Apple isn't after marketshare as far as Macs are concerned. This is evident from the the segment of the market (the Premium end) in which they choose to operate. And they've made it very clear they don't intend to compete in the mid to low range.
"We've always been about making the best product, not having the highest market share or the highest revenue," he said. "And so acquiring a company so our revenue gets larger isn't something that drives us."
I, for one, am very glad that every dollar I give to Apple contains more added profits than other brands.
I like to see Apple's cash reserves go up and up! Every time I buy an Apple product, it does my heart good to know that its owners are becoming richer than if I had saved the money for myself via buying an equivalent, but cheaper product.
That is what Allows Apple to improve my life! Way to go, Apple!
Heh heh heh. We Apple shareholders love fact that we hold a gun to y'all's heads, and you can't do a darn thing about it!!!!
Your hands are tied. You have no free will. You have no willpower. The logical side of your brain is totally melted and gone and you cannot see any competing products. You are nothing but a useless little bot that will follow instructions from hizzoner Steve-O.
And you can buy three lemons for the price of one mango, so your point is? Shopping on price only doesn't always get you the best deal. There is a reason "switchers" make up more than half of new Mac customers, they figured their money was better spent avoiding a machine that is locked into a Microsoft OS. In case you didn't know this you can ever run Win 7 native on intel Macs. There are little excuses left for Windows fanboys (that don't build their own hardware) to diss Macs, Apple offers great looking and speedy hardware, tons of software and options no other brand can match.
Thank you. I didn't know any of that. You are very helpful. Tell the man at the iVAT that father said you can have an extra cup of flavor-aid.
Apple makes software that doesn't need 16GB of RAM and biggest video card there is, just to run its OS.
and microsoft does? vista was a mess, but i'm running windows 7 with 3 GB of RAM and a $60 video card and i can't find a game that i can't play on highest settings (crysis excluded, but i run that on high) i don't even have a core 2 duo, i'm using a pentium dual core (not netburst).
i was previously using my incredibly outdated nvidia 7000 series integrated graphics, which also worked just fine with aero.
for $1000, you get a laptop from apple with 2 GB of RAM. a $684 dell laptop comes with 6 GB of RAM.
now that microsoft has a competent OS, i see no reason to pay an apple hardware tax unless i graduate with an incredibly awesome job. i enjoy my macbook mainly for its excellent hardware quality, size, and battery life, but now i consider mac os to only really be better for software development and for not having any annoying activation junk. i bought my macbook when the best microsoft had to offer was windows xp.
So basically what this is saying is Apple purchasers are willing to pay on average more than twice what a PC would cost... even when their laptop line is out of date and includes a cpu that existed 3 years ago. Gotcha.
Anything to get away from Windows and Linux
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhomerun
and microsoft does? vista was a mess, but i'm running windows 7 with 3 GB of RAM and a $60 video card and i can't find a game that i can't play on highest settings (crysis excluded, but i run that on high) i don't even have a core 2 duo, i'm using a pentium dual core (not netburst).
i was previously using my incredibly outdated nvidia 7000 series integrated graphics, which also worked just fine with aero.
for $1000, you get a laptop from apple with 2 GB of RAM. a $684 dell laptop comes with 6 GB of RAM.
now that microsoft has a competent OS, i see no reason to pay an apple hardware tax unless i graduate with an incredibly awesome job. i enjoy my macbook mainly for its excellent hardware quality, size, and battery life, but now i consider mac os to only really be better for software development and for not having any annoying activation junk. i bought my macbook when the best microsoft had to offer was windows xp.
nice pointless exaggeration.
Until recently, I was running Snow Leopard on 1GB of RAM and it screams!
"We've always been about making the best product, not having the highest market share or the highest revenue," he said. "And so acquiring a company so our revenue gets larger isn't something that drives us."
He left out from the end "but having the highest gross profit DOES!"
Agree with you about the Windows "experiece" - or rather, ordeal.
