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 7

post #241 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrBoar View Post

The problem with Apples low end ( the Mini) is that it is designed to be expensive.
The CPU might be "green" but it also costs perhaps 3-4 times as much as say E5200 that would be as fast and really not bad even in heat output.
The 2.5" is sligtly more expensive than the 3.5
A slotloaded DVD burner is 3 times as expensive as a standard tray. So a macmini one inch higher with room for those standard components would cost 200 dollars less to make and still be a true mini.

I do not suggest any bottom of the barrel celeron and intel integrated graphics

Or better yet leverage the network and deliver a model without the optical drive.
Sticking with a 2.5" drive makes sense since SSD will be the dominant desktop/laptop storage tech in a scant few years.

Apple doesn't care about optical drives anymore so a cheaper full size drive means nothing.

Basically all Apple has to do is wait for Arrandale and other highly consolidated parts. The Netbook craze is fueled by the fact that most computers are just big internet surfing boxes.
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 #242 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrBoar View Post

The problem with Apples low end ( the Mini) is that it is designed to be expensive.

You have it backwards. It's expensive because of the design. It isn't specifically designed to be expensive.

Quote:
The CPU might be "green" but it also costs perhaps 3-4 times as much as say E5200 that would be as fast and really not bad even in heat output.
The 2.5" is sligtly more expensive than the 3.5
A slotloaded DVD burner is 3 times as expensive as a standard tray. So a macmini one inch higher with room for those standard components would cost 200 dollars less to make and still be a true mini.

The Mini is not a budget computer it is a minimalistic design object. It Apple wish they could make a nicely designed budget computer at the price of then killing the market for the current macmini and probably inflict some damage on the lowend imac as well.

I do not suggest any bottom of the barrel celeron and intel integrated graphics

It is what it is. It's not really expensive, but you can get cheap PCs for less.

It costs what it does, because the parts used are more expensive, where required, so that it could be made so small.
post #243 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

...The Netbook craze is fueled by the fact that most computers are just big internet surfing boxes...

Hopefully it says something positive about my life, work and play that I need my PC and Mac to perform much more than Facebooking on a 10" screen. Maybe that or I'm antisocial.
post #244 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You have it backwards. It's expensive because of the design. It isn't specifically designed to be expensive...

It sure wasn't designed to be inexpensive, though.
post #245 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

It sure wasn't designed to be inexpensive, though.

As inexpensive as Apple could figure out how to make one.
post #246 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Hopefully it says something positive about my life, work and play that I need my PC and Mac to perform much more than Facebooking on a 10" screen. Maybe that or I'm antisocial.

Well you never show up to my parties


I think today computers are too "cookie cutter" with redundant parts. The whole BTO process is a sham. It's a lot like Ford telling me I can have any color I want for my Model T as long as its black.

I'm told I can build a custom system that matches my needs so long as my needs also include an optical drive, certain sized hard drive and RAM.

Today's computers give you the illusion of choice but unless they're selling zero/zero configuration barebones computers the choices I have are merely tweaking a few products here and there.

That all brings us right back to the topic at hand. We don't have cheaper more affordable Macs because this is anti-thetical to what Apple wants. They want higher revenue and higher margin.
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 #247 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Or better yet leverage the network and deliver a model without the optical drive.
Sticking with a 2.5" drive makes sense since SSD will be the dominant desktop/laptop storage tech in a scant few years.

Apple doesn't care about optical drives anymore so a cheaper full size drive means nothing.

Basically all Apple has to do is wait for Arrandale and other highly consolidated parts. The Netbook craze is fueled by the fact that most computers are just big internet surfing boxes.

But SSD's aren't dominant yet, so sticking with a 2.5" drive is sort of pointless, less it's 7200 RPM, but then, you're still limited by capacity (laptop drives and SSD are still smaller than drives, the largest 2.5" drive is maybe 500 GB, 3.5" drives are up to 2 TB).

The Mini is a odd duck, really to get the most out of it, you need an external HD, in order to use TM, or add additional storage, as a 120/320 GB in the standard Mini's are nothing to write home about. So then you've got a another cable, and another HD, power brick hanging out the back, more cables, which somewhat defeat the point in small, indiscrete PC. And I'm not about to go backing up to the network wirelessly, especially since Apple doesn't have a great track record with 802.11n.
.
Biggest issue I have with it, is that it's a pain to open. HDs fail, 3-5 years and they're just about toast. So rather than making it easy, lemme go grab that putty knife...unlike most Dells, my PCs or even older PowerMacs, I can't just pop down the side, and slide out the faulty drive. Boo.

Make it couple inches bigger in X,Y,Z, and they could put in a real hard drive, and perhaps a real DVD burner (8x?).

