or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Briefly: On last minute iMac and iPhone design changes
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Briefly: On last minute iMac and iPhone design changes - Page 2

post #41 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

White, black and grey were said to be candidates for a replacement color, with black winning out despite its slightly conspicuous appearance.

Conspicuous is relative to the surrounding. I happen to think that white is most conspicuous because it's brighter than probably anything around it save for anything that's fluorescent colored.

Quote:
Originally Posted by msantti View Post

I prefer the black logo.

One would get sick and tired of seeing yourself all day with the mirrored one.

It probably wouldn't be perfectly flat, I think it would have been somewhat fun-house like, I'm using my memory of the G4 iMac.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew Yohe View Post

These statements are almost too ridiculous for words. "Pull the wool", "Looks larger than it is", "The sides look thinner than they actually are". What?! They tell you the exact specs of each model. What is your deal? The black trim has nothing to do with it "looking bigger". (which by the way, I use my iMac by looking at it, and am not constantly thinking about the dimensions of it. If it looks big, that's because it is.) The trim is there to to give contrast between the LCD and the surface. Apple isn't deceiving anyone at all.

Your explanation doesn't ring true to me. Things can appear a different size than they are if the design techniques exploit optical illusions, in this case, I think it does and was pretty well explained be the person you replied to. I really don't understand how you can deny this in such a manner. The perimeter, combined with the black back face also makes the machine seem thinner too. A similar trick was done with the previous generation, the panel was just as thick but the back panel curved forward instead of being flat. The overall thickness was the same, but the iMac seemed thinner, I think Apple even promoted it as being thinner though the overall dimensions were the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denton View Post

Someone needs to lay down some basic axioms for Apple fan-boys. The first is quite obvious:

1. No matter how good an Apple product, a vocal minority will always complain about every design choice made by Apple.

It's not always the same minority. For example, Aegisdesign had been an almost stead-fast defender of a lot of Apple's design choices, but had lately been hammering on the designs of iPhone and the new iMac.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

It's difficult to believe that the decision to switch from plastic to glass was made just two weeks before they sold over 250,000 iPhones. Could they really have done it in that short a time?

I really doubt it, unless ALL the testing and validation was done before then, even then, that's a very rapid production.

I think someone posted here two or three months beforehand saying that that decision was already made.
post #42 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That's not it at all, as you should know.

The more SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost. If Apple offer both, then it migh have raised the price by $50.

Why do you think Apple puts cheap gpu's in its machines? To save a few bucks.

And yet they managed to offer choice on the 'Books, without raising the price.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #43 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

And yet they managed to offer choice on the 'Books, without raising the price.

How do you know what the price would have been?
post #44 of 115
I know I may just be a cat, but I think the logo should have been like the one on the Cinema Display, a nice innocuous brushed alluminum logo that bubbles up from its surroundings.

The screen would have floated better without the black apple beneath it. Perhaps the haste with which they needed to make the change clouded their judgement.

The silver logo didn't neccessarily have to be a mirror; it could have been silver matte so it's there but not so prominent, elegant in its understatement.

I don't think it is that big of a deal, actually. It's just that given Apple's usual "MOMA" design standards, it seems a little jarring.
post #45 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That's not it at all, as you should know.

The more SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost. If Apple offer both, then it migh have raised the price by $50.

Why do you think Apple puts cheap gpu's in its machines? To save a few bucks.

$50 for handling another SKU number sounds like a lot. Why would it be more than $5?
Cubist
Reply
Cubist
Reply
post #46 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

How do you know what the price would have been?

Because they were offered at the same price points as the models they replaced? Like pretty much Apple always does?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #47 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddits View Post

I know I may just be a cat, but I think the logo should have been like the one on the Cinema Display, a nice innocuous brushed alluminum logo that bubbles up from its surroundings.

The screen would have floated better without the black apple beneath it. Perhaps the haste with which they needed to make the change clouded their judgement.

The silver logo didn't neccessarily have to be a mirror; it could have been silver matte so it's there but not so prominent, elegant in its understatement.

I don't think it is that big of a deal, actually. It's just that given Apple's usual "MOMA" design standards, it seems a little jarring.

