or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple to introduce more affordable Macs, sources say
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple to introduce more affordable Macs, sources say - Page 4

post #121 of 293
Psystar is toast!
post #122 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

As everyone who knows me knows, I think Apple is overpriced, that said I get most of my Macs from Apple friends and get around 25=35% off, depending on unit, refresh or end of life (normally the best deal, EOL (end of life)), however, I have done enough research to show that a PC built close to a MAC PRO comes out to the same if not more. This doesn't mean it's NOT overpriced as the PC manufacture and Apple have decent margins on them.

My point was Apple could have easily built a 4 and 8 core i7 system with great DDR (non ECC) and you would have a machine that if you built retail would cost $800 (i7 Machine), so actual manufacturing cost would be about $450, instead, Apple chooses higher end so they can have a higher profit margin. In other words, they could have built an i7 machine at $450 (our cost would be $800 to build, retail), and sell it for $1200.

With the Macbook (about $250 to make) and AIR (I can't and won't go there), these machines are somewhat overpriced, thing is, I don't know how they will release something cheaper (which on paper is very easy to do and still be of good quality, remember, Macbook not that expensive to make, especially with Unibody), but because of these two items, I don't know how they come out with a cheaper machine unless they add newer 4 core CPU's to the MACBOOK and MACBOOK pro and start pricing laptops based on cores.

In the end, the consumer wins and Apple has not paid attention to the PC user for a long time, it's all been iPhone, iPhone, iPhone.

By your logic you must conclude, on its face, that the Dell and Lenovo whose systems are equivalent to a Mac Pro must be overpriced as well. To not include them as being overpriced is to ignore facts.
post #123 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

If netbooks are so crappy, then they will only serve to lower people's opinion of windows, and make it more likely that they get a Mac when the netbook finally karks it.

I love that word "kark" - did you make it up, or do people actually use it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrandersoniii View Post

iLife alone is worth nearly a $100 in the Mac world... and would probably take $200 - $300 in the Windoze world to (poorly) replicate.

I agree it's worth $100 IF you USE it. I never use a bit of it anymore (I'm a Photoshop user, don't make movies or edit sound, e.g.,), nor do most of my Mac owning friends, and nobody's gonna give me $100.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wil Maneker View Post

My estimation is that Apple will provide a lower entry point for the consumer products and have all component upgrades trickle down through the highest entry point for the Macbook and iMac. Margins will be nearly-sustained by delivering a product containing lowest-tiered components.

Seems pretty simple to me. Use parts that were cutting edge Mac quality when released, but which have gone down in price near the end of their life cycles - a slightly slower processor, e.g., and have this model as entry level. No extra engineering. Margins preserved. A Mac that's as fast as they could have gotten the year before and been thrilled with. Just one more SKU

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxy View Post

Apple's consumer-level hardware (i.e., excluding the Mac Pro) compares unfavorably to that of other manufacturers, especially when price is considered. The only justification for calling a Mac a "premium" product is OS X, and despite that it is getting harder to make a case for the whole package. When Windows 7 comes out, Apple will find much stiffer competition from the Windows world.

Bah-loney. For one thing, the total design of hardware and software adds value and ergonomic benefits. I go nuts when I'm using a Win trackpad, e.g..

And the machine at some point is only as fast or reliable or durable or enjoyable to use as its weakest link. Whenever you begin to do price comparisons in this way, you find the "Apple tax" to be much lower than assumed, even out of the gate, and even moreso over the longer useful lifetimes of the average Macs which many studies have shown to have a lower TCO (total cost of ownership, including price, support, warranty, repairs, up time - and for we individual owners - resale value.

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #124 of 293
Quote:
I'm skeptical because they already said this the last time round. Apple specifically said they were cutting margins. It may have been due to the recession that they changed their minds but I'd say right now that their prices are way too high. A move to cut prices will only bring them into normal pricing range, which is still high in these times when products should be priced below normal.

Instead of £949 for a dual core with a 20" screen and integrated graphics, it should be £799.
Instead of £929 for the aluminum Macbook, it should be £799. and the white one at £599.
The Macbook Air should be £999 instead of £1271.
The MBP should be £1299 instead of £1369.
The Mini should be £399 but could be £449 instead of £499.
The Mac Pro entry level should be £1499 not £1899 but I doubt that will change.

Price drops are always good but inflating your prices first and then dropping them doesn't really change much. Even with these changes, they are still a target of Microsoft's advertising.

Apple currently don't have a quad core processor under £1900 whereas you can buy a PC quad for £500 - that's bordering on 1/4 the price. I don't think cutting prices on the current model spec by a small amount will do much to change their reputation of having few options and high prices for those options unless they address both those points.

For example, not always using the highest spec parts in their machines for that target market. Some people might not need an iMac with 2.66GHz processors so drop $110 off the price and sell one with 2.26GHz and aim to push the entry point below $1000.

The PC industry understands that people who pay for cheap machines can generally get by with lower performance. At every update, Apple pushes the latest hardware at the same or higher pricing and seems to ignore people's needs.