I don't trust my backups enough to HD's just yet, nor do I have enough of Comcast's bandwidth to dick around and download GB files all the time).

My guess, is that Apple had a bunch of old Mini shells laying around, and it was easy as pie to swap out the GBU/northbridge/CPU and make it fit.

I like my Mini, but it could be so much better. But it's Apple only headless Mac that isn't over $2000.
post #248 of 293
Do people really need 2TB in a desktop?

Do they really care about DVD burners anymore?


Perhaps given certain circumstances but a multi computer dwelling needs the same sort of network resources that business moved to two decades ago.

HDD can't keep up with SSD today and in 3 years they'll be 3-4x behind in performance.


Let's skate to where the puck is going.
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 #249 of 293
To clarify my point with regard to design and price.
Apple could have aimed for a entry level desktop. A size less than half of the Cube. A nice design. And a price at least 200 dollars less than the current one.

Instead they made it even smaller, requiring the use of far more expensive components.

Do anyone believe that a one inch higher mini would be disliked by the consumer for being "to large"??
They started the Mini with a single G4 at 1.2 GHz to cram 4 GHz into the same enclosure they have to use the much more expensive laptop CPUs. But from a buyers point of wiev what is the point?


Sure the optical drive can go, that is, when you getOS X on a bootable USBstick from Apple and all apps can be bought online or on a USB stick as well, not before.
post #250 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by guinness View Post

But SSD's aren't dominant yet, so sticking with a 2.5" drive is sort of pointless, less it's 7200 RPM, but then, you're still limited by capacity (laptop drives and SSD are still smaller than drives, the largest 2.5" drive is maybe 500 GB, 3.5" drives are up to 2 TB).

The Mini is a odd duck, really to get the most out of it, you need an external HD, in order to use TM, or add additional storage, as a 120/320 GB in the standard Mini's are nothing to write home about. So then you've got a another cable, and another HD, power brick hanging out the back, more cables, which somewhat defeat the point in small, indiscrete PC. And I'm not about to go backing up to the network wirelessly, especially since Apple doesn't have a great track record with 802.11n.
.
Biggest issue I have with it, is that it's a pain to open. HDs fail, 3-5 years and they're just about toast. So rather than making it easy, lemme go grab that putty knife...unlike most Dells, my PCs or even older PowerMacs, I can't just pop down the side, and slide out the faulty drive. Boo.

Make it couple inches bigger in X,Y,Z, and they could put in a real hard drive, and perhaps a real DVD burner (8x?).

I don't trust my backups enough to HD's just yet, nor do I have enough of Comcast's bandwidth to dick around and download GB files all the time).

My guess, is that Apple had a bunch of old Mini shells laying around, and it was easy as pie to swap out the GBU/northbridge/CPU and make it fit.

I like my Mini, but it could be so much better. But it's Apple only headless Mac that isn't over $2000.

For most people, even a 320HDD will be enough. Is speed, again for most people, really an issue? I don't think so.

An 8x DVD burner is now standard in all Minis.
post #251 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

...I think today computers are too "cookie cutter" with redundant parts. The whole BTO process is a sham. It's a lot like Ford telling me I can have any color I want for my Model T as long as its black.

I'm told I can build a custom system that matches my needs so long as my needs also include an optical drive, certain sized hard drive and RAM.

Today's computers give you the illusion of choice but unless they're selling zero/zero configuration barebones computers the choices I have are merely tweaking a few products here and there.

That all brings us right back to the topic at hand. We don't have cheaper more affordable Macs because this is anti-thetical to what Apple wants. They want higher revenue and higher margin.

I had this issue and thought about it long and hard. I want a portable all-in-one computer. Or, I want a 15" laptop in which I can have a decent graphics card and components I can choose. Not just the limited Dell configs with rubbish graphics cards. Or, expensive CPUs which are not necessary, you need a good GPU but only an average (like Merom 2ghz) CPU for gaming.

In the end I went with the shop-assembled (with a bit of my own assembly) PC desktop. And a refurb MacBook Alu.

The HP Voodoo and Dells are interesting. But they didn't come close to what I wanted, even if price was not really an issue.

So I went PC desktop (big hot box) and ["expensive"] Mac laptop (that ain't even a MacBook Pro)... \

I'm happy about my choices and the value I'm getting out of it though. Took a lot of research, at the end of the day I've returned to PC-Mac duality. PC gaming desktop, and just in the past week, MacBook Alu 2ghz refurb ~ with my own 7200rpm 2.5" drive. Snappy enough without needing 4GB. Thanks to the 9400M Photoshop CS4 *FINALLY* scales images cleanly when viewing outside of 100%, 50%, 25% etc. Naice!

