Apple plans mystery "product transition" before September's end - Page 7

I like it. xMac to shut out their competition, that being Pystar.


Throw in the Apple TV capabilities, I like this, but won't hold out any hope for this.


Even a 30% gross margin is a fantasy for Dell and HP. So I doubt whatever it is will draw the attention of any regulatory agency. Apple is sacrificing some minor margin to introduce some technology to some product that will transition a product line or several of their product lines. The product will have some improved technology, yet will remain price competitive (at least as Apple defines price competitive).

I thought I'd parse Peter Oppenheimer's statements and make my own distinct prognostication.

a key "product transition"
cuts back on its profit margins
help shut out rivals
The new, unnamed product
continue to have "technologies and features that others can't match

hmmm, what new, unnamed product could possibly fit all the above criteria. On second thought, nothing I can come up with fits, I give.

I think the transition they are referring to is a Multi-Touch transition that will span multiple product lines. This transition is already underway:

Macbook Air
iPhone
iPod Touch

Here's what I predict will happen for the other product lines.

Macbook and Macbook Pro will get multi-touch pads similar to the Macbook Air. Apple will probably not implement touch screen notebooks in the near future.

New iPods will be released, all with multi-touch interfaces. The iPod Shuffle will remain without a screen.

I don't think Apple will release multi-touch displays or iMacs. They may introduce a keyboard with a multi-touch interface or another input device.

Finally, I think there is a possibility that Apple will introduce a tablet like device. It would be small, with no keyboard, and used as a companion device for the iPhone and Mac notebook/laptops.

As a professional mac user, I like to think that Apple still hasn't forgotten about that user base. You have to remember that even though the proportion of consumers on macs to Professionals on macs is like 100:1, that's just because there aren't that many professionals. But when it comes to that, almost all video production studios are mac based.

Even though Blu-ray is available as a third party upgrade, I think it would be fair to include it as a standard feature on a $3000 computer.

I wasn't trying to reference their Mac business but their iPod business. We've already seen what happens when you're the big guy on the block and people don't like how much control you have (the small DRM free catalogue). I could easily see the likes of SanDisk and Archos getting involved if they price their iPods so low that it drags the entire companies margin down 4%. Since the iPod is just a piece of the pie the price drop would obviously be more than 4% - it'd be more like 10-15%. I'm just saying they should watch their wording since they are out in the spotlight now and there's a number of companies that are upset with them (mostly just envious but those companies also have good legal teams just like Apple does).

Anyway - where's my Aluminum MB?

I am with you. A BD drive in the AppleTV to download the digital copy with ease and or a BD drive in a upgraded MBP. Keep the dream alive.

Wo- Having suggested this touch screen idea above, I think you make a good point about adding it to their computer line. It might make more sense to send out the more minimalist tablet touch first. The need to reach all the way to a big vertical screen on a desktop to move things around might (and grease up your movie screen) not be all that efficient - I could still see it for the macbooks, however, which could be considered to be big tablets for some.

The only consumer electronics device you sell below cost is a console.

You heard it here first: Apple console.

Like I said, a BD on a pro mac would still make some sense. But there is just no way it will make it's way onto the apple TV, the whole point of that device is to buy and rent video content from itunes. So yeah.

Not according to Jobs.


I thought they built hardware to add value to their software.


You are 100% right there. Apple would never want to support a 5 year-old Athlon piece of crap PC. But if a manufacturer, who happened to be really angry with Microsoft, wanted to build a notebook, which was just a nice clean reference design from Apple. It would be a different matter. Remember how 3rd party iPod manufacturers have to pay Apple for the "Made for iPod" sticker? Now imagine a "Made for OS X" sticker.


Well, if competing with Microsoft is so tough. We might as well shut the company and go home now!


Sony are very unhappy with Microsoft.
HP are unhappy with Microsoft.
Even Dell would ship OS X, if they were allowed to.

If Apple announced this, shit would fly. Microsoft shares would start a 5 year nosedive.

There's this commonly held belief that this could not happen, because it would destroy sales of Apple's profitable Macintosh computers. I say bullshit.

Some people buy Macintosh computers to run Windows.
The hardware is good enough to stand on its own two feet without an artificial advantage. The brand loyalty is great. Macs would continue to thrive as long as the hardware was price competitive.