I agree. I also think that the nice square edge of the aluminum would be more apparent if the black border on the screen was muted.
Cubist
Reply
Cubist
Reply
post #48 of 115
I think the design decision process went like this:

--Jobs wants the outer case to be a solid piece of aluminum, so he can have his material du jour plus the seamlessness he craves.

--Therefore, the screen has to be inset, somehow.

--So carve an inset into the block of aluminum, and use a sheet of glass to make the screen surface perfectly flush with the surrounding case.

--Glass is glossy

--That's good, right?

--But now we have to attach the glass somehow.

--Friction and magnets! Genius!

--But now we have to cover up the magnets and the edge of the aluminum inset, which we can see through the glass.

--We can't put a real bezel on there, that'll screw up the flush front surface.

--Paint the perimeter of the glass black (or put on some kind of appliqué, whatever).

--Make the black perimeter just big enough to cover up the edges of the aluminum and the magnets. Meh, looks kind of tacked on.

--Make the perimeter bold! It's a design statement!

Serve to a grateful world.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #49 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I think the design decision process went like this:

--Jobs wants the outer case to be a solid piece of aluminum, so he can have his material du jour plus the seamlessness he craves.

--Therefore, the screen has to be inset, somehow.

--So carve an inset into the block of aluminum, and use a sheet of glass to make the screen surface perfectly flush with the surrounding case.

--Glass is glossy

--That's good, right?

--But now we have to attach the glass somehow.

--Friction and magnets! Genius!

--But now we have to cover up the magnets and the edge of the aluminum inset, which we can see through the glass.

--We can't put a real bezel on there, that'll screw up the flush front surface.

--Paint the perimeter of the glass black (or put on some kind of appliqué, whatever).

--Make the black perimeter just big enough to cover up the edges of the aluminum and the magnets. Meh, looks kind of tacked on.

--Make the perimeter bold! It's a design statement!

Serve to a grateful world.

I would of liked to see the magnets and tne inset.
Cubist
Reply
Cubist
Reply
post #50 of 115
the iphone and the new imac are great products but they are ugly,and not as attractive or drool worthy as the products they replace, the plastic white imac is a non recycleable item my ass.

and with this idiotic imovie "iclip" software i really hate apples direction latley...

mac is becoming windows/and pc yuck.
post #51 of 115
I kind of don't buy the news. How could apple change the surface material of iphone at the last two weeks. it's impossible.
post #52 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by city View Post

$50 for handling another SKU number sounds like a lot. Why would it be more than $5?

It's a matter of having two shunts off the assembly lines, two different boxes, or at least two labels slapped on that wouldn't needed, or someone smacking something on the box to designate which was which.

Then there must be the stocking of two different units, without knowing how many of each will sell, etc.

Apple went through this with Best Buy with the original colored iMacs. Two colors were selling well, and the others weren't. BB wanted to order whichever models were selling better, and order less of the ones that weren't. Apple insisted of buying equal numbers of each color. BB said "No thanks", and stopped selling Apple products.

As warehouse and shelf space costs money, how would you allocate space for each model? What if you were wrong?

If some damage that glass front, Apple will have to carry two versions, taking up more space, and costing more.

This costs money up and down the entire line.

It could cost MORE than $50.
post #53 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't know why they went for glass.

Was it purely for style, or was there something else?

But, it does make it easy to change the glass.

Jobs claimed that it was to make it look good, but it's pretty much impossible to tell that the iMac has glass on it; it just looks shiny. He also claimed that the glass is highly recyclable (which I'm sure was to please the nature-protection groups).

I personally think that Apple getting hammered for not having as high of a recycling rate at other computer companies is ridiculous because I know that a ton of Mac users keep their old computers, they don't just throw them away. I have a Macintosh Classic II sitting on my bookshelf that I never use, but I'm not going to throw it away. I don't know any PC users that put their old Windows boxes on their bookshelves to look at on a daily basis.

And with the mirrored Apple logo... I have an eMac that has a mirrored Apple logo in the same place that it would be on the iMacs, and when using the computer, I cannot see myself in the mirror. Maybe it would be possible to see your reflection on the iMacs, but in order to see myself on the eMac, I have to slouch over and look directly at it.
post #54 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Because they were offered at the same price points as the models they replaced? Like pretty much Apple always does?

No, that's not true. Apple often lowers the price of the newer models, like they did here with the new iMacs.