I've given up on a Mac that can do anything close at any reasonable price to what a big hot noisy box PC desktop can do. Which is not to say that the PC desktop can do anything close to what a Mac can.
post #252 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

For most people, even a 320HDD will be enough. Is speed, again for most people, really an issue? I don't think so.

An 8x DVD burner is now standard in all Minis.

For most people, speed is not an issue. As for me though, I ain't ever going back to anything less than a 7,200rpm drive or equivalent speed in a laptop or desktop.

In 2008 when I had RAID0 running with 2 drives on my PC desktop... Loading up games and in between levels, almost twice as fast. Minimal delay between getting ready to game and being right in the action.

On a Mac laptop, I find a 7200rpm drive with 2GB of RAM feels faster when "medium-loaded" with running apps, compared to a Mac laptop with 5400rpm drive with 4GB of RAM... All other specifications being the same.

Of course, 7200rpm drive with 4GB or 6GB of DDR3 RAM on the latest MacBook/Pro Aluminiums, ah... Well, is that 4GB MacBook/Pro RAM issue fixed already or what?
post #253 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

On a Mac laptop, I find a 7200rpm drive with 2GB of RAM feels faster when "medium-loaded" with running apps, compared to a Mac laptop with 5400rpm drive with 4GB of RAM... All other specifications being the same.

All other specs the same, yes the 7200RPM would be faster, but since you get considerably more capacity with the 5400RPM drive I find this to be the best option if it's your sole drive, as opposed to just being your boot drive.

It was just a boot drive I'd go for the fastest drive, maybe an SSD, but for a notebook I would go for the largest drive since I know it will get filled. Since the writing starts on the outside and works its way in the benefits of faster speeds reduces as the drive fills up so eventually, depending on the drive capacities compared can have a 5400RPM drive out perform a 7200RPM drive once you reach x-many GB filled. For example, a 500GB 7200RPM drive filled 50% with 250GB could be more responsive than a 320GB 7200RPM drive filled 80% with the same 250GB.
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 #254 of 293
I'm always going to defer to speed vs size when it comes to hard drives.

I see people obsess about whether they want to buy the 2.2Ghz model or the 2.4Ghz model which yields likely a 10% max benefit in performance in the same processor family.

Then they stick with the same old 5400 rpm drive it came with which costs them more performance than the processor upgrade brings.

SSD are expensive but they're expensive because they perform and what's the point of buying a shiny new computer if you're hobbling it with slow spinning rust?

Seagate and Western Digital have the right idea. Both companies are working on large high areal density drives that spin at lower rates to conserve power. NAS vendors are using low wattage Freescale, ARM and Intel chips for their boxes. The movement is towards scalable external storage either direct attached or network attached and fast (SSD) storage for the desktop.

Optical drives are not really a necessity anymore for many people and should be optional. I'd rather bump in processor speed or RAM in lieu of yet another slow crappy optical drive being crammed down my gullet.

Affordability is perception based on a ratio of performance/cost. When you begin to see a bunch of features you have no use for the affordability of said device drops.
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 #255 of 293
Quote:
1) You have actually beaten out Lemon Bon Bon for having the most anoying posting style on these forums.

I'm surprised you left yourself out. But if it's any consolation, you're catching me up.

(I thought you'd have at least looked up the 'meaning' of 'what's a lemon bon bon?' in the dictionary...)

Macs are overpriced in the UK. It's a fact.

Macs don't have to be 'cheap'. They have to be 'not' overpriced.

Which they are.

I'm with the 'bullseye', Marv' in this one. It's not like Macs are 'cheap'.

£900 starting price isn't cheap. £329 wintel laptop is 'cheap'.

For those incapable of seeing the 'middle' ground here (especially in this economy...) I refer you Silly Solipses great argument winner 'Aren't Apple entitled (as a greedy, 30 Billion $ in the bank) to make a profit?'.

It works everytime. In fact. I'm hoping Apple put their prices up another £1000 instead of $400 this time. That way even Melgross maybe priced out of the entry model as opposed to the 'too expensive even for him' top end model.

Do Apple need to join reality on their entry pricing? Discuss.

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 #256 of 293
Quote:
anoying

I've been told I'm 'Annoying' before. But not 'anoying'. That's a new one on me. But I'll take it. It's free.

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 #257 of 293
Quote:
most

Well, Mel'. Maybe 'most' people disagree with you? Seeing as they make up the majority of the PC market where value for money is abundant and where getting 'stiffed' on pricing for less spec is 'less' apparent.

Did you know you can actually get a 'crap' quad core for less than £1895? Yeh. Was a shock to my system...what with me being an Apple fan boi an' all...