I'm personally against Celeron processors a lot but they are still $70-80 instead of $250-300. People who do the basic laptop stuff like browsing, email, word processing etc will get by with a 1.7GHz Celeron if they managed with 1.5GHz and less powerbooks coupled with 9400M graphics. Shaving $200 off the bottom end for people who want a well-built computer and don't care about the highest performance would be a good move.

\\

This guy gets it.

Apple doesn't offer enough choice for people with different budgets.

iMac? Use an expensive laptop chip.
Mac Pro? Put a workstation chip in it.

Options? Desktop that uses reasonable priced chips ie in the gaping hole in their line up. Nicely designed consumer tower box cube thing.

iMac. As above. Slower clocks. Squeeze margins a little. Not a loss leader...but a 'not a greedy bastard' leader (see UK pricing which is out of whack and out of touch with their competition, sane people...the credit crunch and yeah. Netbooks.

Throw in a fekkin' a keyboad and a mouse with the mini. Do a bundle deal on a monitor.

They've got $30 billion in the bank...and Apple are still in crisis mode.

We're tightening our belts...and taking the 'pain'. Not Apple, they jack prices up £400 in a recession because they want to make even MORE money as a business.

Save to say. Best Appleinsider article in a while.

After 23 months of consistent growth, it's a bit ingenuine of Apple to say they don't care about marketshare. Smacktalk. They frequently boast about that in the 'Keynotes' boasting about amount of stores, iPod and iPhone marketshare etc. Yeah right.

Are saying they want to go back to the dark days of 1% or less and a precarious market share position of sheer irrelevance? Selling less than a million Macs? Do they want to really throw away all the good work they've done? On so many fronts? By being the traditional margin huggers?

It's not like they weren't already posting hundreds of millions in record profits per quarter. The UK jack was unnecessary when they were perceived as expensive before the jack. They actually priced me out of a new Mac for the first time ever. Not a nice feeling.

They could squeeze the hell out of HP, Dell and others. THey don't have to be 2 pence each...but they could make life uncomfortable for the opposition by taking the margin hit while we're in recession, cut prices and take the fight into double figures marketshare.

How much? Well. The entry price Macbook is ridiculous. In the US? Don't know. Don't care. But in the UK, I do. £799 wasn't cheap. Now? It's laughable. Should be £599 for the entry. No buts. No maybes. And top out at £999. Less profit on the entry for upsell.

Same with iMac. Ridiculous starting price. Should be around £595 also. Then? It's a steal.

Mac Pro? Stick a Desktop Nehalem in it. Slash the price by a third for the entry model.

Make the Leopard of Snow a free upgrade to the community that have suffered many changes over the years.

We're feeling our pain. But are Apple?

Can people who earn billions understand why people who are taxed to bail out rich guys who made our lives poorer are so p*ssed off?

Who knows.

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #125 of 293
Quote:
Price drops are always good but inflating your prices first and then dropping them doesn't really change much. Even with these changes, they are still a target of Microsoft's advertising.

It's also ingenuine to raise and lower them. It's transparent. It's obvious. It's worthy of M$ themselves.

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #126 of 293
Quote:
Apple currently don't have a quad core processor under £1900 whereas you can buy a PC quad for £500 - that's bordering on 1/4 the price

They're giving M$ the fuel for those adverts. It used to be 100% more to get a Mac. But 400% more to get...a quad core?

Puh-lease. And that's the way it will be perceived by many. That sums up their problem. They're so up themselves...they've lost touch. And they did it at the worst time. Sheer arrogance.

This recession...is the chance to stand up and be counted by Apple. Instead they've acted cheaply, penny pinchingly...and greedily.

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #127 of 293
Quote:
Seems pretty simple to me. Use parts that were cutting edge Mac quality when released, but which have gone down in price near the end of their life cycles - a slightly slower processor, e.g., and have this model as entry level. No extra engineering. Margins preserved. A Mac that's as fast as they could have gotten the year before and been thrilled with. Just one more SKU

There are plenty of fast (and out of date and therefore cheaper components...just ask Apple...with their pregnant cow product cycles...) components out there.

Apple wants to maintain an image of superiority to protect margins. When much of the same stuff can be had much cheaper. Alot of it is branding.

'X'. It's all about the 'X'. Really. If it was windows? Would you buy Mac hardware? No way. Would you buy a junk PC? Maybe not.

But you might? Buy something reasonable in design, price and spec?

It doesn't have to be junk. Does it have to be price jack rip-off Britain?

I'd define 'reasonable' as somewhere in the middle. Where Apple could be.

But now... they're going to find out the hard way...that money is tight...and if they're not careful...and pull their head out of their arrogant place where the sun don't shine that people may shop elsewhere and Apple may lose the brilliant position they worked hard to get to.

I've been with Apple every intriguing step (almost) since 1997 when they were out on their knees. With the recent UK price obscenes...? They almost lost me for good.

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #128 of 293
Maybe we'll see a Mac...and the entry MacPro can go away.

