direction of the (often deliberately) confusing Dell store. Sorry, but that's just not the Apple way, and I don't think it's consumer-friendly either - never mind the difficulty that wildly varying hardware features and specs impose on software design and QA (which Dell doesn't have to worry about, natch).

Apple has always been about absolute simplicity, and when people were open-minded about Macs, it worked brilliantly for them. A lot of people now gaze fondly at Macs when they see them, but rule them out for reasons of unfamiliarity or incompatibility. I've even seen people say that they didn't want anything that fancy, just something to do "a little email and internet, and some Word" - which means that the Mac truly has an uphill battle in terms of mindshare.

An attractive price certainly helps, of course, but I wouldn't really single the eMac out on that front. The iMac is the main offender, price-wise. However, a low price will only grab a few more people. The main problem is getting people to realize that a Mac is an option at all, and Apple is clearly hoping the iPod will coax people into considering a certain other Apple product - and to accept that a higher price is worth it for a substantially better product.
"...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 #71 of 159
...And that's the reason I like (and probably all of us) Apple so much. They do not just market themselves to be a better product, they truly are. It is disheartening that more people do not know about what they are missing. It is truly a media induced shame, and hopefully the iPod (as you suggest) will start to push people the other way. The difference at Apple is, more than just cheap marketing and talk, they care. From the top on down, the CEO to the guy behind the genius bar, Apple cares. And I dont care if anyone disagrees with that, Steve didnt sell his VW Bus for nothing, man.

Someday people will say, "Apple, they make the iPod...next time I get a computer, I'll check out a Mac to go with my iPod."
People that are passionate about what they do, truly believe in their good cause, have a clear vision and understanding of what they want, those people are heroes.
Reply
People that are passionate about what they do, truly believe in their good cause, have a clear vision and understanding of what they want, those people are heroes.
Reply
post #72 of 159
999 buys a heck of a lot of PC at the street price.

4X DVD-rw
8X AGP 64-128MB
512MB RAM
17" LCD
120-160GB HDD
5.1 audio
USB2, FW400, and 10/100 ethernet

Neither iMacs nor eMacs are close.

I'd settle for the box at that price and I'll take care of the display on my own.

iMacs and eMacs remain a horrible deal, and they're getting worse daily.

If tomorrow we woke up and the eMac was gone, replaced by an the iMac into each of its price points, we'd still only be part way to where a consumer grade desktop needs to be.

Apple's been fighting a lot of inertia, but their prices aren't creating movement either.
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #73 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Matsu
999 buys a heck of a lot of PC at the street price.

4X DVD-rw
8X AGP 64-128MB
512MB RAM
17" LCD
120-160GB HDD
5.1 audio
USB2, FW400, and 10/100 ethernet

Neither iMacs nor eMacs are close.

I'd settle for the box at that price and I'll take care of the display on my own.

iMacs and eMacs remain a horrible deal, and they're getting worse daily.

If tomorrow we woke up and the eMac was gone, replaced by an the iMac into each of its price points, we'd still only be part way to where a consumer grade desktop needs to be.

Apple's been fighting a lot of inertia, but their prices aren't creating movement either.

where do you get that system from, or are you talking about individually bought parts?
post #74 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Amorph
That's what one would expect on a more-or-less level playing field. Macs have a long legacy of being ignored or dismissed as options - it doesn't really matter what Apple does if people think they need Windows to "run the Internet."

That's not a situation you want to be in, marketing-wise.

You're right! That's not a decision you want to be in marketing wise. If Apple had the same brialliance in their marketing as they do in their engineering then I believe more people wouldn't feel they'd need windows to run the internet.

However, my comment was in regards to Apple's whole history, not just the current times, which the internet would fall under. Faelyn's comment as well was in regards to Apple's whole history, which Steve Jobs, himself, made reference to in some meeting about how Apple used to behave arrogantly.

Second, please don't take my "liberal" comment too far. It was just a very generic statement about how Apple is still pretty strict in terms of many things and appear they are unwilling to move despite request by their customers.

Please don't ask what I mean by that because I don't want to deviate from the topic and start another debate.

I think you'd agree that Apple hasn't always had the best business decisions, whether it's dealing with the lawsuit by Microsoft in 1989 or by offering a thousand different configurations for a computer.