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 #258 of 293
Quote:
It sure wasn't designed to be inexpensive, though.

Funny that. Maybe that's part of the design process that needs a little look at.

*Thinks of the market share penetration of the iPod line. That actually saved the Mac line from obscurity. Maybe we could have a Mac we could 'wear' like the shuffle. Hmm. The Mini is perhaps a bit too big...though...

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 #259 of 293
Design Cul-de-Sac.

In certain areas of the desktop line. Less evident in the laptop line.

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 #260 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

For most people, speed is not an issue. As for me though, I ain't ever going back to anything less than a 7,200rpm drive or equivalent speed in a laptop or desktop.

In 2008 when I had RAID0 running with 2 drives on my PC desktop... Loading up games and in between levels, almost twice as fast. Minimal delay between getting ready to game and being right in the action.

On a Mac laptop, I find a 7200rpm drive with 2GB of RAM feels faster when "medium-loaded" with running apps, compared to a Mac laptop with 5400rpm drive with 4GB of RAM... All other specifications being the same.

Of course, 7200rpm drive with 4GB or 6GB of DDR3 RAM on the latest MacBook/Pro Aluminiums, ah... Well, is that 4GB MacBook/Pro RAM issue fixed already or what?

While some are, a lot of us here don't match the "average user" profile.

For them, the situation is different. They don't play many first person shooters. They don't do video or photo editing. They do little that requires a big, fast HDD. Even when they download MP3s, a 320 HDD is more than enough.

And, gasp! They actually THROW THINGS AWAY!!!
post #261 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

I'm always going to defer to speed vs size when it comes to hard drives.

I see people obsess about whether they want to buy the 2.2Ghz model or the 2.4Ghz model which yields likely a 10% max benefit in performance in the same processor family.

Then they stick with the same old 5400 rpm drive it came with which costs them more performance than the processor upgrade brings.

SSD are expensive but they're expensive because they perform and what's the point of buying a shiny new computer if you're hobbling it with slow spinning rust?

Seagate and Western Digital have the right idea. Both companies are working on large high areal density drives that spin at lower rates to conserve power. NAS vendors are using low wattage Freescale, ARM and Intel chips for their boxes. The movement is towards scalable external storage either direct attached or network attached and fast (SSD) storage for the desktop.

Optical drives are not really a necessity anymore for many people and should be optional. I'd rather bump in processor speed or RAM in lieu of yet another slow crappy optical drive being crammed down my gullet.

Affordability is perception based on a ratio of performance/cost. When you begin to see a bunch of features you have no use for the affordability of said device drops.

I don't know about that.

SSDs aren't practical for most people. Their speed is an illusion. Yes, it cuts off a bit of time when starting up. Yes they cut a couple of seconds off opening programs the first time in a session.

But other than that, they don't do anything useful for most people. If you have fairly small files, say 4 MB for MP3s, then they do nothing for you.

If you get one of the cheaper SSDs, then you're wasting ypur money, because it's been shown many times now that they aren't even faster than a decent HDD much of the time.

And they're small, and expensive anyway when compared to a HDD.

If you buy a good SSD, like Intel's "M" series, they are VERY expensive, and small. How many people want to pay $700 for a 160 GB SSD?

As for optical, yes, they are still almost a necessity. Most software still comes on optical. Some can be downloaded, but that's not always useful.

Someday, it will be different, but not yet.
post #262 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

I'm surprised you left yourself out. But if it's any consolation, you're catching me up.

(I thought you'd have at least looked up the 'meaning' of 'what's a lemon bon bon?' in the dictionary...)

Macs are overpriced in the UK. It's a fact.

Macs don't have to be 'cheap'. They have to be 'not' overpriced.

Which they are.

I'm with the 'bullseye', Marv' in this one. It's not like Macs are 'cheap'.

£900 starting price isn't cheap. £329 wintel laptop is 'cheap'.

For those incapable of seeing the 'middle' ground here (especially in this economy...) I refer you Silly Solipses great argument winner 'Aren't Apple entitled (as a greedy, 30 Billion $ in the bank) to make a profit?'.

It works everytime. In fact. I'm hoping Apple put their prices up another £1000 instead of $400 this time. That way even Melgross maybe priced out of the entry model as opposed to the 'too expensive even for him' top end model.

Do Apple need to join reality on their entry pricing? Discuss.

Lemon Bon Bon.

A certainly agree that Mac's are expensive. I don't think they're overpriced though. This is an area in which we've not only beaten the dead horse, but flayed it completely.

I don't think that Apple is greedy. I think that they do make better products, and they must pay for their service somehow.

Apple, as we've said many times, simply doesn't compete in the junk market.