The entry MacPro is overpriced by about $1000. Don't beleive me? Build one on NewEgg...I did (with a Core i7 920 instead of Xeon W3520...it doesn't matter they're the same cost/1000).

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/Pu...umber=10623612

The old MacPro was expensive and the dual socket MacPro is still going to be expensive. The entry model is a bad joke. Four memory slots? Hello triple channel, please to have 3 or 6 slots. The machine I built for ~$1200 has 6 memory slots, double the memory installed and a Radeon 4870. It's not as though I was reaching for bottom shelf components either.
post #129 of 293
Quote:
Determined to grow its share of the personal computer market during the worst economic climate in its corporate history, Apple is tailoring changes to a pair of its offerings that will help drive down prices of some of the most popular Macs, AppleInsider has learned.

Word of the changes comes just weeks after Cupertino-based company became the target of a renewed advertising blitz from rival Microsoft Corp., which is using a new series of controversial television spots to cast Macs as overpriced novelty PCs that command a premium purely for their distinctive aesthetic.

Still, people familiar with the matter say Apple's move towards more affordable Macs isn't so much a response to Redmond's marketing antics as it is an interim solution to combat the proliferation of budget notebooks -- often called netbooks -- until the company is ready to introduce its own take on the market in the much rumored Newton-like web tablet, a project which is taking considerably longer to complete than once anticipated.


You can bet Apple will say the following:

1- It's not about the money;

2- It's not about Microsoft ads which highlight the $500 premium on Macs ($800 premium in Canada);

3- It's not about the $2 billion stock option bonuses paid to Apple's senior management.


Apple's business model of overpriced Macs and iPhones is a failure which led to a 4% Mac world market share. It could succeed only in a monopoly market where buyers are brain dead. Maybe, just maybe, with declining sales, someone at Apple, anyone, noticed.

Because Apple repeated the mistakes of the Mac (overpriced and refusal to license the operating system) for the iPhone, the same end failure should await the iPhone.

Even stockholders revolted and pension funds gained a say on senior management's compensation.

Remember how Steve Jobs, the high school graduate, felt unappreciated by the Apple board of directors with the gift of a corporate jet and a $15 million per year base salary with full health coverage for himself and his family?

It's not about the money, the price of Macs and iPhones, or the compensation paid to Apple's senior management. No, it's not. Believe that and you're brain dead.


post #130 of 293
Oh this is rich, I just ordered a new Mac yesterday! should I cancel my order and wait and see what happens? Oh, this is so Apple, but hey, the Mini I ordered cost less than the first Mac I bought 17 years ago. Of course that was the last new one I bought...
Mac user since 1990 - System 6.0.7 through OS X 10.6 - Mac Mini (2009) - 4/320 - Snow Leopard
Reply
Mac user since 1990 - System 6.0.7 through OS X 10.6 - Mac Mini (2009) - 4/320 - Snow Leopard
Reply
post #131 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

Apple's business model of overpriced Macs and iPhones is a failure which led to a 4% Mac world market share.

The marketshare argument is not only old, it's also quite ridiculous. If Apple had 25% marketshare of their OS they not only would have 25% marketshare of PC sales that would also have about 90% of all consumer PC revenue. How many ways must it be said that Apple isn't competing to best MS in OS unit sales? Apple already has more than 66% of the consumer PC sales in the US for sales over $1k. You know, the PC market segment that actually makes money.

Quote:
Maybe, just maybe, with declining sales, someone at Apple, anyone, noticed.

Yet Apple's profits are up year-over-year for the first calendar quarter while MS' were down 32%.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #132 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roc Ingersol View Post

The day after Apple concedes and cuts pricing, analysts will be howling about the margins and would scream bloody murder if the price point went back up. lkrupp puts it a bit strongly, but fundamentally he's right. Price cuts are not the way to go.

As we have seen with the "netbooks", computing is being redefined as time progresses. Whether it is the MacBook Mini or the MediaPad that Apple ends up releasing, in the end, it is just another computing device that could fill the gap between the iPhone and the MacBooks, which would explain the more "affordable" prices while keeping up the quality.

Gotta tell ya', whenever it comes out, I'm buyin' it .
post #133 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Those same people maintain that the Mac maker has absolutely no interest in catering to the netbook market as it exists today, which -- as interim chief Tim Cook repeatedly points out -- is comprised of systems with "cramped keyboards, terrible software, junky hardware, very small screens, and [a poor] consumer experience."

Sooo... instead of cramped keyboards, Apple will give... err... no keyboard at all

I mean... yeah, all netbook keyboards are smaller than full size ones, but many of them are perfectly decent. Can touch-screen keyboard really - really - be better?!?!? I don't think so.

Junky hardware. (moan). Intel Atom's performance is limited, but manufacturing process is same as Core 2 Duo. Chipsets as well... has anyone heard of netbooks dying often? I haven't. Matter of fact, Apple had their fair share of (graphics) related problems recently. Check on, say, latest Asus 1000HE EEE netbook. Up to 9.5 hours of battery life. LED display. Chiclet keyboard. Multi-touch gesture touchpad. Yes it is plastic, but it doesn't look any worst than previous generation Macbook white. And I'm sure it will not crack that easy.