I doubt we'll see 25% share, though. Nor do we really need to.
It's quite impossible with their chosen business model. It would mean that 1 out of every 4 PCs sold are Macs. That would also mean that over half the revenue in the world for PCs goes to Apple. It would also mean countries like the US and parts of Europe would also have to be near 100% Mac because Apple doesn't even operate have direct Mac sales in most countries due to economic conditions. It's just not possible with their current business model to get to 25%, which HP and Dell can barely get to by selling cheap crap that is only profitable when from the crapware placement.
AS for Windows, it's going no where because of Mac OS X. Only an OS that runs on all HW from any vendor could possibly usurp Windows position. The closest thing to that is Chrome OS and that is not even a consideration for many, many reasons.
"We've always been about making the best product, not having the highest market share or the highest revenue," he said. "And so acquiring a company so our revenue gets larger isn't something that drives us."
I don't understand these people that look at marketshare first and foremost. It's only important if you can maintain your profit while doing it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov
Until recently, I was running Snow Leopard on 1GB of RAM and it screams!
Try again with your clunky Windows.
Other vendors have to use more RAM because of the crapware space they sell, but studies have shown that Macs use and need less RAM out of the gate. Personally, I'd rather pay $50 to upgrade my RAM if I need it over having a system with crapware bogging down my machine's usability.
I am very excited about how the ipad can revolutionize education. The current system forces teachers to be systems administrators and instead of actually teaching, time is wasted trying to get things working. Kids actually end up learning more about the idosynchrosies of computer operating systems than they do their actual subject matter.
The iPad removes 25 years of Windows/Desktop/File System feature creep and replaces it with an simple elegant UI that gets out of the way and allows you to focus on the task at hand. THAT IS HUGE.
I'm sure we will see many "One iPad per Child" programs deployed in schools.
He left out from the end "but having the highest gross profit DOES!"
Even having the industry's highest gross profit isn't necessarily the most important. It's just one of many important financial barometers of a corporation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I don't understand these people that look at marketshare first and foremost. It's only important if you can maintain your profit while doing it.
I concur. My guess is that these people aren't serious about learning about economics.
While people are free to offer their opinions, by ignoring the economics of the industrialized world and spouting off inane commentary that directly contradicts a company's financial statements, one runs the risk of completely voiding the validity of one's viewpoint.
That is what I'm seeing more frequently here at AppleInsider, MacRumors, and other technology news sites. You have probably seen some of this yourself.
It's quite impossible with their chosen business model. It would mean that 1 out of every 4 PCs sold are Macs. That would also mean that over half the revenue in the world for PCs goes to Apple. It would also mean countries like the US and parts of Europe would also have to be near 100% Mac because Apple doesn't even operate have direct Mac sales in most countries due to economic conditions. It's just not possible with their current business model to get to 25%, which HP and Dell can barely get to by selling cheap crap that is only profitable when from the crapware placement.
True, but even more to the point, at the present relative rate of growth, how many years would it take for Mac market share to grow from 5% worldwide to 25%? Just wild guessing, but I'd say 25-30 years. Does anyone seriously think Apple is going there? I think they are perfectly happy if not thrilled with 20-30% annual revenue growth from the Mac, market share and rank be damned.
For the price of a mac, you can buy 3 PCs - Well that was an easier way to tell the story. Now gather 'round for some flavor-aid children.
And for the price of a BMW I can buy 3 GM, Ford or Chrysler "econo boxes" .... and your point is ?
Following up on what newbee wrote, it's worth pointing out that Apple tops the list of every relevant survey for computing/consumer electronics: customer satisfaction, reliability, etc.
Can money buy happiness? Concerning consumer technology, perhaps it can...
At least in my own bachelor household, I don't see additional computers as beneficial. More computers = higher system administration load = less free time.
Thank you. I didn't know any of that. You are very helpful. Tell the man at the iVAT that father said you can have an extra cup of flavor-aid.