Apple is a financially conservative, and prudent firm. It's been shown, by myself, and others here, that both their gross margins, and their net profits are good but not nearly excessive.

We don't know what they have in mind for the money they have, but no one here can make the claim that they know better what to do with it, though they may try.

With my daughter going to school starting this summer, in England, we asked the school whether we should buy a computer there, rather then pay the high shipping costs from here, or to bother carrying a 24" iMac.

She told us that computers and electronics, in general, were more expensive there, and even with shipping, it would be cheaper to buy it here.

I haven't yet decided how to handle that. I asked if it was mostly Macs that were more expensive (because of our discussions here about that), and she said that all computers, and electronics cost more because of VAT, and import fees the government imposes upon such products.

As far as buying my own Mac Pro went, well, I'm retired. If I still was taking work in, I would have popped for the highest config. as I've always done. Another $1,200 or so pays for itself in a couple of weeks in a "real" working environment.

I have no income from the machine these days, and so the extra $1,200 will go to a processor upgrade sometime in 2010 when the new, faster, 6 core chips are out for a bit of time. That way, I'll have the fastest config. the machine will be capable of, unless OWC, or someone else decides to make a processor board upgrade path, which is possible for this machine (I've been talking to them about that).
post #263 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

As for optical, yes, they are still almost a necessity. Most software still comes on optical. Some can be downloaded, but that's not always useful.

Someday, it will be different, but not yet.

All the major stuff is still on optical discs, but most of it is also online. You can DL Adobe Photoshop up to CS4 and MS Office online. But I'd say that the majority of software, in general, has been mainly web based for some time now and that it is most likely way consumers are going to access it. I'd say that even AOL is more likely to be downloaded than installed from disc.

Even software sections of stores are shrinking and Apple's Snow Leopard Betas can even be installed without even burning it to a DL-DVD, which is a cost and time savings as installing the Beta involves only the initial download and then essentially the time it takes to move 6GB from one partition to another. But you know how I feel about optical drives already.
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 #264 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Apple is a financially conservative, and prudent firm. It's been shown, by myself, and others here, that both their gross margins, and their net profits are good but not nearly excessive.

What gets me is that the argument that Apple's margins are high compared to struggling PC vendors seems to come across as if they are being altruistic by having lower margins, while the truth is they are unable to compete with higher margins since they focus on the budget sector.

Quote:
With my daughter going to school starting this summer, in England, we asked the school whether we should buy a computer there, rather then pay the high shipping costs from here, or to bother carrying a 24" iMac.

She told us that computers and electronics, in general, were more expensive there, and even with shipping, it would be cheaper to buy it here.

I haven't yet decided how to handle that. I asked if it was mostly Macs that were more expensive (because of our discussions here about that), and she said that all computers, and electronics cost more because of VAT, and import fees the government imposes upon such products.

How long will she be gone for and what is her scholastic focus? In other words, would a MBP be more ideal for her situation? Shipping a 24" iMac and then having to pay the import tax seems quite pricey.
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 #265 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't know about that.

SSDs aren't practical for most people. Their speed is an illusion. Yes, it cuts off a bit of time when starting up. Yes they cut a couple of seconds off opening programs the first time in a session.
....
As for optical, yes, they are still almost a necessity. Most software still comes on optical. Some can be downloaded, but that's not always useful.

Someday, it will be different, but not yet.


Just today

http://www.barefeats.com/mbpp13.html



That's domination.



Ooooh the fastest 2.5" SATA HDD you can buy gets slaughtered.

You only need one optical drive on a Mac connected to the network. How many people are constantly using their optical drives?
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 #266 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

Well, Mel'. Maybe 'most' people disagree with you? Seeing as they make up the majority of the PC market where value for money is abundant and where getting 'stiffed' on pricing for less spec is 'less' apparent.

I think that the reason a lot of folk on this forum disagree with you is that, despite your constant whining about Apple's pricing strategy, it seems to be rather successful.

Your loudest and most misinformed whine has been about the Mac's recent UK pricing. Kind of ironic that Gartner has, just today, published figures that suggest that the UK might have have been Apple's brightest spot.

http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=966713

"Apple made its debut in the top five replacing Fujitsu Siemens, with market share of nearly 5 per cent."

UK PC SALES GROWTH.

Apple plus 6.6%
HP minus 6.7%
Dell minus 21.7%

Total minus 5.1%
post #267 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Just today

http://www.barefeats.com/mbpp13.html

image: ]http://www.barefeats.com/images09/mbp13_rr.gif

That's domination.

image: http://www.barefeats.com/images09/mbp13_rw.gif

Ooooh the fastest 2.5" SATA HDD you can buy gets slaughtered.