Suggesting that no one would buy a Mac, if they could buy a Dell to run OS X is pure and utter nonsense.

Mac OS X is the best OS on the planet. It's time to go head-to-head with Windows.

Bring it on Monkey boy!

C.

The MacBook Pro already has the Air's touch pad (but a little bit smaller). Adding it to the MacBook isn't a "transition" worth hinting at in the financial call.

Increasing the capacity of the iPod touch would be a step towards eliminating hard drives from all iPods. Are flash drives cheap enough to completely eliminate the iPod classic? I'd consider at least 80-100 GB to be the target max capacity Apple needs to maintain. A more likely "transition" product would be the larger screened iPod touch (aka tablet). I would find a modestly sized tablet or larger touch with screen sharing to maniulate the UI of a remote Mac very useful. Imagine only carrying around a small tablet and using Back to Your Mac to access your full-size computer at home!

Not now, no. But in the coming years, maybe months, it could be Intel -> Intel + PA Semi. The latter would develop custom chips that would make cloning by the competition more difficult than it is now. These would enhance Intel-based Macs, not replace Intel's chips.


On the MacBook Air it makes a big difference. Take a look at the first couple videos of the HDD Air vs. the SSD model, especially the second one where they launch like 20 applications simultaneously:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ith_video.html



One word: cannibalization. If they try to go into the micro laptop market to compete with things like the Asus EEE, which are very underpowered and cheap because of it, they risk cutting into sales of their own tremendously successful mobile Wifi devices: the iPhone and iPod touch.

Did you read my previous posts? It's just not going to happen. Get over it.

Not only does it not make any sense in the current situation. But Apple has had really bad experiences with licensing osx in the 90s, I don't think they want to go back there.

Mini Tower Mac!

Yaaay!

Oh, but it does make sense, because of the current situation. If Apple were to partner with another major manufacturer like Dell or HP, it would step on tiny little companies like Psystar, which can't compete with that. And people really overstate how OSX is tied to Apple computers- it runs really, really well on some very common hardware. Hardly any work would be involved there, and the "experience" doesn't suffer a bit.

Now, I don't think that is likely, but I do think it is a possibility. You can't simply dismiss anything these days.

Crikey, people are working themselves into a tizz!

I think we'll see some new aluminium MacBooks and maybe an iPod Touch Nano. Nothing more earth shattering than that.

Apple partnering with Dell is about as believable as saying the world is flat. The stock would sell off down to $15 and steve, for all the good he's done for Apple, would be kicked out again. Apple would cease to sell any decent number of computers since people could buy a Dell with the same OS for less and their gross margins would be cut, at the very least, in half. Not going to happen...

In the end Apple wants to make money and they are doing a d@mn good job at it right now so I can't see them doing something so backwards as going after market share when what makes them money isn't the OS but the hardware they sell.

...No They are a hardware company meaning they make money off hardware. Ever wonder why Apple only brings attention to the first weekend or so of Mac OS X sales when a new version is released? Because after the initial rush, standalone OS X sales quickly decline. Most people get the new operating system with the purchase of a new Mac.

Apple sells Mac OS X for $130; $70 with a student discount. iWork is sold for $80; $40 with a student discount. Those are shareware prices. Meanwhile, look at standalone Vista and Office licenses. Much more expensive. Why? Because MS is a software company while Apple mainly uses software to add value to their profitable hardware.

Hope that makes sense.

I didn't have time to go through all the posts, but I'm sure it has been suggested.

I believe Apple will license OS X to specific PC manufacturers.

Licensing software to a specified distributer is the only way you could shut out competition - the competition being fly-by-night clone manufacturers. This is why it took so long for Apple to sue Psystar. They needed to develop a case that would allow them to only license Mac OS X to specific PC manufacturers. They needed a company to do a crappy job of distributing and supporting Mac OS X on common PC hardware so they could come out and say the only way they can insure the integrity of the Apple brand is to license the software to major manufacturers who can control the quality and thus avoid an anti-trust suite by smaller computer manufacturers.

You won't be able to buy the software and just install it on any PC, you'll have to buy an HP, Dell or other major brand. This is why it would be a limited hit to their margins, only certain major brand PCs will qualify for the program, and only those that don't compete with Apple's current product lines. Basically low-cost tower PCs. The software will be tied to those systems and it won't be able to be installed (without hacks) on other systems such as notebooks. Much like how you can't install OS X on older Mac hardware.