Small screens. So... what is Apple tablet going to have for screen? Bigger than 10"..? I don't think Apple will make keyboardless Mac Air. I'd expect tablet will size anywhere between iPod Touch screen and 10" netbook screens. Likely smaller than 10".

Poor consumer experience? I've heard loads of people being perfectly happy with their netbooks. Heck, I've heard Mac owners here in AI forums being happy with XP/Linux based netbooks. Of course it is not replacement for full featured Macbook or iMac, but for what netbooks are designed... I think experience is more than satisfying.

I think that Tim Cook's statement is just damage control attempt. And poorly executed one.
post #134 of 293
Nahh, I'm not going to cancel, I've waited 17 years to buy a brand new Mac - I'm tired of waiting.

As for those you say you can build a "cheaper mac" elswhere, the intrinsic value of the Mac is not just in the hardware, never has been. It has never been just one banana - it's the WHOLE fruit basket that is the key here. Apple will never be a Dell or HP or any other Winbox maker, they have had the individualist streak from the beginning.

It's about the whole Apple world and how you interact with it, when I get around a bunch of Winboxes, feel like I'm like going to the dentist. In an Apple Store, well, it's more like going Fantasy Island...
Mac user since 1990 - System 6.0.7 through OS X 10.6 - Mac Mini (2009) - 4/320 - Snow Leopard
Reply
Mac user since 1990 - System 6.0.7 through OS X 10.6 - Mac Mini (2009) - 4/320 - Snow Leopard
Reply
post #135 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by CU10 View Post

Not unless the company sells more units.

50% marketshare, no less.

As a consumer I'll take whatever I can get that gives me more bang for my buck. If I can get a MacBook Pro for $500- I'll buy it. The seller wins and I win.
These whiny stockholders should just sell their stock and buy something else that does what they want rather than bitchily complaining around here all day long.
post #136 of 293
Apple might make a cheaper Mac, but they'll probably have to make up it, and remove a few more ports first.

Sounds like the perfect recipe for a Mac netbook.
post #137 of 293
Seems to me there is a large area between say, $700 - $1000 that Apple could play in with a low cost portable, and not cheapen the Mac brand. Say they release a MacBook Mini that is a counterpart to the Mac Mini. And as far as netbooks go, that would be expensive, but I think many people would buy a $700 MacBook portable tomorrow, immediately, no questions asked - I know I would.

Another thought is they add on a cellphone plan for Internet access and have the carrier subsidize it. That would bring the initial cost down significantly without affecting the overall price - Apple would still get paid.
post #138 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The marketshare argument is not only old, it's also quite ridiculous. If Apple had 25% marketshare of their OS they not only would have 25% marketshare of PC sales that would also have about 90% of all consumer PC revenue. How many ways must it be said that Apple isn't competing to best MS in OS unit sales? Apple already has more than 66% of the consumer PC sales in the US for sales over $1k. You know, the PC market segment that actually makes money.


Yet Apple's profits are up year-over-year for the first calendar quarter while MS' were down 32%.

Apple does HW, MS does SW - people can easily put off upgrading most SW, but if the prices of HW components drop (which they have), but the overall unit cost doesn't, well that can very easily explain Apple's higher profits.

Just look at how Apple setup their model lines - other companies will sell a computer at a particular price point, but as the year goes along, you get more incremental upgrades in a computer in December, then you would've the previous January. With Apple, you get the same price, and same internals, until they do a product refresh. At best, Apple will do a speed bump, and up the HD by a couple gigs in the interim.
post #139 of 293
It not just the recession. Electronics pricing has dropped dramatically right across the board. This is how it works, every year things get better AND cheaper.

The pricing gap between Macs and PCs has usually been justifiable at least to some degree, but now it is far too wide. A couple hundred dollars premium is more than reasonable, but in most cases you can get essentially the same parts in a different box for less than half the cost. That is not something that the company will be able to maintain long term. If they do not adjust their pricing downward, they hold on to their principles at their own peril.

Apple's vitriol against netbooks is completely unfounded. On one hand they call them underpowered and cramped, then turn around and say that the iPhone is their netbook. Hardware-wise, most netbooks are very capable computers, totally suitable for most people's computer usage. The only thing that's bad about them really, is that they only come with Windows or Linux operating systems. As a short tern stop gap, until they decide what their netbook killer would be, Apple should probably look into just getting their own OEM version of the MSI wind.
post #140 of 293
I don't have access to all the market research data, but it seems fairly obvious to me that they could probably increase earnings by lowering their prices and driving up sales volume considering they only have 7-8% of the USA market --- clearly there are tens of millions of novice/average computer users who have not experienced and/or owned a Mac. Other than the group of users who are either high-end gamers, enthusiasts who like to build their own PCs, ultra-budget customers, die-hard PC/Windows fans, or those stubborn to change --- I'd bet a large percentage of that 93% of PC users would love to switch to a Mac (and OSX) if the prices were more competitive with what they see from PC manufacturers (whether that perception of "overpriced" is justified or not).
post #141 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by imacmadman22 View Post

Nahh, I'm not going to cancel, I've waited 17 years to buy a brand new Mac - I'm tired of waiting.