You only need one optical drive on a Mac connected to the network. How many people are constantly using their optical drives?

the random read/writes have always been great for SSDs, even when they failed to out perform HDDs in the other areas, but the reason this is so high is because it is the fastest SLC NAND with means less dense chips of only 32GB and they are using a RAID 0. Not exactly a typical consumer setup.
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 #268 of 293
Quote:
I think that the reason a lot of folk on this forum disagree with you is that, despite your constant whining about Apple's pricing strategy, it seems to be rather successful.

Your loudest and most misinformed whine has been about the Mac's recent UK pricing. Kind of ironic that Gartner has, just today, published figures that suggest that the UK might have have been Apple's brightest spot.

Drowned only the 'zining' of irrational premium price huggers such as yer good self.

Nothing misinformed about Mac UK prices. Check them out for yourself and take away the price increase of this years base model from the last years entry model.

It's 'successful' in a very limited market. And the fact they went backward in the US market sez they hit the ceiling. If they're happy there...then they're pricing alot of people...more than the few that disagree with me on this forum out of the Mac market. (What? Did you count all of them, yourself included..?) If Apple want to break out of the 'club' (something they managed to do with the iPod and iPhone line to a degree...) and become the people's computer I believe it is...they're going to have to make their entry models cheaper.

Shrugs.*

If they were so unbothered about marketshare...they'd never have plunged the sub-k market back in the day. But they did.

As for recent UK sales figures. We'll see when the £250-£400 price hike beds in. It's not like Apple had 'marketshare' here anyhow? Eh. Guess they refreshed the models...and they 'bumped' sales a little. We'll see how the next quarter does. I'm sure their sales figures will double. Nobody likes buying expensive stuff they can't afford more than UK consumers...well. Apart from US consumers...

'Alot' of UK buyers find Macs expensive. Only 'Pinot' seems surprised by this.

Even Melgross was given food for thought regarding UK prices.

6%. Whoop. That showed me.

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 #269 of 293
Quote:
A certainly agree that Mac's are expensive. I don't think they're overpriced though. This is an area in which we've not only beaten the dead horse, but flayed it completely.

I don't think that Apple is greedy. I think that they do make better products, and they must pay for their service somehow.

Apple, as we've said many times, simply doesn't compete in the junk market.

Apple is a financially conservative, and prudent firm. It's been shown, by myself, and others here, that both their gross margins, and their net profits are good but not nearly excessive.

We don't know what they have in mind for the money they have, but no one here can make the claim that they know better what to do with it, though they may try.

With my daughter going to school starting this summer, in England, we asked the school whether we should buy a computer there, rather then pay the high shipping costs from here, or to bother carrying a 24" iMac.

She told us that computers and electronics, in general, were more expensive there, and even with shipping, it would be cheaper to buy it here.

I haven't yet decided how to handle that. I asked if it was mostly Macs that were more expensive (because of our discussions here about that), and she said that all computers, and electronics cost more because of VAT, and import fees the government imposes upon such products.

As far as buying my own Mac Pro went, well, I'm retired. If I still was taking work in, I would have popped for the highest config. as I've always done. Another $1,200 or so pays for itself in a couple of weeks in a "real" working environment.

I have no income from the machine these days, and so the extra $1,200 will go to a processor upgrade sometime in 2010 when the new, faster, 6 core chips are out for a bit of time. That way, I'll have the fastest config. the machine will be capable of, unless OWC, or someone else decides to make a processor board upgrade path, which is possible for this machine (I've been talking to them about that).

Yeah. Oft flayed. But arguments to be repeated...as people who want to be in Apple's target market get stung by £250-£400 price hikes. If they were expensive before the 'hike' then I'd have to disagree with you and say that now they are overpriced. For a variety of reasons.

'Make better products'. Sure. The cases look nice. They have a great OS. And the whole widget thing sprinkled with Mac Eco System...yes. We know what's good. But how much to pay for that. I don't thing anyone is seriously suggesting that Apple makes a £329 laptop. But a £900+ one as the entry price? A tower starting at £1895.

Those kind of sticker prices put people off in the UK. Just like Apple's iPhone pricing in the UK did. They didn't 'get it'. And were forced to think again with cheaper models. Proving that Apple's 'greed' elastic only stretches so far.

But their specs are just about competitive when the models 1st appear. Then date badly after several months...because we know how Apple like to congratulate themselves for prolonged periods between updates.

Oh. I've got my iMac now. But it's proof of my argument. Macs are expensive. I had to buy last years top model on sale. I'm glad I did. This years high end iMac is a rip-off.

Hey. If you said they were expensive. I'd take that as some sort of concession of seismic proportions. *Writes down the date.