So, if the price was the same, that could have been one reason why.
post #55 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I think the design decision process went like this:

--Jobs wants the outer case to be a solid piece of aluminum, so he can have his material du jour plus the seamlessness he craves.

--Therefore, the screen has to be inset, somehow.

--So carve an inset into the block of aluminum, and use a sheet of glass to make the screen surface perfectly flush with the surrounding case.

--Glass is glossy

--That's good, right?

--But now we have to attach the glass somehow.

--Friction and magnets! Genius!

--But now we have to cover up the magnets and the edge of the aluminum inset, which we can see through the glass.

--We can't put a real bezel on there, that'll screw up the flush front surface.

--Paint the perimeter of the glass black (or put on some kind of appliqué, whatever).

--Make the black perimeter just big enough to cover up the edges of the aluminum and the magnets. Meh, looks kind of tacked on.

--Make the perimeter bold! It's a design statement!

Serve to a grateful world.

There's no carving of blocks of aluminum. These are stampings.

I do think the way the glass was put on was ingenious though.

The use of magnets allowed them to put the glass on easily, so that a glass suction cup could remove it.

By doing that, they concealed the screws.

But, this makes the case easier to disassemble than people think it is. So, it serves a function other than style, and may even have the primary reason why it was done that way.
post #56 of 115
I wonder how many of the people who are bad mouthing the design have actually gone over to the iStore and taken a look at them. I think you might be a little too quick to judge.

The design just might grow on you. Without a doubt, this is the best iMac they have ever offered. And the best value as well.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #57 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

There's no carving of blocks of aluminum. These are stampings.

I do think the way the glass was put on was ingenious though.

The use of magnets allowed them to put the glass on easily, so that a glass suction cup could remove it.

By doing that, they concealed the screws.

But, this makes the case easier to disassemble than people think it is. So, it serves a function other than style, and may even have the primary reason why it was done that way.

Yes, Mel, I realize they weren't literally carving the aluminum block. A figure of speech for my little scenario.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #58 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catman4d2 View Post

the iphone and the new imac are great products but they are ugly,and not as attractive or drool worthy as the products they replace, the plastic white imac is a non recycleable item my ass.

and with this idiotic imovie "iclip" software i really hate apples direction latley...

mac is becoming windows/and pc yuck.

Polycarbonate is pretty much non-recyclable. The melting temp is very high, and that brings the cost way up. When it is re-melted, it isn't as good as the original material.
post #59 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Yes, Mel, I realize they weren't literally carving the aluminum block. A figure of speech for my little scenario.

Well, it was certainly dramatic!
post #60 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Very cute, guys, but once it's on, you can't see your reflection.

Very cute yourself, but to each his own and we each may have our reasons for not caring for a glossy screen.

However, his Steveness and crew seemed to have made that decision for us all!

Kinda like the founder of Ford cars and trucks, Henry Ford told is customers regarding his car, "You can have any color your want, as long as it's black!"

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #61 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Well, it was certainly dramatic!

Exactly! I considered "rip the inset from the living flesh of the aluminum" and "cast an inset from the molten aluminums of creation" but decided to tone it down.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #62 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesWvr View Post

Jobs claimed that it was to make it look good, but it's pretty much impossible to tell that the iMac has glass on it; it just looks shiny. He also claimed that the glass is highly recyclable (which I'm sure was to please the nature-protection groups).

I personally think that Apple getting hammered for not having as high of a recycling rate at other computer companies is ridiculous because I know that a ton of Mac users keep their old computers, they don't just throw them away. I have a Macintosh Classic II sitting on my bookshelf that I never use, but I'm not going to throw it away. I don't know any PC users that put their old Windows boxes on their bookshelves to look at on a daily basis.

And with the mirrored Apple logo... I have an eMac that has a mirrored Apple logo in the same place that it would be on the iMacs, and when using the computer, I cannot see myself in the mirror. Maybe it would be possible to see your reflection on the iMacs, but in order to see myself on the eMac, I have to slouch over and look directly at it.

Sooner or later, all Macs will get thrown out, except for a very few that some people will keep as a historical memento, if they have room. That's what I do.

But, at some point almost all Macs are disposed of. It just takes longer for the first wave to be thrown out. After that, the rest are gotten rid of with regularity, just as PC's are.

Otherwise, Apple wouldn't have a recycling program, and problem.
post #63 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Very cute yourself, but to each his own and we each may have our reasons for not caring for a glossy screen.

