or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple plans mystery "product transition" before September's end
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

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

post #241 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by superkaratemonkeydeathcar View Post

xMac
xMac
xMac xMac
xMac xMac xMac
xMac xMac xMac xMac xMac
xMac xMac xMac xMac xMac xMac xMac xMac

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

Quote:
Originally Posted by CDonG4 View Post

It's definitely going to be a newish product.
...
I'm thinking xMac might finally rear its head (I've always. This xMac could be modular and suit a variety of needs. DVR + Media Center + BluRay player... or a File Server + NAS + Drobo like backup system... or a desktop with limited expandability based on a mini atx form facotr. Perhaps its not as flexible as this (perhaps it is) and its the counterpart to the tablet.

/wildest apple dreams of the last 20 years coming true

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

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post

I think Apple may be on a slippery slope here. Saying your going to kill the competition by making sure they can't under cut your prices is a little monopolistic isn't it? I mean they don't have enough PC share to garner any law suits but if they bring out something that completely kills the competition in the mp3 market I can easily see SanDisk, Archos, and even MS jumping on board saying Apple is involved in un-competitive practices and they are trying to create a monopoly. I just think they need to watch their words a little closer as they become bigger and bigger and have more and more control over stuff like the digital music market...

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.
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
post #242 of 735
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.
post #243 of 735
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.
post #244 of 735
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?
post #245 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abracadabra View Post

Looking into my crystal ball I can see a take 3 on a certain hobby product... it is a little bit hazy but it looks like this time it will be with 1080p, DVR, and something else, hard to see, wait a sec, it is a... yes!, a BluRay drive. And it is cheap and will sell in millions
Oops, it is not a crystal ball, it's a wishing well I am staring into...

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.
post #246 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

Noticed a few predictions that really don't make sense if you look at what Apple has done.


Touch-screen Macs - I can see the thought process, but Apple has already put Multi-Touch into two of their three laptops in the last few months: the MacBook Air and the MacBook Pro. Why would they then slap a Multi-Touch display on any of their computers? Side note: Apple likely won't add Multi-Touch to their Cinema Displays, nor the iMac. Why? Because Apple is looking to the future, which is mobile WiFi devices like the iPhone, iPod touch, and MacBook Air, not desktops. Not saying they're going to kill the iMac or Mac Pro anytime soon, but they sell many more laptops and they promote mobile platforms.

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.
post #247 of 735
The only consumer electronics device you sell below cost is a console.

You heard it here first: Apple console.
post #248 of 735
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.
post #249 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

Licensing Mac OS X to third parties - Never happening. Apple's a hardware company.

Not according to Jobs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

They use software to add value to their products and differentiate them from the competition.

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

Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

The reason Mac OS X is so much more stable than Windows and even Linux is because it is run off hardware built for it, and vice versa. Apple could never hope to support the umpteen PC configurations out there.

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

Don't forget, Windows is successful because of anti-competitive, anti-consumer exclusive OEM deals with third part hardware vendors that stifle competition from alternatives like Linux and Microsoft promotes closed, proprietary formats like WMA and WMV that tie the user to their platform. If Apple tried to sell Mac OS X on its own for profit, they'd be going up against a monopoly that even the free Linux distros are having a hell of a time breaking into.

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

Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

Don't forget, Apple is outpacing the PC industry 3 to 1. They have no reason to move into the stagnating market they're competing and winning against.

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.
post #250 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron View Post

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.

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!
post #251 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

The TRANSITION word is the interesting one.

We are talking something big that will eat profits in order to get the company to a better place.
So in the past there was OS9 -> OS X and recently we had Power -> Intel.

It's not going to be Intel -> PA Semi

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

So what is it?
It could be HDD -> SDD but I am not sure customers can actually feel the benefit yet.

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


Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

The only other one I can think of is..
Notebook -> Netbook

By this I mean completely reposition the Macbook as a lower-cost device. Going up against stuff like the MSI Wind. The Netbook thing is really picking-up speed. Apple already has a netbook, But the Air is 4 times the price of the competition.