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 #270 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

What gets me is that the argument that Apple's margins are high compared to struggling PC vendors seems to come across as if they are being altruistic by having lower margins, while the truth is they are unable to compete with higher margins since they focus on the budget sector.

More to the point I believe, the Windows OEMs compete within what is essentially a commodity market. Since the products they sell all work the same way (as dictated by Microsoft), they are forced to compete mainly on the basis of price.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #271 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

the random read/writes have always been great for SSDs, even when they failed to out perform HDDs in the other areas, but the reason this is so high is because it is the fastest SLC NAND with means less dense chips of only 32GB and they are using a RAID 0. Not exactly a typical consumer setup.

Note that the system was indeed compared to the fastest 2.5" HDD available (Seagate Momentus 7200.4 in a RAID 0 configuration) and the HDD got obliterated.

SLC is certainly the extreme choice for performance and it's costly but even the Vertex stuff and Intel MLC based SSD outperform hard drives in Random Read/Write and with features like TRIM and better controllers coming it's clear that this year will be a watershed year for SSD.

Consumers should start thinking about performance as it relates to storage and and density in two different manners. Expecting everything in one drive is not going to happen.
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 #272 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

Drowned only the 'zining' of irrational premium price huggers such as yer good self.

I am not hugging anything. You, in the other hand, keep clinging on to the notion that Apple operates in some kind of vacuum, shielded from the vagaries of national economies and fluctuating currency markets.

Quote:
Nothing misinformed about Mac UK prices.

Sure About that?

Quote:
Check them out for yourself and take away the price increase of this years base model from the last years entry model.

iMac base model: Less Vat (15%)

2008 £ 680.00
2009 £ 825.22 Price difference = £145.22 MORE.

Is that what you are talking about?



Want to try the same exercise in dollars? You do know Apple is a US company?

iMac base model: Less Vat (15%) Converted to $ using exchange rate on day of release.

2008 Rate 1.990 = $ 1353.20
2009 Rate 1.403 = $ 1157.78 Price difference = $195.42 LESS

So yes, you are right Lemon. The UK Pound got dumped in the shitter! Apple put there UK prices up on NEW models and yet they are taking home LESS dollars.

It seems like they must have done it... just to annoy you.
post #273 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

Want to try the same exercise in dollars? You do know Apple is a US company?

iMac base model: Less Vat (15%) Converted to $ using exchange rate on day of release.

2008 Rate 1.990 = $ 1353.20
2009 Rate 1.403 = $ 1157.78 Price difference = $195.42 LESS

So yes, you are right Lemon. The UK Pound got dumped in the shitter! Apple put there UK prices up on NEW models and yet they are taking home LESS dollars.

It seems like they must have done it... just to annoy you.

Informative post.
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 #274 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

All the major stuff is still on optical discs, but most of it is also online. You can DL Adobe Photoshop up to CS4 and MS Office online. But I'd say that the majority of software, in general, has been mainly web based for some time now and that it is most likely way consumers are going to access it. I'd say that even AOL is more likely to be downloaded than installed from disc.

Even software sections of stores are shrinking and Apple's Snow Leopard Betas can even be installed without even burning it to a DL-DVD, which is a cost and time savings as installing the Beta involves only the initial download and then essentially the time it takes to move 6GB from one partition to another. But you know how I feel about optical drives already.


I can't agree with that. don't even begin to think about downloading CS4, or office, or any other big program or suite.

Several years from now, when most people have really fast connections it will be different, but that's years from now.

Store stocks are shrinking because people are buying online, from Newegg, Amazon, etc, not because they're downloading the software. Almost no one I know does that except for smaller programs.

Developers don't count.
post #275 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

What gets me is that the argument that Apple's margins are high compared to struggling PC vendors seems to come across as if they are being altruistic by having lower margins, while the truth is they are unable to compete with higher margins since they focus on the budget sector.


How long will she be gone for and what is her scholastic focus? In other words, would a MBP be more ideal for her situation? Shipping a 24" iMac and then having to pay the import tax seems quite pricey.

She's going for a four year degree. A BFA in photography.

A MBP isn't the best computer for that, but a 24" iMac is really good for that. We won't need the computer until she starts the actual school year in early September. The summer is for a long orientation course for foreign students.
post #276 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Informative post.

An informative post that will probably be ignored by the majority of people that it was intended for.
post #277 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

An informative post that will probably be ignored by the majority of people that it was intended for.

Par for the course on internet forums.
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 #278 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Just today

http://www.barefeats.com/mbpp13.html



That's domination.



Ooooh the fastest 2.5" SATA HDD you can buy gets slaughtered.

You only need one optical drive on a Mac connected to the network. How many people are constantly using their optical drives?