Psystar has basically shot the hobbiest computer builder in the foot, but has built the framework to allow Apple to license it's operating system on computers other than Apple hardware. Apple now doesn't need to beat Psystar in the court case on all accounts - that will be just a show trial - it just needs to show that it needs to and is allowed to control the licensing of it's software.

What Apple loses in low-end computer sales, it will make up in OEM licensing of Mac OS X.

Yes, and people who do so are confused. Mac OS X is not "tied" to Apple's computers any more than the Nintendo Wii's operating system is tied to the Wii, or Sony's PS3 OS is tied to PS3s, or even Microsoft's own Xbox's OS is tied to its console.

These are all EMBEDDED SYSTEMS. They are cohesive hardware-software products made by one company. People have the choice to use them or not. They differ from Windows, an operating system made by one company, MS, that is licensed to hardware vendors, a separate company, Dell, HP, etc. Microsoft has a monopolist position on PCs because every new PC sold equals a Windows license sale. People buying PCs don't have a choice because Windows is the de facto OS on every new PC, even though alternatives like Linux exist. Apple making their operating system available to third parties won't change Microsoft's anti-competitive, anti-consumer exclusive OEM deals they have with PC manufacturers.

2 cents from a newbie:

I figure on an AppleTV DVR

Far out guess:

Fuel cell power for MBP.

That's what they said about Apple switching to Intel chips...

Developing an OS is very expensive. MS pays for it by selling a huge number of copies, and even then look at how high the prices are for retail copies. Since Apples sells far, far fewer copies (both pre-installed and retail) than MS, they rely on the profits of the hardware sales to subsidize the R&D for the OS. MS can license to PC makers at a discount because they have volume on their side.

In order to maintain the revenue stream to support OS X R&D, Apple would need charge OEMs a high enough price to make up for any cannabolization of Mac hardware sales. That alone would make it an unattractive option for most PC makers. Your budget Mac clone is all of a sudden much more expensive than the exact same hardware with Windows (because the OEM price for Vista is going to be a lot lower than the OEM price for OS X). So in effect, you've solved nothing...Macs are still viewed as more expensive than Windows...except now you have concrete proof of it!

it's got to be a mac tablet. I love the "idea" of this but i have several concerns.

Do we really need a computer that small? many times we see this kind of product with so many apps. it's trying to be a full computer in a hand-held. do we really need everything a computer has in such a small size. Buy a friggin' MBA then. All it really needs is everything the iphone has less the phone. and maybe more advanced inputing like a sylus or something to draw with. other than that just a large format (say 12"-15") screen sized and all the functionality of the iphone would be perfect. (oh, and a files storage system like "finder") Let's call is the iPAD (my "Trek" side shows through).

Transition will be Mac-related. Apple cannot lock out competitors in the entire PC market, but they could in certain segments. All-in-one, ultra portables, tablets, etc.

I expect all laptops and possibly iMacs to go with solid-state drives. It is the future. Magnetic hard drives and optical disc drives are the only computer components that still have moving parts. They need to go. Magnetic hard drives will be first.

Touch will be standard on many new products. Apple invested a lot in this technology. They will use it for more than just phones and music players.

Will the long-rumored tablet arrive? Perhaps, but it probably won't be what everybody is imagining.

Different kind of show, but what about Keen Eddie?

It is going to be a Macbook running on the iPhone/Touch OS and wirelessly via Apple's MobileMe cloud syncing technology. Most important, it would be protected by more than 200+ patents registered and buried in the iPhone and the iPod Touch.

As we know, the iPhone/Touch OS is an extension of the Mac OS X Leopard which is now undergoing transition under the code name of Snow Leopard.

However, there is one other type of Leopard that is still roaming our planet and hasn't yet been mentioned, and that is the Clouded Leopard. Yes there is such an animal: http://www.cap.nsw.edu.au/bb_site_in...e/leopards.htm

Thus, the Macbook Cloud.

Such a product addresses the 'transition' issue and "The new, unnamed product will continue to have "technologies and features that others can't match," statement. In addition, a strategically positioned pricing model could be developed to satisfy the proclaimed decrease in margins.

This is a wild guess: How about a transition of the iPod line to in-dash automotive systems? Last year, there was some buzz on Apple working with Volkswagen, even making an appearance on the VW Up! Concept car.

