Now imagine the cost of replacing Apple's custom LCD in the air...
-Clive
You'll never find one. The Air is not a popular machine.
If you had a Porsche, not one of the popular models, but instead, one of the unusual ones, and needed a windshield, you would be unlikely to find one in a junkyard. You would buy a new one. Same iwth the Air. You can't expect to find used parts for obscure machines in general.
That second paragraph is because of me (unless others emailed BareFeats). It?s possible the LCD is cheaper for the 11?, especially considering how the 13? LCD seems to be better quality, but I don?t think it would account for enough difference to affect the total price to the extent I think BareFeats is assuming.
The price is pretty much wholly irrelevant. If the machine is something that a buyer wants, a few hundred bucks one way or the other won't make any difference.
And it especially does not matter that some other product shares the same price point. Nobody would buy the MacBook Mini if they wanted a powerful machine, period. And if they wanted a powerful machine for less money, they wouldn't even be looking at it.
The price and the relative specs are not very important with this class of machine.
The price is pretty much wholly irrelevant. If the machine is something that a buyer wants, a few hundred bucks one way or the other won't make any difference.
And it especially does not matter that some other product shares the same price point. Nobody would buy the MacBook Mini if they wanted a powerful machine, period. And if they wanted a powerful machine for less money, they wouldn't even be looking at it.
The price and the relative specs are not very important with this class of machine.
I wasn?t going to get into it on this or the forums in question, but you?re absolutely right. Prices aren?t based on the cost to produce the item plus some magic profit percentage. It?s what the market can bear. Since no one else is really competing directly for these powerful ultra-portables Apple can increase their profit margins. Since Apple has economy of scale from having a limited number of products they can increase their profit margin. MS got record profits from the economy of scale on SW.
I wasn?t going to get into it on this or the forums in question, but you?re absolutely right. Prices aren?t based on the cost to produce the item plus some magic profit percentage. It?s what the market can bear. Since no one else is really competing directly for these powerful ultra-portables Apple can increase their profit margins. Since Apple has economy of scale from having a limited number of products they can increase their profit margin. MS got record profits from the economy of scale on SW.
It is good to know that my points are valid.
It is what the market will bear, and if you have something as nice as the Mini 11, the price becomes less of a burden. People will want it, unless it is just silly-expensive. And it is not. It is within reach of many people who want something very nice.
Apparently, selling with lesser margins becomes common in Apple business model. Should have happened after 15% of market share was reached.
Marketshare isn’t a good measure here because it’s based on the unit sales of the entire market as a whole, not on the number of units you’ve sold by a particular company. For instance, when netbooks were taking off we saw Apple make record unit sales, revenue and profits in their Mac division, but lose market share.
Because these new MBAs are priced so low I can see a drop in profit per unit, but the uptick in sales should outweigh that (assuming they priced their products correctly for the market).
Note: Apple predicted lower estimates on the iPad as they are unable to get components fast enough to meet their expected demand. This is another reason why pricing is so important. Had they known this a year ago they could have started out with a base price of $599, not $499, making $100 in additional profit per unit and likely sold just as many. Of course, i’m glad to pay less, but that’s me a a consumer.
Back in the bad old days, Bill Gates was famous for claiming that nobody needed more than 64 Megs. ...
The "famous" quote was that 640k ought to be enough for anyone - not 64 "Megs" as you say. No personal computer had anything near 64 Mb RAM until at least the late 90s.
He denies ever having made such a claim though.
If you're going to misquote someone, at least misquote correctly
The "famous" quote was that 640k ought to be enough for anyone - not 64 "Megs" as you say. No personal computer had anything near 64 Mb RAM until at least the late 90s.
He denies ever having made such a claim though.
If you're going to misquote someone, at least misquote correctly
Thanks. I should have posted more carefully. I wasn't thinking.