That's fine, but it doesn't have anything to do with the reflections.

Quote:
However, his Steveness and crew seemed to have made that decision for us all!

Kinda like the founder of Ford cars and trucks, Henry Ford told is customers regarding his first car, "You can have any color your want, as long as it's black!"

Well, the MacBook is doing better than any other model Apple has ever had. Would it do better if there was choice? Maybe, maybe not.
post #64 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Exactly! I considered "rip the inset from the living flesh of the aluminum" and "cast an inset from the molten aluminums of creation" but decided to tone it down.

Yeah, but that would at least have been closer to the truth!
post #65 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That's not it at all, as you should know.

The more SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost. If Apple offer both, then it migh have raised the price by $50.

Why do you think Apple puts cheap gpu's in its machines? To save a few bucks.

So instead of the $200.00 and $300.00 price break you'd be getting a $150.00 or $250.00 price break instead?!

More SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost??? Apple started out with the iPod SKU, then the Mini iPod SKU, then the Shuffle SKU, then the... you get my point... Apple already has a limited product line MacBooks & MacBook Pros for laptops and The Mac Mini, iMac, PowerMac for Desktops... adding screen options for production runs can be managed effectively without creating havoc for their inventory control. There are some brilliant minds over at Apple, this shouldn't stump them or present a problem. It is more of the attitude of what Apple puts out is what you wil get. Love it or leave it type thing. And in certain circumstances, I'm sure some people will pass on this new iMac design until Apple either offers them a choice or the person gives in to Apple's conformity.

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #66 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Yeah, but that would at least have been closer to the truth!

The truth is more like ripped the inset from the...... Nevermind.

At any rate, I think it's pretty clear that the controversial black border is an artifact of how the glass is inset into the case.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #67 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

So instead of the $200.00 and $300.00 price break you'd be getting a $150.00 or $250.00 price break instead?!

More SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost??? Apple started out with the iPod SKU, then the Mini iPod SKU, then the Shuffle SKU, then the... you get my point... Aplle already has a limited product line MacBooks & MacBook Pros for laptops and The Mac Mini, iMac, PowerMac for Desktops... adding screen options for production runs can be managed effectively without creating havoc for their inventory control. There are some brilliant minds over at Apple, this shouldn't stump them or present a problem. It is more of the attitude of what Apple puts out is what you wil get. Love it or leave it type thing. And in certain circumstances, I'm sure some people will pass on this new iMac design until Apple either offers them a choice or the person gives in to Apple's conformity.

Yes, as hard as it may be for you to believe, it does add to the cost. You just don't want to think it through. It's a joke to you. But, if you do think of what happens, from the first designs, to the stocking of the stores, you would understand that the more SKU's the higher the price.

That doesn't mean that prices won't come down with new designs. Technology moves ahead, and so prices do come down. But multiple SKU's prevent it from coming down to what it might.

Remember that with the new iPods, Apple kept removing more accessories with each new iteration, to keep that price down. People noticed, and complained about each time it happened. I'm sure people here remember.

I'm not saying that I don't think Apple should have offered two screens. I've said the opposite.

I'm just giving you one reason why Apple may not be offering it.

But, the easily removable screen does offer a way to replace them without taking the machine apart. Interesting.
post #68 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

The truth is more like ripped the inset from the...... Nevermind.

At any rate, I think it's pretty clear that the controversial black border is an artifact of how the glass is inset into the case.

Yes, it serves a dual purpose.
post #69 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That's fine, but it doesn't have anything to do with the reflections.



Well, the MacBook is doing better than any other model Apple has ever had. Would it do better if there was choice? Maybe, maybe not.

It would be a better argument if you were to give the breakdown of Matte finish MacBook Pro's sales vs. Glossy MacBook Pros.

MacBooks may be doing well by virtue of price point then having to do with a glossy screen.

It would also be interesting if Apple did have a glossy screen iMac and a matte finish iMac on display at their Apple Stores to see which one the public would go for, then they can base their production runs ratio on that and not be paying for warehousing slow moving inventory.

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #70 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

It would be a better argument if you were to give the breakdown of Matte finish MacBook Pro's sales vs. Glossy MacBook Pros.

MacBooks may be doing well by virtue of price point then having to do with a glossy screen.