You do know how much those enterprise drives cost don't you? From Newegg, each 32 GB drive costs $393.

You also didn't mention that this was with TWO of these drives.

As BF also says:

Quote:
The bad news is that the X25-Es are expensive and limited to 64G capacity each. There are larger capacity SSDs currently shipping such as the Intel X25-M, but the write speed is an unimpressive 80MB/s per drive. And non-Intel SSDs have major stuttering issues in random write mode.

We also won't know if the claims from other drive manufacturers will be upheld. They've made claims before that all sites testing the drives have found to be false, so we'll see.

In addition, as I said before, with smaller files you won't notice a difference. Even 5400 HDDs are fast enough so that the extra speed here won't be noticed, not matter how much faster they may be.

For most people this is a waste of money at this time.
post #279 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

Drowned only the 'zining' of irrational premium price huggers such as yer good self.

Nothing misinformed about Mac UK prices. Check them out for yourself and take away the price increase of this years base model from the last years entry model.

It's 'successful' in a very limited market. And the fact they went backward in the US market sez they hit the ceiling. If they're happy there...then they're pricing alot of people...more than the few that disagree with me on this forum out of the Mac market. (What? Did you count all of them, yourself included..?) If Apple want to break out of the 'club' (something they managed to do with the iPod and iPhone line to a degree...) and become the people's computer I believe it is...they're going to have to make their entry models cheaper.

Shrugs.*

If they were so unbothered about marketshare...they'd never have plunged the sub-k market back in the day. But they did.

As for recent UK sales figures. We'll see when the £250-£400 price hike beds in. It's not like Apple had 'marketshare' here anyhow? Eh. Guess they refreshed the models...and they 'bumped' sales a little. We'll see how the next quarter does. I'm sure their sales figures will double. Nobody likes buying expensive stuff they can't afford more than UK consumers...well. Apart from US consumers...

'Alot' of UK buyers find Macs expensive. Only 'Pinot' seems surprised by this.

Even Melgross was given food for thought regarding UK prices.

6%. Whoop. That showed me.

Lemon Bon Bon.

They only went backwards in he US market because of really cheap netbooks, which are almost, but not quite full computers, though they are counted such because they run a computer OS, even though so far, it's an old one.

This has lowered the marketshare of PC companies that haven't fully jumped on the netbook bandwagon also, it's not just Apple.

And Apple does have the least loss from last years sales of all these companies, esp. when netbooks are taken out of the equation..
post #280 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

Yeah. Oft flayed. But arguments to be repeated...as people who want to be in Apple's target market get stung by £250-£400 price hikes. If they were expensive before the 'hike' then I'd have to disagree with you and say that now they are overpriced. For a variety of reasons.

'Make better products'. Sure. The cases look nice. They have a great OS. And the whole widget thing sprinkled with Mac Eco System...yes. We know what's good. But how much to pay for that. I don't thing anyone is seriously suggesting that Apple makes a £329 laptop. But a £900+ one as the entry price? A tower starting at £1895.

Those kind of sticker prices put people off in the UK. Just like Apple's iPhone pricing in the UK did. They didn't 'get it'. And were forced to think again with cheaper models. Proving that Apple's 'greed' elastic only stretches so far.

But their specs are just about competitive when the models 1st appear. Then date badly after several months...because we know how Apple like to congratulate themselves for prolonged periods between updates.

Oh. I've got my iMac now. But it's proof of my argument. Macs are expensive. I had to buy last years top model on sale. I'm glad I did. This years high end iMac is a rip-off.

Hey. If you said they were expensive. I'd take that as some sort of concession of seismic proportions. *Writes down the date.

Lemon Bon Bon.

I'm really not an extreme person, and my views as expressed here are not extreme. Let's get that out of the way please.

Yes, I said that they are expensive. But it's not just the expensive cases, though that certainly is part of it. Service, which they have plenty of (how much do the genius bars cost apple over a years time?) costs a lot more too.

I don't know exactly why everything cost so much more in England, though VAT of 16% and up certainly doesn't help. Neither do the high import fees. Both of these tax amounts depend on where the product is engineered, manufactured, how many middlemen there are in the distribution channel etc, so it's tough for a consumer to know what to expect. We have far less taxes on everything here, and have few import taxes and fees.

Apple is conservative in their hardware as well. They are much more concerned that everything work and be reliable then get the very latest for an extra 5% every three months or so.

An example is my new Mac Pro. Intel specs 1333 memory for Xenons at 2.5 GHz and above, yet, Apple only uses 1066. Why? Likely they found some stability problems with the faster memory. So they not only don't supply 1333, but they force it to 1066 should you use it.

How much of a performance drop will that have? Likely 5% or so. Big deal.
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