I know I'm starting to sound like an ass, but I'm surprised people are missing the point of Instant On. It's a pretty amazing achievement. Before, you couldn't really put your laptop in a bag asleep (due to heat issues, there's still electric current running... I know some people do anyways). And, you can't leave it on sleep because that drains the battery and after 1 to 8 hours, will totally kill the battery.
What? None of this makes any sense. Even the old Powerbook G4s could sleep for 3-4 days before the battery was drained. 1 to 8 hours? That's the battery life of a laptop continuously powered on! There's no way sleep could possibly eat that much power. What heat issues? I've never seen a sleeping laptop that got hot or even vaguely warm. The whole point of sleep is to just keep the dynamic RAM powered up so its contents aren't lost. Just how much power do you think it takes to refresh RAM?
What? None of this makes any sense. Even the old Powerbook G4s could sleep for 3-4 days before the battery was drained. 1 to 8 hours? That's the battery life of a laptop continuously powered on! There's no way sleep could possibly eat that much power. What heat issues? I've never seen a sleeping laptop that got hot or even vaguely warm. The whole point of sleep is to just keep the dynamic RAM powered up so its contents aren't lost. Just how much power do you think it takes to refresh RAM?
I haven?t experienced the heat issues from sleeping my Macs, but his initial point still stands. The InstantOn is different from the way Mac notebooks went into stand by/hibernation mode before.
Not sleep, where everything is still stored in RAM and resumes instantly when you open the lid or touch the mouse/keyboard, but that mode past sleep where the contents of the RAM are saved to the HDD in a file that mirrors the amount of RAM you have installed. On my MBP with a fast SSD and 4GB RAM it takes about 5 seconds to resume after sitting in this state.
Comments
Now imagine the cost of replacing Apple's custom LCD in the air...
-Clive
You'll never find one. The Air is not a popular machine.
If you had a Porsche, not one of the popular models, but instead, one of the unusual ones, and needed a windshield, you would be unlikely to find one in a junkyard. You would buy a new one. Same iwth the Air. You can't expect to find used parts for obscure machines in general.
That second paragraph is because of me (unless others emailed BareFeats). It?s possible the LCD is cheaper for the 11?, especially considering how the 13? LCD seems to be better quality, but I don?t think it would account for enough difference to affect the total price to the extent I think BareFeats is assuming.
The price is pretty much wholly irrelevant. If the machine is something that a buyer wants, a few hundred bucks one way or the other won't make any difference.
And it especially does not matter that some other product shares the same price point. Nobody would buy the MacBook Mini if they wanted a powerful machine, period. And if they wanted a powerful machine for less money, they wouldn't even be looking at it.
The price and the relative specs are not very important with this class of machine.
I mean in his help column he is always recommending Windows products, just like Consumer Reports...I mean do they even use computers?
Best.
He is impartial. Don't expect him to act like a fanboy. He is not the enemy, he is a judge.
He is not yet on any official enemies list, unlike CR.
Mossberg is not Adobe. Or Microsoft. Or Michael Dell. Or any of the other official enemies.
You can put him on super secret double probation if you want, but he is not yet an enemy.
Hi Newtron/appl/etc...! Welcome back!
Yes, already been reported. A solution, as temporary as it is with trolls, should be forthcoming.
Yes, already been reported. A solution, as temporary as it is with trolls, should be forthcoming.
Why bother? The software you guys use is incapable of accomplishing your goal.
The price is pretty much wholly irrelevant. If the machine is something that a buyer wants, a few hundred bucks one way or the other won't make any difference.
And it especially does not matter that some other product shares the same price point. Nobody would buy the MacBook Mini if they wanted a powerful machine, period. And if they wanted a powerful machine for less money, they wouldn't even be looking at it.
The price and the relative specs are not very important with this class of machine.