As for those you say you can build a "cheaper mac" elswhere, the intrinsic value of the Mac is not just in the hardware, never has been. It has never been just one banana - it's the WHOLE fruit basket that is the key here. Apple will never be a Dell or HP or any other Winbox maker, they have had the individualist streak from the beginning.

It's about the whole Apple world and how you interact with it, when I get around a bunch of Winboxes, feel like I'm like going to the dentist. In an Apple Store, well, it's more like going Fantasy Island...

... populated with dentists?

Anyway, my dentist has absolutely gorgeous nurse; I haven't seen anything like that in Apple Store (or any other computer store)
post #142 of 293
Here's a reality check from Staples' weekly flyer, valid until May 12, 2009:

For $999.95 Canadian dollars, you get:

One HP Pavilion Elite computer with:
+ Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300 quad-core desktop CPU;
+ 4 GB RAM;
+ 500 GB Hard drive;
+ 802.11n wireless network;
+ Blu-Ray drive for High definition;
+ TV tuner;
+ keyboard and mouse;

One HP 21.5 inch liquid crystal monitor; and

One all in one HP printer-scanner-copier.


When are we going to see similar prices for a Mac?

Staples is an office supply store with branches in Canada, the U.S. and the U.K. Check their web site if you didn't get their flyer.

P.S.: I'm pretty sure that HP didn't pay $2 billions in stock option bonuses to its senior management.


post #143 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

When are we going to see similar prices for a Mac?

Apple doesn't make the same kind of desktop that you speced out so until Apple decides to compete directly with these consumer towers it is not going to happen... but you know that.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #144 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

Here's a reality check from Staples' weekly flyer, valid until May 12, 2009:

For $999.95 Canadian dollars, you get:

One HP Pavilion Elite computer with:
+ Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300 quad-core desktop CPU;
+ 4 GB RAM;
+ 500 GB Hard drive;
+ 802.11n wireless network;
+ Blu-Ray drive for High definition;
+ TV tuner;
+ keyboard and mouse;

One HP 21.5 inch liquid crystal monitor; and

One all in one HP printer-scanner-copier.


When are we going to see similar prices for a Mac?

Staples is an office supply store with branches in Canada, the U.S. and the U.K. Check their web site if you didn't get their flyer.

P.S.: I'm pretty sure that HP didn't pay $2 billions in stock option bonuses to its senior management.



Those are last year's HP desktop, that's why they are cheap... the processor is an old intel architecture with that plastic monitor and a tower instead of an all-in-one compact design like the aluminum Penryn iMac with 24" display.
post #145 of 293
This price issue comes up every week because it's a big issue for Apple. They are overpriced. OS X helps them boost it a bit, but they're going overboard, plus you can't even get a blu ray drive on one if you wanted it.

Apple got a big boost because Vista was such a colossal F up. Sure, they got to make a lot of money for a while, but now it's a different world and they have to compete. People have less money, they're not on PPC anymore so the tech nerds who can afford overpriced macs can build their own macs cheaper and custom, and Windows 7 is about to change perceptions. Obviously they've done a good job of making money lately, but when Windows 7 hits they can talk about their margins all they want, they just blew an opportunity to grow market share and forever win repeat buyers with this Vista debacle.

If they'd just built a $1000 headless xmac that people have been asking for for years, they could just make one or two models and sell millions.
post #146 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Are you the thought police coming to arrest me for speaking my mind? Well fuck you too, buddy.

If I hurt your feelings telling Apple off then, you should be absolutely devastated now. I took that time to bone your mom.

I think someone needs a time out and some duct tape!! BTW, speaking one's mind is not the problem. However, when someone spouts off non-sense like you do, then one must expect a reaction from the general populace. Hell, Charles Manson spoke his mind, but he is also freakin' lunatic with no grip on reality!! Just take it with a grain of salt my "friend" (I use that term very loosely).
post #147 of 293
I wouldn't mind Apple knocking 10% off their prices, and also including:

1) Free upgrade to Snow Leopard (for all new computers sold) for peace of mind
2) Free iWork (if you can't compete on hardware price, then throw in what you can afford to give away)

and on the Mac Mini, please can we have a bundle that also includes an Apple Keyboard and Mouse?

If Apple wants to drop prices further, then they might have to use cheaper hardware - slower CPUs maybe, but it would be a shame to drop to Pentiums because they don't do virtualisation.
post #148 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

Anyway, my dentist has absolutely gorgeous nurse; I haven't seen anything like that in Apple Store (or any other computer store)

Well, there isn't much use for nurses in computer stores.
post #149 of 293
Personally, I cannot see Apple reducing the prices of their current Mac lineup. Although, I could see a few more affordable and lower entry macs entering the market. Even though this is, again, unlikely, what I would like to see...