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.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #252 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

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.

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.
post #253 of 735
Mini Tower Mac!

Yaaay!

bb
Reply
bb
Reply
post #254 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by paprochy View Post

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.

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.
post #255 of 735
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.
post #256 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

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.

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.
post #257 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

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

...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.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #258 of 735
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.
post #259 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

And people really overstate how OSX is tied to Apple computers...

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.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #260 of 735
2 cents from a newbie:

I figure on an AppleTV DVR

Far out guess:

Fuel cell power for MBP.
post #261 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post

Apple partnering with Dell is about as believable as saying the world is flat.

That's what they said about Apple switching to Intel chips...
post #262 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

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.

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!
post #263 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrosmash View Post

It's a MacTablet, obviously. A merging of a full Mac and the iPhone in terms of functionality and UI.

It's the last remaining "poorly defined" market to be conquered before Steve-o retires.

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).
post #264 of 735
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.
Prosecutors will be violated
Reply
Prosecutors will be violated
Reply
post #265 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by allblue View Post

PS Having recently watched all 16 episodes of "Foyle's War'" on DVD (he's a Detective Chief Superintendent BTW) I agree it is a superb series, and it takes a bit to excite my TV jaded palate these days. My only question is 'how the hell did ITV produce something that good?'

Different kind of show, but what about Keen Eddie?
post #266 of 735
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.
post #267 of 735
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...
post #268 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by paprochy View Post

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

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


Quote:
Originally Posted by paprochy View Post

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.

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

C.
post #269 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

Ha, thanks.

And I see your point. Blu-ray is certainly more modern and Apple supported the format by being a member of its consortium, but that was mainly in opposition of Microsoft's backing of HD-DVD, which featured more DRM developed by MS that...wait for it...tied the user to Windows.

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.

Quote:
Aren't there already Blu-ray drives sold by third parties that come with BD writing software for Macs?

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


Quote:
Originally Posted by poke View Post

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

You heard it here first: Apple console.

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.
post #270 of 735
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 .
post #271 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

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!

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.
post #272 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlashmanBurgess View Post

I'm guessing the whole product line of LCD monitors transition over to the LED back lighting rather than florescent tubes.

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

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #273 of 735
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.
post #274 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

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.

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

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.

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.
post #275 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanchan View Post

Apple designed motherboards?

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

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #276 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

If it's like a foldable dual 13inch (think macbook air but with LED LCD screen on both inner sides, full multi-touch), this would be THE EBOOK THAT WILL DEFINE THE 21ST CENTURY when publishing took a step out of the gutterberg(sic, get it?) into the light.

Maybe the big thing is that colleges across the USA will have these as an option - full MacEbook for all your courses, never worry about leaving your books back in the dorm or at your friends' place or losing it.

THE E-LEARNING REVOLUTION THAT WAS PROMISED TO US.

A US $99 version for all developing countries. !! Wow. My mind just blew.

Hello! MacFolio!.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #277 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECB View Post

2 cents from a newbie:

I figure on an AppleTV DVR

Far out guess:

Fuel cell power for MBP.

I like your fuel cell idea. Welcome.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #278 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

Not gonna happen. The smaller screen is fine for watching video, but it's way too small for touchscreen, particularly running apps.
.

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.
post #279 of 735
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.
post #280 of 735
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.

Nov '09 | iMac 21.5" C2D 3.06 Ghz | Intel 330 240GB SSD | ATI

Sep '12| Toshiba 14" 1366 x 768! | i5 3rd Gen 6GB| Intel x25-m 120GB SSD | Win 7|  Viewsonic VX2255wmb 22" LCD
iPhone 4S| iPad 2 wifi

Reply

Nov '09 | iMac 21.5" C2D 3.06 Ghz | Intel 330 240GB SSD | ATI

Sep '12| Toshiba 14" 1366 x 768! | i5 3rd Gen 6GB| Intel x25-m 120GB SSD | Win 7|  Viewsonic VX2255wmb 22" LCD
iPhone 4S| iPad 2 wifi

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple plans mystery "product transition" before September's end