Microsoft has been working to get in this market for years, with the Auto PC project, evolved into Sync and sold on Fords. Many other car stereos are including hard-drive MP3 capability and nav.

An aftermarket iPod-branded car stereo/nav system could quickly dominate over other brands. But Apple doesn't really do aftermarket.

Also, the concept as shown was an integrated multi-function system, including climate controls and warning lights, on the large touch-screen display. This level of function would need to be an an OEM design. Would this be enough to swing enough car-buyers to a different brand to "shut out" the rivals? Unless they were working with many different automakers... And would this dramatically hurt their bottom line? Probably not.

Then again, September is time to roll out the new model year cars. My wife just placed an order for a new VW Tiguan, to arrive in Oct-Nov. If this is true, I think there might be time to "adjust" the order...

I apologise, I did not realise that I wasn't permitted to disagree with people.



Was this OS X version 6 or OS X version 7 ?

C.

MS did not develop HD DVD's DRM, but they did develop an implementation of HDi. Windows is not required, Toshiba's earlier machines ran on Linux, I think maybe they had their own HDi implementation.


IIRC, they can't be played on a Mac.



They talked about reducing their margin, not wiping them out. MS spent maybe six years and billions of dollars before they started making anything that looks like a net profit on the venture.

I want a new mac mini that does everything you can think of, from run a display ,cable tv in , rca plug in and out, 500 gig , too big and too ugly is ok cause i'm gonna hide it anyway. Noisy is not ok . $200 sounds unbeatable My remote on my iphone will run it just fine .

Speaking of overstatement, the high price of retail copies of Windows is irrelevant, because almost no one buys it that way. Microsoft charges major manufacturers (that buy in bulk, as you say) about $40 a license, depending on version. Apple could easily match that price.

I don't want to go off-topic talking about Windows OEM licensing, so my point is that if Apple were to license OSX, their sale of the license -whether it's $20 or $100 per machine- is mostly profit and is tantamount to the profit Apple makes off a hardware sale. Especially if done in bulk.

Again, I don't think this is likely. I'd give it about a 5% chance of happening, but dismissing it because of what happened 15 years ago is silly.

Monitors alone don't drive new sales, and there are hundreds of sources for monitors at lower prices already. Think different.

I'm thinking a display update. An HDTV display with Apple TV integrated. There is so much content on the web, everyone is coming up with a box to stream it. Why not just take advantage of the digital switch (lots of new TV to be bought), and offer a display, that doubles as a TV, with the box technology built in?

Okay, so my strategy might not be what Apple is thinking, but this is the only area I'm see a hard push in competition. Especially with Xbox streaming 360. I think Apple has to make a move.

A transition from computer display to HDTV/computer display.

Apple have already made OS X - It's paid for already. The only question is, how should they now make money from it?

If Apple licensed OS X to Sony - and charged Sony $100 per OEM copy - that's $100 additional revenue. And another $100 if the customer buys iLife.


Please explain cannibalization. Why should Apple automatically lose hardware sales if this happened? Are you saying that Mac hardware isn't good enough? Are you saying people wouldn't buy Mac hardware if they could buy a Vaio? I happen to believe that Mac hardware can stand on its own feet.

Now turn your question around. How much money does Apple lose by only being able to sell iWork, MobileMe and all its SOFTWARE products only to Mac hardware. If OS X had 30% market share. How much more software could Apple sell? And how many more developers would be attracted to the platform?

C.

Oh, very interesting. With a "MacOS" chip built in?! Cool idea.

Hello! MacFolio!.

I like your fuel cell idea. Welcome.

I completely disagree. Can someone make a mockup of the "iPod nano touch." Remove the click wheel on the bottom half and make the screen cover the entire front side.. I believe this is very plausible.

As a product transition (and not an altogether new product), I'm fairly certain we're looking at a multi-touch Cinema Display. The Cinema Display line hasn't seen a refresh in a while and it would be timely prior to a Snow Leopard release to have the hardware present for the software features to work.

Just my two cents.

is this is the longest thread where everyone pulling in different direction ?

iPod, MacBook & Pro and OS X and other hardware ... wow, product transition means so many things :-)

i personally believe it is Laptop line - MacBook & Pro getting a complete make over and price reduction

iPod - going full touch and lower price is given, but no one knows the time frame.