20" imac
$899
2.26ghz c2d
1gb ddr3 1066
250gb 7200rpm sata hdd
nvidia 9400m

24" imac
$1199
2.26ghz c2d
2gb ddr3
320gb 7200rpm sata hdd
nvidia 9400m

macbook pro 15"
$1399
2.26ghz
2gb ddr3 1066
160gb 5400rpm sata hdd
nvidia 9400m

macbook pro 17"
$1899
2.26ghz
2gb ddr3 1066
250gb 5400rpm sata hdd
nvidia 9400m
1680x1050 vs. 1920x1200

Although these might seem unrealistic, my point is... there are customers out there who do not need the performance and reliability of a 2.66ghz imac or the raw power of the 9600m in the macbook pro. For me, I would love the convenience of a 17" macbook without the 9600m gt, without 4gb ddr3 and without the 2.66ghz c2d.
A setup with only 2gb ddr3 a 9400m alone, a lightly slower cpu and hdd would easily fit in. For example, someone would require an imac 24" that can run leopard, but only need it for photos, video editing and internet with the convenience of a 24" screen. But, they are forced into spending that additional $400 odd on the hardware which, the majority of the time, they will never be able to take full advantage of. People could save so much money and time by simply choosing not to purchase a product with hardware they are never going to use, but instead, one with the specifications that not only meets their needs, but also comes at a more comfortable price for them.

I could truly never see apple offering these more affordable hardware options anytime soon.
Apple probably wouldn't knock their prices down either, but I truly think we will see a refresh in terms of "more affordable macs", maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but we will definitely see something of it.
post #150 of 293
Not only is the "time" right given the economy, but this is a good response to the direct advertising blitz.

AAPL may be wise to adopt an approach where they sell the machines much cheaper and then make money on the software and let uses stock the machine how they want.....Vs the bundle approach. If you really want to play in the big hardware game, then you must target the "average" customer. The average customer, unfortunately, has no idea the "value" of the Mac bundle. And, I'm afraid no amt of advertising will educate them either. Therefore, break your products out and make your money back via line item pricing.

Will be interesting to see their approach....Probably will be just less specs for less money, is my guess.
post #151 of 293
Nobody outside Steve Jobs' brain knows what his personal goals are. But I'd imagine that when you have more money than you could possibly spend, you're getting old and have major health issues, then maybe you want to do "one more thing", like, say, one last shot at world domination, rather than die as the guy who failed to make a major dent in Microsoft's marketshare. He doesn't want Star Wars to end with Luke failing to blow up the Death Star and the evil Empire running the galaxy for another thosand years.

You have to remember that he was kind of a loser who had to come crawling back to Apple through an acquisition. His company was bought by a company on the ropes, kind of like Chrysler merging with Fiat. But after that, he has fulfilled his goal of creating his dream products AND enjoying massive commercial success. So where can he go from there? Keep making more well-designed products and sell them to the same 3% of the world population as always? Nah, time for the next step.
post #152 of 293
I'm always surprised when I hear a Mac owner insist that Macs are "overpriced." Anything you decide to buy at any given price is, by definition, priced right. It could not be overpriced, or you would not have purchased it.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #153 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I'm always surprised when I hear a Mac owner insist that Macs are "overpriced." Anything you decide to buy at any given price is, by definition, priced right. It could not be overpriced, or you would not have purchased it.

They are damned expensive. But you get what you pay for: a well-built, solid machine that is fun to use and is very productive. You don't have the infinite range of options like a PC, so you can't do/have everything, but what the Mac does do, it does very, very well.
post #154 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I'm always surprised when I hear a Mac owner insist that Macs are "overpriced." Anything you decide to buy at any given price is, by definition, priced right. It could not be overpriced, or you would not have purchased it.

Yes it's pretty illogical. But then again many Americans have been educated to make poor fiscal choices and be wreckless with their money. There are so many ways to save/make money in America but the saying goes

Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. Thomas Alva Edison.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #155 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by John French View Post

That Is not the word I would use. Macs are not "overpriced". They are, however, damned expensive, but you get what you pay for.

"Overpriced" is not my word either, but it's the word we hear all the time in these discussions, including many times in this thread. It comes into use when technical specs are laid side-by-side, and the claim made that the more expensive product with the same technical specs must be "overpriced" -- even when the person making the claim voluntarily bought the more expensive product. I never understood how anyone could make that argument, when it's obvious that hardly anybody, themselves included, buys anything on the basis of technical specifications alone.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #156 of 293
the crucial price factor that nearly everyone ignores in debating Mac pricing is the basic economic consideration of the full "life cycle" costs for durable goods like PC's. no one (except the uber rich) replaces their computer every year with a new one. generally computers have a 4-5 year lifespan. and even when a principal computer is replaced with a new one during that period, it usually continues in use as a second or third computer for someone else in that home or office.