It would also be interesting if Apple did have a glossy screen iMac and a matte finish iMac on display at their Apple Stores to see which one the public would go for, then they can base their production runs ratio on that and not be paying for warehousing slow moving inventory.

I don't have those numbers. Possibility one of the companies that analyse sales has estimates, because Apple doesn't break those figures out. The argument would be better for either one of us, depending on how it went.

But the audience for the MBP is mostly different from most of the iMac audience. I'm not sure we could compare a laptop customer to a desktop cone that directly, or one buying a much more expensive device.

I can say that by going from those here who have bought the new iMac, at least those who have posted, the glossy screen isn't a problem. The only review that had a problem was MacWorld in their brightly lit offices, though even they said that the glossy models images looked better.
post #71 of 115
hehehe...

You guys argue and bicker like little old ladies. I like the glossy. All our macs in the office are glossy. Fluorescents arent too huge of a deal... i dunno.
post #72 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by josephwinters View Post

hehehe...

You guys argue and bicker like little old ladies.

You laugh like a little old lady. Har har.
post #73 of 115
hehehehehe...
post #74 of 115
EEEEEE!!!! EEEEEE!!!!! EEEEEEE!!!!!

Oh shit, I laugh like a monkey.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #75 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

EEEEEE!!!! EEEEEE!!!!! EEEEEEE!!!!!

Oh shit, I laugh like a monkey.

At least you type better.
post #76 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Yes, as hard as it may be for you to believe, it does add to the cost. You just don't want to think it through. It's a joke to you. But, if you do think of what happens, from the first designs, to the stocking of the stores, you would understand that the more SKU's the higher the price.

That doesn't mean that prices won't come down with new designs. Technology moves ahead, and so prices do come down. But multiple SKU's prevent it from coming down to what it might.

Remember that with the new iPods, Apple kept removing more accessories with each new iteration, to keep that price down. People noticed, and complained about each time it happened. I'm sure people here remember.

I'm not saying that I don't think Apple should have offered two screens. I've said the opposite.

I'm just giving you one reason why Apple may not be offering it.

But, the easily removable screen does offer a way to replace them without taking the machine apart. Interesting.

I use to work for a small education company (small as in "Cottage Industry") that was the sole distributor of both a professional and consumer line of educational teaching materials of a product line well over 100 items - teacher manuals, workbooks, audio, software, consumables and the like, of a product used to teach English through storyline characters versus the American way of rules like "i before e except after c". This product, produced in England, authored by a woman named Lyn, was a success in the UK - used in 80% of the schools.

We were the sole outlet here in the states selling to school districts, private schools and parents. Although I have no idea as to the "going on" of intellect and artistic creation, design, print, publish, and marketing of the materials, I do know all about inventory, exchange rates and inventory control and having precious shelf space occupied, especially when it's YOU who is laying out money before ever recouping those monies from the profits realized in sales of said materials. So what I say is not based on a joke!

Also, being the sole outlet in the states but not the "authors" of the materials we had to fight tooth and nail for them to create an "Americanized" version of their product so American students would learn the "American' version of words like 'color' not 'colour' etc. We never won out, though. Also, like Steve Jobs, they too thought they new what was best for the market here, much to our chagrin, some of the materials we pruchased just languished, while other materials could have had greater potential if only expanded upon. But the American way versus what worked in the UK and "we've been at it longer" was all we ever heard from them. We also learned about inventory control the hard way, by pre-ordering in bulk, but a lot of items were left on the shelf and a big bill was left to us to pay. We soon changed our ways by extending delivery times and by keeping smaller quantities on hand and increased frequency of orders placed to England.

In the end, being the bunch of novices we were, we paid off our huge business debt, worked our inventory down to managable levels of what sold great and what didn't and had a smoother operation then our inital growing pains. Apple is no "Cottage Industry" and I am sure their inventory and production has been worked down to a science of what serves them best. Having two versions of the iMac, even if one requires BTO, would not be the ruin of Apple! Trust me, they invented, manufactured, warehoused and store shelved "The Cube" for Heaven's sake!

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #77 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

But the audience for the MBP is mostly different from most of the iMac audience. I'm not sure we could compare a laptop customer to a desktop cone that directly, or one buying a much more expensive device..