Way to go ... when you run out of logical responses, resort to name calling ... brilliant! ... don't forget the old chestnut ..."Your mother wears army boots".
Maybe not this year though. You will get it next year though And your head will explode at that point... unless you've raised your expectations. At which point, you're pretty unreasonable to ask Apple to improve what they don't even yet offer. But I do bet that they could get the 32GB model down to $499 if they wanted to this year, it just depends on the demand. Sorta like how they dropped the iPhone $100 weeks later after they introduced it in stores.
No my expectations are pretty much set. I could care less if they add OLED, Flash or a webcam I just simply want the ability to multitask. I was only joking about the price drop but like with all technology at some point I have no doubt the 32GB version will replace teh 16GB at the same price point. Apple never lowers their price point they simply give you more for the same price.
Win7 is fine. According to Mossberg, it is basically as good as OS X.
I still like Mac OS X much better. However I find it worth noting that you never see OS X advertised, unlike Windows. Apple always advertises the hardware or the applications, never the underlying OS. Apple's preference is to remove the complexities of the OS from the average end user. That is why the iPad is designed for average Joe not the geeks in this forum.
I still like Mac OS X much better. However I find it worth noting that you never see OS X advertised, unlike Windows. Apple always advertises the hardware or the applications, never the underlying OS. Apple's preference is to remove the complexities of the OS from the average end user. That is why the iPad is designed for average Joe not the geeks in this forum.
I never understand the comments about the "geeks". That about the same percentage as hardcore gamers which is about 5%. The fact that users want their multi function table to multi function doesn't make them a geek. Talking about a front mounted webcam, multitasking or even Flash doesn't make someone a geek. Its not like anyone has asked for watercooling with an Nvidia 295 GTX GPU option on the iPad.
This is 2010 any multi function device should be able to do more then one thing at a time. This was suppose to be the most innovative device of 2010 and it simply isn't even for the average Joe.
Comments
Apple isn't after marketshare as far as Macs are concerned. This is evident from the the segment of the market (the Premium end) in which they choose to operate. And they've made it very clear they don't intend to compete in the mid to low range.
I wonder if that has changed.
No, it has not changed.
Tim Cook, Apple's COO, said so the other day at the Goldman Sachs conference.
I, for one, am very glad that every dollar I give to Apple contains more added profits than other brands.
I like to see Apple's cash reserves go up and up! Every time I buy an Apple product, it does my heart good to know that its owners are becoming richer than if I had saved the money for myself via buying an equivalent, but cheaper product.
That is what Allows Apple to improve my life! Way to go, Apple!
Heh heh heh. We Apple shareholders love fact that we hold a gun to y'all's heads, and you can't do a darn thing about it!!!!
Your hands are tied. You have no free will. You have no willpower. The logical side of your brain is totally melted and gone and you cannot see any competing products. You are nothing but a useless little bot that will follow instructions from hizzoner Steve-O.
We love it!!
And you can buy three lemons for the price of one mango, so your point is? Shopping on price only doesn't always get you the best deal. There is a reason "switchers" make up more than half of new Mac customers, they figured their money was better spent avoiding a machine that is locked into a Microsoft OS. In case you didn't know this you can ever run Win 7 native on intel Macs. There are little excuses left for Windows fanboys (that don't build their own hardware) to diss Macs, Apple offers great looking and speedy hardware, tons of software and options no other brand can match.
Thank you. I didn't know any of that. You are very helpful. Tell the man at the iVAT that father said you can have an extra cup of flavor-aid.
Don't be bitter!