for people with tight budgets or who are just plain hard-core cheap, yes, the initial price is most often the deciding factor. but for everyone else, it is about getting what they really want (like Tim Cook said). because a $200 purchase price differential spread over 5 years is just $40 per year - too little to really matter to most. the other costs of ownership, like monthly ISP service fees, are much more significant. and at the office, ongoing IT costs are much more significant than the up front hardware expense.

then the other standard economic consideration these debates omit is the value of your time. you tell me how much per hour your time doing computer maintenance and service yourself is worth. (if you hire someone else, that's at least $50 per hour, but they are supposed to be "skilled").

so what are the total hours of maintenance/service per year for Windows PC ownership compared to Mac ownership? i don't mean playing with it like geeks and hobbyists do, i mean just necessary set up, upkeep, troubleshooting, and updating. i've never seen any figures about this, but i have the distinct impression my PC using friends spend quite a bit of time fussing with Windows to keep it working right. more than i do on Mac. and i think my time is worth a lot. then add to that the cash cost of tech support - free at the Apple Store, but definitely not free from PC OEM's and retailers - and you get another significant annual cost of ownership for life cycle analysis.

bottom line is, smart shopping is not just about the sticker price. just looking at that is bad economics.
post #157 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

MacMini back to 499. That would be a nice thing to happen. It used to be that price, and could probably easily go back!

Maybe Apple can listen and make the xMac? Out of DESKTOP parts (instead of using the more expensive and less durable laptop parts in their iMacs). Using desktop parts you could reduce the cost, and come out with a cheaper Mac all the while keeping those premiums, er, margins.

But no, expect nothing at all. They are doing good business, why change it?

(And to those poo-pooing the netbooks... they really are decent machines! Margins aren't great, that is true, but I am always asked about mine and have sold over ten so far. I haven't sold a Mac in a few years, even in the instances where a Mac was needed. Reason, people feel they can't plunk down that kind of cash for what the machine really is, a PC. But Apple won't listen to this. Ah well, their loss.)

Agreed, sell a desktop with desktop parts. I also agree Apple won't do it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

It does seem a little strange that Apple refuses to sell lower performing hardware at lower prices. It forces people who can get by with less than a premium machine to buy either a used Mac or a PC, neither of which puts a penny into Apple's pocket. On the other hand, the difference between a machine built around a 2.0GHz processor and DDR2 isn't really all that much lower than one built around a 2.8GHz processor and DDR3. Having lower performing Macs in the lineup might convince a large number of people that they could live with less and that would really hurt Apple's bottom line.

Agreed, I've never understood this. One side benefit though, it props up the resale value of used Apple computers for consumers, doesn't help Apple's bottom line one whit though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

On the topic of Apple pushing the latest technology...

Latest architecture: yes
Latest RAM: yes
Latest CPU: yes
Latest graphics: you're kidding right?

Apple consistently sells premium priced computers with entry level graphics. The GT120 is really just a rebranded 9500GT, which is nothing more than an 8600GS made on a smaller process. Thus it's a crippled version of a two year old chip that was widely regarded as the weakest performing (relative to the high end) mid-range entry in nVidia history.

Today that chip, paired with 512MB of RAM is worth no more than $50 yet Apple put that POS into their $3,299 Mac Pro. They should be embarrassed to be shipping such junk in a workstation whose owners are the most likely of all to need the power of Cuda and OpenCL, but they're obviously too busy counting their profits to care. Forcing any Mac Pro buyer with a brain to spend another $200 to get a real video card must seem like a good strategy. Just like the $100 adapter to use a dual link DVI display on mini DisplayPort, it's a blatant cash grab. That's one of the things I truly hate about Apple.

All this talk about graphics processors is the fundamental point in the current war between Intel and nVidia. In the near future your graphics chip will be able to handle many of the tasks currently managed by the main CPU. In a growing number of fields the power of your GPU will become more important than your CPU. This scares Intel to death because they know nVidia and AMD (thanks to their purchase of ATI) are years ahead of them in stream processing.

By refusing to let anyone else build chipsets for Intel Nehalem processors, Intel is trying to hold back their competitors long enough to get graphics embedded into all their processors. If they succeed with that strategy Intel will own both the chipset and entry level graphics market. nVidia and ATI will be left with only the mid-high end graphics market that they already own.

---
Overall I like hearing that Apple may be getting more aggressive on pricing. It's time for them to make a big push to move as many people as possible to a single hardware platform and single version of the OS. That would allow both Apple and 3rd party developers to move ahead more quickly and with lower risk of incompatibilities.

Give me Snow Leopard on an iMac with serious OpenCL graphics and a case I can open up to change the hard drive and I'll stop complaining that there's no consumer tower.

Part of th graphics issue is that only one model can use them and I don't see this changing in my life time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by superkaratemonkeydeathcar View Post

i can haz xMac? -headless iMac? -plz?

I would pay iMac prices for something that's 1/2 a base-level Mac Pro.
-Just don't need to buy/get rid of a perfectly good monitor every 3 years.