Regards!
post #75 of 159
Does someone in the PC world make a notebook with similar features, size, etc. as the iBook for just over $1,000? I fully intended to get a super small laptop from a PC manufacturer... but couldn't find anything with the same form factor as an iBook for anything close to the price of the iBook.
post #76 of 159
Here you go, without even trying.

$1214 from a 1st tier manufacturer.

2,8Ghz HT P4 1MB L2
512MB PC3200 (1 DIMM)
160GB HDD
17" LCD
128MB ATI Radeon 9200
8X DVDRW
16X DVD-ROM
USB2, FW400
5.1 Audio
Front panel ports
7-in-1 media reader

With absolutely no price shopping, just select a few options and you're done. My experience has been that they're even cheaper in stores.

You'll note an 8X DVD burner, 128MB video, 160GB HDD, 5.1 audio, 512MB of RAM, and a 7-in-1 reader. Strip out the reader, drop the DVDRW/HDD/RAM/video to an iMac skimpy 4X/80GB/256/64 and you'll just about hit 999, FROM HP! NOT a white box assembler!!! And that INCLUDES a 17" LCD.

And there you have it.

No one here is saying Apple has to build a 499 machine. Or even a killer 999 bundle. Put a G5, a DVDRW, a decent grapics CARD, and 512MB or RAM (with at least one more OPEN slot) into a box for 999 and leave the display up to me. SOLD SOLD and SOLD hundreds of thousands of times over.
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #77 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Joey
Does someone in the PC world make a notebook with similar features, size, etc. as the iBook for just over $1,000? I fully intended to get a super small laptop from a PC manufacturer... but couldn't find anything with the same form factor as an iBook for anything close to the price of the iBook.

Only thing I can think of would be an Averatec notebook which runs around $1000, but I don't think it comes with Firewire, and it has integrated video. Outside of that, you pay a premium for 12" PC notebooks. The iBook is one of the few Apple products that's priced just about perfectly for its feature set.
What the problem is?
Reply
What the problem is?
Reply
post #78 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by Matsu
Here you go, without even trying.

$1214 from a 1st tier manufacturer.

2,8Ghz HT P4 1MB L2
512MB PC3200 (1 DIMM)
160GB HDD
17" LCD
128MB ATI Radeon 9200
8X DVDRW
16X DVD-ROM
USB2, FW400
5.1 Audio
Front panel ports
7-in-1 media reader

With absolutely no price shopping, just select a few options and you're done. My experience has been that they're even cheaper in stores.

You'll note an 8X DVD burner, 128MB video, 160GB HDD, 5.1 audio, 512MB of RAM, and a 7-in-1 reader. Strip out the reader, drop the DVDRW/HDD/RAM/video to an iMac skimpy 4X/80GB/256/64 and you'll just about hit 999, FROM HP! NOT a white box assembler!!! And that INCLUDES a 17" LCD.

And there you have it.

No one here is saying Apple has to build a 499 machine. Or even a killer 999 bundle. Put a G5, a DVDRW, a decent grapics CARD, and 512MB or RAM (with at least one more OPEN slot) into a box for 999 and leave the display up to me. SOLD SOLD and SOLD hundreds of thousands of times over.

Can I have a link to that machine. Because I could not find an iBook comparable machine. I found this http://h71016.www7.hp.com/dstore/Mid...&AirTime=False but that is not comparable in price just size and weight. And there is no internal drive.
post #79 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by oldmacfan
Can I have a link to that machine. Because I could not find an iBook comparable machine. I found this http://h71016.www7.hp.com/dstore/Mid...&AirTime=False but that is not comparable in price just size and weight. And there is no internal drive.

Matsu wasn't replying to the iBook comparison post there, but rather to the "Where did you find a PC desktop with DVD-R, 120GB, 17"LCD, etc. for $999" post.

As far as my reply concerning the Averatec (with the missing features I noted in comparison to the iBook), see this link:
http://www.techdepot.com/product.asp...824583&iid=939
What the problem is?
Reply
What the problem is?
Reply
post #80 of 159
I was talking about desktops. You will not find a machine that compares to the iBook.
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Justifying Higher Mac Prices