Originally Posted by BenRoethig
Most of the newer ones haven't given much of a reason for a high opinion.
Because of the G4 chip. Instead of replacing it, they just plain dropped it.
Schools were moving to laptops. Here in NYC, a laptop lab is the preferred method of buying computers for K-12. What they do is have a specially designed cart on which the laptops are kept. The cart is moved to the classrom where the computers are needed. There could be up to 36 laptops per cart. Mostly Macbooks, or similarly priced PC's.
The need for the Education Mac is no longer here. The eMac no longer had a function.
You're using Apple's change in naming conventions to twist things here. Let's make things easier here and I'll give you a name conversion list.
PPC: Mac Mini
Intel Macbook Pro.
What's the point? You're bemoaning the change in the name?
No, I'm saying that Apple is popular and has consistent margins, they're not subject to the same pitfalls as Dell. Apple probably makes as much on Mac Mini (even at the old PPC price points) as Dell does on three inspiron desktops. on the flip side, they make much more money per each workstation than Apple does on a MacPro. But we're not talking margins here, we're talking about products gaps that were previously filled.
Profit is very important. Apple doesn't have the expensive workstation and server market that Dell does. Neither do they have the business consulting services.
They have to make a proper profit on all their lines. That's the proper way to do it.
If a machines doesn't fit within their targets, they should drop it.
[quote]I don't understand your point. Apple doesn't have one line of computers.
They sure do now. If you're an entry level buyer, you buy a MacMini. If you're a consumer, you buy an iMac. If you're professional you buy a Mac Pro. Consumers need only dual cores and two DIMM slots, anyone who needs more must need a workstation.
On the laptop side If you want a smaller notebook, you must be a consumer and need a Macbook if you need a larger screen, you must be a professional. These are all black and white choices with no overlap based what Apple and Apple alone thinks you should need.
You mentioned iPods. I didn't. So, if you want a small inexpensive iPod, you buy the Shuffle. Computer: the Mini, or low end Macbook.
Medium models? The Nano, or the new Macbook or iMac.
High end? The iTouch, or the Mac Pro or MBP.
What's your problem here?
You're once again using naming conventions to twist things.
No, I'm just following YOUR using the name. The name has a computer behind it. If you don't mean what you say, say something else.
When you mention the G5 Powermac, but don't MEAN the G5 Powermac, then exactly what do you mean?
There is more to a computer than just a CPU. With a PowerMac line (read Mac Pro) you had had expansion slots, you had multiple drive bays, you had an additional pair of DIMM slots, you could choose your video card, and you could choose your display all for an affordable $1299-$1699. With the iMac now being the only choice Apple makes all those decisions for you and if Apple is wrong, than its just too bad. They don't really care if you're ability to do tasks is diminished. And make no mistake, I did not buy the iMac because I love the elegant simple design. I bought it because the current incarnation of windows sucks and I have so much invested in the Mac platform that it would not be an easy move.
First of all, you should stop using the word "had". As far as I can tell, the Mac Pro continues to have all the advantages of the Powermac, except that it's a much better computer.
The Powermac at the $1299 price was gone long ago. The cheapest one was several hundred more than that before the Mac Pro arrived.
You have to take inflation into account as well. Apple moves the price of its machines up and down when new ones replace the old, depending on what they are offering.
Since only a very few ever do more to upgrade their machines than add memory, and most people don't even do that, the iMac is more than enough for most people in that price range.
And that makes Apple's complete elimination of tower options under $2300 somehow alright? How much do they have to take away before you start to lose faith in them?
Look at their sales. That's what matters, not theoretical desires.
A company is allowed to decide what products they want to put out. It's up to the potential customer to decide if those products suit them.
So far, Apple seems to be making the right moves. I don't have to agree with all of them.
Because I bring a voice who doubts some of Apple's decisions? Who sees a qualitative difference between a switcher and someone who choose to use a Mac because it was (at one time) a better platform? Who sees that Apple is making a lot of decision based on hype and herding that have the potential to significantly hurt its standing with the base?
No. Because you are making assumptions about numbers and thoughts of others that you don't know. You are trying to fit others into your line of thinking.
I'm sorry I got outside the RDF and took advantage of the think part of Think Different. Apparently independent thought isn't tolerated in the Mac platform anymore. It's all about what we can do to serve Apple and Steve Jobs. It has nothing to do with a superior computer to serve your needs. You need to go to windows for that right?
The idea about RDF is cute for those who want to think they are special because they are too good to be caught in it. But, few people are taken in by this "RDF" in the first place.
It's narrow thinking to believe that those who agree Apple makes pretty good moves aren't capable of thinking on their own.
I have very good reasons for what I think. You may not agree, but perhaps you are a victim of the "anti-RDF" hmmm?