1 optical, 2 hd bays, 1 double-wide graphics, 3 pciE, coupla ports

You and me both, to bad Apple doesn't care and unfortunately for both you and me, they are selling more and more computers(re: mostly laptops) and making a ton of money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

As everyone who knows me knows, I think Apple is overpriced, that said I get most of my Macs from Apple friends and get around 25=35% off, depending on unit, refresh or end of life (normally the best deal, EOL (end of life)), however, I have done enough research to show that a PC built close to a MAC PRO comes out to the same if not more. This doesn't mean it's NOT overpriced as the PC manufacture and Apple have decent margins on them.

My point was Apple could have easily built a 4 and 8 core i7 system with great DDR (non ECC) and you would have a machine that if you built retail would cost $800 (i7 Machine), so actual manufacturing cost would be about $450, instead, Apple chooses higher end so they can have a higher profit margin. In other words, they could have built an i7 machine at $450 (our cost would be $800 to build, retail), and sell it for $1200.

With the Macbook (about $250 to make) and AIR (I can't and won't go there), these machines are somewhat overpriced, thing is, I don't know how they will release something cheaper (which on paper is very easy to do and still be of good quality, remember, Macbook not that expensive to make, especially with Unibody), but because of these two items, I don't know how they come out with a cheaper machine unless they add newer 4 core CPU's to the MACBOOK and MACBOOK pro and start pricing laptops based on cores.

In the end, the consumer wins and Apple has not paid attention to the PC user for a long time, it's all been iPhone, iPhone, iPhone.

To bad Apple doesn't care, it's either Apple's way or not at all. I have an iSight iMac and a Powerbook that need to be replaced with Snow Leapord on the horizon and I'm not smart enough to go the hackintosh way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elliots11 View Post

This price issue comes up every week because it's a big issue for Apple. They are overpriced. OS X helps them boost it a bit, but they're going overboard, plus you can't even get a blu ray drive on one if you wanted it.

Apple got a big boost because Vista was such a colossal F up. Sure, they got to make a lot of money for a while, but now it's a different world and they have to compete. People have less money, they're not on PPC anymore so the tech nerds who can afford overpriced macs can build their own macs cheaper and custom, and Windows 7 is about to change perceptions. Obviously they've done a good job of making money lately, but when Windows 7 hits they can talk about their margins all they want, they just blew an opportunity to grow market share and forever win repeat buyers with this Vista debacle.

If they'd just built a $1000 headless xmac that people have been asking for for years, they could just make one or two models and sell millions.

I agree about the xMac and blown opportunities with Window's XP(re: shades of SP 1 and SP2) and Vista's tribulations, but don't know squat about Windows 7. Could Microsoft make similar mistakes again?
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 #158 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by winterspan View Post

I don't have access to all the market research data, but it seems fairly obvious to me that they could probably increase earnings by lowering their prices and driving up sales volume considering they only have 7-8% of the USA market --- clearly there are tens of millions of novice/average computer users who have not experienced and/or owned a Mac. Other than the group of users who are either high-end gamers, enthusiasts who like to build their own PCs, ultra-budget customers, die-hard PC/Windows fans, or those stubborn to change --- I'd bet a large percentage of that 93% of PC users would love to switch to a Mac (and OSX) if the prices were more competitive with what they see from PC manufacturers (whether that perception of "overpriced" is justified or not).

You know who does have access to all of the market research data? Apple. I think we can safely assume that Apple takes what it believes is the most profitable approach to marketing their products. I don't understand why anyone would think that Apple would do otherwise. But a lot of people do, even when they admit that they don't know what Apple knows. That's one consistent theme in these discussions which has always puzzled me.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #159 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

I thought this guy was banned not too long ago for seriously shooting his mouth off? Guess he didn't use that time wisely to think things through has he?

Kasper.... are you catching wind of this?

Way to allow dissenting opinions choirboy. Did you type that while waiting for those bloodstains to soak out of your Nazi brownshirt? Did you get the creases out of the armband? Can't have a wrinkly swastika.

The MacJihad would be amusingly cute if they weren't tiresome and making life difficult for people who use Macs professionally and don't want to be associated with fanboi assholes who need to contract swine flu.

In this case, I'd have to side with the original poster. F U.

post #160 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

this is not good. I repeat, not good. Thus begins the slow, downward spiral to mediocrity. Do the previous posters really think apple can produce cheap pcs like dell without sacrificing quality, customer service, and margins? If so then you live in a fantasy world. Just imagine what a $500 macbook would look like. It would look like an acer of course. I'm sorry but even jon ive can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. The drive for market share also drives down margins as michael dell has found out the hard way. You have to keep selling more and more just to break even.

I hope the "we want cheap macs" crowd doesn't get their wish any time soon. I would rather see apple stop making macs altogether before producing drab, black plastic abominations. Leave the trailer park market segment to dell and the design-impaired nerd crowd.

agree

"TRAVEL is Fatal to Prejudice,Bigotry,Narrowmindedness"mt

TRY IT!

Reply

"TRAVEL is Fatal to Prejudice,Bigotry,Narrowmindedness"mt

TRY IT!

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple to introduce more affordable Macs, sources say