It may be true that the audience may be different for the MBP versus the MB or iMac, it's just that the MBP is the only line that gives the consumer the chocie of matte or glossy.

AND...

Melgross, are we arguing and bickering like a bunch of old ladies? I thought we were having a point - counterpoint conversation?

To those who say Glossy is not bad, I am not debating regarding that issue. I am however, griping, bickering like an old lady, if you care, with regards to the loss of what once was and no freedom of choice. What if Ford put a 4 cylinder, no make that 2 cylinder in their "muscle" car the Mustang and said it's what the people want, a greener environment and no car enthusiast was given the choice to BTO with a V-8! Bet you'd hear a bunch of old ladies bickering on some muscle car auto enthusiast board!

It's getting late ya'll, Good night!

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #78 of 115
Personally, I dislike the black Apple logo. If the body is made from aluminum, why color the Apple logo at all? Just leave the logo as an impression made in aluminum. It will stand out just fine. That last iMac did this using the white plastic case.

Speaking of black, not only do I dislike the black logo, I really dislike the black back. Truly ugly.
post #79 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

I use to work for a small education company (small as in "Cottage Industry") that was the sole distributor of both a professional and consumer line of educational teaching materials of a product line well over 100 items - teacher manuals, workbooks, audio, software, consumables and the like, of a product used to teach English through storyline characters versus the American way of rules like "i before e except after c". This product, produced in England, authored by a woman named Lyn, was a success in the UK - used in 80% of the schools.

We were the sole outlet here in the states selling to school districts, private schools and parents. Although I have no idea as to the "going on" of intellect and artistic creation, design, print, publish, and marketing of the materials, I do know all about inventory, exchange rates and inventory control and having precious shelf space occupied, especially when it's YOU who is laying out money before ever recouping those monies from the profits realized in sales of said materials. So what I say is not based on a joke!

Also, being the sole outlet in the states but not the "authors" of the materials we had to fight tooth and nail for them to create an "Americanized" version of their product so American students would learn the "American' version of words like 'color' not 'colour' etc. We never won out, though. Also, like Steve Jobs, they too thought they new what was best for the market here, much to our chagrin, some of the materials we pruchased just languished, while other materials could have had greater potential if only expanded upon. But the American way versus what worked in the UK and "we've been at it longer" was all we ever heard from them. We also learned about inventory control the hard way, by pre-ordering in bulk, but a lot of items were left on the shelf and a big bill was left to us to pay. We soon changed our ways by extending delivery times and by keeping smaller quantities on hand and increased frequency of orders placed to England.

In the end, being the bunch of novices we were, we paid off our huge business debt, worked our inventory down to managable levels of what sold great and what didn't and had a smoother operation then our inital growing pains. Apple is no "Cottage Industry" and I am sure their inventory and production has been worked down to a science of what serves them best. Having two versions of the iMac, even if one requires BTO, would not be the ruin of Apple! Trust me, they invented, manufactured, warehoused and store shelved "The Cube" for Heaven's sake!

I never said that it would be the ruin of them. Just that the products would have some added cost.

You found out that for yourself.

But, I'll relate a short bit of my history, which the older members her already have heard.

I was a partner in an audio manufacturing company Magnum Opus, in the '70's through the end of '82, when we sold it. In designing products I always had to take care to try to use components that could be used within other products, to keep the complexity of ordering and inventory down. This was for professional products costing mucho bucks. It was impossible to keep different versions of products for different needs of customers because that would lessen the production run of everything, driving up costs.

As a compromise, we designed a chassis for our studio preamplifier/control unit. That way, the chassis and power supply was always the same, and modules could be bought to make the unit into whatever the customer needed.

It was still expensive to do that way, but had advantages. It did cost far less than coming out with several models, each one just a bit different than the next.

It's how computer companies work today.

Apple has the same problem, don't think they can avoid it by being larger.

Other computer companies have several more lines of computers than Apple has, and it shows in their margins.
post #80 of 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by msantti View Post

I prefer the black logo.

One would get sick and tired of seeing yourself all day with the mirrored one.

Well I have two of the old plastic Cinema displays from the G4 era, and both of them have the shiny chrome silver Apple logo..

To be honest, in the past three years, I have never once looked at my reflection in the logo until today after reading this article.. Oh yeah, I can see myself in there..
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Briefly: On last minute iMac and iPhone design changes