Apple makes software that doesn't need 16GB of RAM and biggest video card there is, just to run its OS.
and microsoft does? vista was a mess, but i'm running windows 7 with 3 GB of RAM and a $60 video card and i can't find a game that i can't play on highest settings (crysis excluded, but i run that on high) i don't even have a core 2 duo, i'm using a pentium dual core (not netburst).
i was previously using my incredibly outdated nvidia 7000 series integrated graphics, which also worked just fine with aero.
for $1000, you get a laptop from apple with 2 GB of RAM. a $684 dell laptop comes with 6 GB of RAM.
now that microsoft has a competent OS, i see no reason to pay an apple hardware tax unless i graduate with an incredibly awesome job. i enjoy my macbook mainly for its excellent hardware quality, size, and battery life, but now i consider mac os to only really be better for software development and for not having any annoying activation junk. i bought my macbook when the best microsoft had to offer was windows xp.
nice pointless exaggeration.
So basically what this is saying is Apple purchasers are willing to pay on average more than twice what a PC would cost... even when their laptop line is out of date and includes a cpu that existed 3 years ago. Gotcha.
Anything to get away from Windows and Linux
and microsoft does? vista was a mess, but i'm running windows 7 with 3 GB of RAM and a $60 video card and i can't find a game that i can't play on highest settings (crysis excluded, but i run that on high) i don't even have a core 2 duo, i'm using a pentium dual core (not netburst).
i was previously using my incredibly outdated nvidia 7000 series integrated graphics, which also worked just fine with aero.
for $1000, you get a laptop from apple with 2 GB of RAM. a $684 dell laptop comes with 6 GB of RAM.
now that microsoft has a competent OS, i see no reason to pay an apple hardware tax unless i graduate with an incredibly awesome job. i enjoy my macbook mainly for its excellent hardware quality, size, and battery life, but now i consider mac os to only really be better for software development and for not having any annoying activation junk. i bought my macbook when the best microsoft had to offer was windows xp.
nice pointless exaggeration.
Until recently, I was running Snow Leopard on 1GB of RAM and it screams!
Try again with your clunky Windows.
No, it has not changed.
Tim Cook, Apple's COO, said so the other day at the Goldman Sachs conference.
He left out from the end "but having the highest gross profit DOES!"
Agree with you about the Windows "experiece" - or rather, ordeal.
I doubt we'll see 25% share, though. Nor do we really need to.
It's quite impossible with their chosen business model. It would mean that 1 out of every 4 PCs sold are Macs. That would also mean that over half the revenue in the world for PCs goes to Apple. It would also mean countries like the US and parts of Europe would also have to be near 100% Mac because Apple doesn't even operate have direct Mac sales in most countries due to economic conditions. It's just not possible with their current business model to get to 25%, which HP and Dell can barely get to by selling cheap crap that is only profitable when from the crapware placement.
AS for Windows, it's going no where because of Mac OS X. Only an OS that runs on all HW from any vendor could possibly usurp Windows position. The closest thing to that is Chrome OS and that is not even a consideration for many, many reasons.
For the price of a mac, you can buy 3 PCs - Well that was an easier way to tell the story. Now gather 'round for some flavor-aid children.
total cost of ownership tells a different story
No, it has not changed.
Tim Cook, Apple's COO, said so the other day at the Goldman Sachs conference.
I don't understand these people that look at marketshare first and foremost. It's only important if you can maintain your profit while doing it.
Until recently, I was running Snow Leopard on 1GB of RAM and it screams!
Try again with your clunky Windows.
Other vendors have to use more RAM because of the crapware space they sell, but studies have shown that Macs use and need less RAM out of the gate. Personally, I'd rather pay $50 to upgrade my RAM if I need it over having a system with crapware bogging down my machine's usability.
The iPad removes 25 years of Windows/Desktop/File System feature creep and replaces it with an simple elegant UI that gets out of the way and allows you to focus on the task at hand. THAT IS HUGE.
I'm sure we will see many "One iPad per Child" programs deployed in schools.
He left out from the end "but having the highest gross profit DOES!"
Even having the industry's highest gross profit isn't necessarily the most important. It's just one of many important financial barometers of a corporation.
I don't understand these people that look at marketshare first and foremost. It's only important if you can maintain your profit while doing it.
I concur. My guess is that these people aren't serious about learning about economics.
While people are free to offer their opinions, by ignoring the economics of the industrialized world and spouting off inane commentary that directly contradicts a company's financial statements, one runs the risk of completely voiding the validity of one's viewpoint.
That is what I'm seeing more frequently here at AppleInsider, MacRumors, and other technology news sites. You have probably seen some of this yourself.
It's quite impossible with their chosen business model. It would mean that 1 out of every 4 PCs sold are Macs. That would also mean that over half the revenue in the world for PCs goes to Apple. It would also mean countries like the US and parts of Europe would also have to be near 100% Mac because Apple doesn't even operate have direct Mac sales in most countries due to economic conditions. It's just not possible with their current business model to get to 25%, which HP and Dell can barely get to by selling cheap crap that is only profitable when from the crapware placement.
True, but even more to the point, at the present relative rate of growth, how many years would it take for Mac market share to grow from 5% worldwide to 25%? Just wild guessing, but I'd say 25-30 years. Does anyone seriously think Apple is going there? I think they are perfectly happy if not thrilled with 20-30% annual revenue growth from the Mac, market share and rank be damned.
For the price of a mac, you can buy 3 PCs - Well that was an easier way to tell the story. Now gather 'round for some flavor-aid children.
And for the price of a BMW I can buy 3 GM, Ford or Chrysler "econo boxes" .... and your point is ?
For the price of a mac, you can buy 3 PCs - Well that was an easier way to tell the story. Now gather 'round for some flavor-aid children.
And for the price of a BMW I can buy 3 GM, Ford or Chrysler "econo boxes" .... and your point is ?
Following up on what newbee wrote, it's worth pointing out that Apple tops the list of every relevant survey for computing/consumer electronics: customer satisfaction, reliability, etc.
Can money buy happiness? Concerning consumer technology, perhaps it can...
At least in my own bachelor household, I don't see additional computers as beneficial. More computers = higher system administration load = less free time.
Thank you. I didn't know any of that. You are very helpful. Tell the man at the iVAT that father said you can have an extra cup of flavor-aid.
Way to go ... when you run out of logical responses, resort to name calling ... brilliant! ... don't forget the old chestnut ..."Your mother wears army boots".
Maybe not this year though. You will get it next year though
No my expectations are pretty much set. I could care less if they add OLED, Flash or a webcam I just simply want the ability to multitask. I was only joking about the price drop but like with all technology at some point I have no doubt the 32GB version will replace teh 16GB at the same price point. Apple never lowers their price point they simply give you more for the same price.
Sorta like how they dropped the iPhone $100 weeks later after they introduced it in stores.
I do believe that was $200 and a refund was given of $100 Apple money (excluding iTunes).
For the price of a mac, you can buy 3 PCs - Well that was an easier way to tell the story. Now gather 'round for some flavor-aid children.
Wrong site.
Win7 is fine. According to Mossberg, it is basically as good as OS X.
I still like Mac OS X much better. However I find it worth noting that you never see OS X advertised, unlike Windows. Apple always advertises the hardware or the applications, never the underlying OS. Apple's preference is to remove the complexities of the OS from the average end user. That is why the iPad is designed for average Joe not the geeks in this forum.
I still like Mac OS X much better. However I find it worth noting that you never see OS X advertised, unlike Windows. Apple always advertises the hardware or the applications, never the underlying OS. Apple's preference is to remove the complexities of the OS from the average end user. That is why the iPad is designed for average Joe not the geeks in this forum.
I never understand the comments about the "geeks". That about the same percentage as hardcore gamers which is about 5%. The fact that users want their multi function table to multi function doesn't make them a geek. Talking about a front mounted webcam, multitasking or even Flash doesn't make someone a geek. Its not like anyone has asked for watercooling with an Nvidia 295 GTX GPU option on the iPad.
This is 2010 any multi function device should be able to do more then one thing at a time. This was suppose to be the most innovative device of 2010 and it simply isn't even for the average Joe.