I wasn?t going to get into it on this or the forums in question, but you?re absolutely right. Prices aren?t based on the cost to produce the item plus some magic profit percentage. It?s what the market can bear. Since no one else is really competing directly for these powerful ultra-portables Apple can increase their profit margins. Since Apple has economy of scale from having a limited number of products they can increase their profit margin. MS got record profits from the economy of scale on SW.
Why bother? The software you guys use is incapable of accomplishing your goal.
At least they are trying. It?s not as if the mods get paid for their service.
I wasn?t going to get into it on this or the forums in question, but you?re absolutely right. Prices aren?t based on the cost to produce the item plus some magic profit percentage. It?s what the market can bear. Since no one else is really competing directly for these powerful ultra-portables Apple can increase their profit margins. Since Apple has economy of scale from having a limited number of products they can increase their profit margin. MS got record profits from the economy of scale on SW.
It is good to know that my points are valid.
It is what the market will bear, and if you have something as nice as the Mini 11, the price becomes less of a burden. People will want it, unless it is just silly-expensive. And it is not. It is within reach of many people who want something very nice.
Apparently, selling with lesser margins becomes common in Apple business model. Should have happened after 15% of market share was reached.
Marketshare isn’t a good measure here because it’s based on the unit sales of the entire market as a whole, not on the number of units you’ve sold by a particular company. For instance, when netbooks were taking off we saw Apple make record unit sales, revenue and profits in their Mac division, but lose market share.
Because these new MBAs are priced so low I can see a drop in profit per unit, but the uptick in sales should outweigh that (assuming they priced their products correctly for the market).
Note: Apple predicted lower estimates on the iPad as they are unable to get components fast enough to meet their expected demand. This is another reason why pricing is so important. Had they known this a year ago they could have started out with a base price of $599, not $499, making $100 in additional profit per unit and likely sold just as many. Of course, i’m glad to pay less, but that’s me a a consumer.
Stop trolling. Not fair.
Is that directed toward moi?
Is that directed toward moi?
Both you and that another little troll in here. Stop trolling.
Both you and that another little troll in here. Stop trolling.
It might behoove you to look up the definition to internet trolling.
It might behoove you to look up the definition to internet trolling.
I did. I know what I'm talking about.
Back in the bad old days, Bill Gates was famous for claiming that nobody needed more than 64 Megs. ...
The "famous" quote was that 640k ought to be enough for anyone - not 64 "Megs" as you say. No personal computer had anything near 64 Mb RAM until at least the late 90s.
He denies ever having made such a claim though.
If you're going to misquote someone, at least misquote correctly
... The Air is not a popular machine.
Really?
The "famous" quote was that 640k ought to be enough for anyone - not 64 "Megs" as you say. No personal computer had anything near 64 Mb RAM until at least the late 90s.
He denies ever having made such a claim though.
If you're going to misquote someone, at least misquote correctly
Thanks. I should have posted more carefully. I wasn't thinking.
I know I'm starting to sound like an ass, but I'm surprised people are missing the point of Instant On. It's a pretty amazing achievement. Before, you couldn't really put your laptop in a bag asleep (due to heat issues, there's still electric current running... I know some people do anyways). And, you can't leave it on sleep because that drains the battery and after 1 to 8 hours, will totally kill the battery.
What? None of this makes any sense. Even the old Powerbook G4s could sleep for 3-4 days before the battery was drained. 1 to 8 hours? That's the battery life of a laptop continuously powered on! There's no way sleep could possibly eat that much power. What heat issues? I've never seen a sleeping laptop that got hot or even vaguely warm. The whole point of sleep is to just keep the dynamic RAM powered up so its contents aren't lost. Just how much power do you think it takes to refresh RAM?
What? None of this makes any sense. Even the old Powerbook G4s could sleep for 3-4 days before the battery was drained. 1 to 8 hours? That's the battery life of a laptop continuously powered on! There's no way sleep could possibly eat that much power. What heat issues? I've never seen a sleeping laptop that got hot or even vaguely warm. The whole point of sleep is to just keep the dynamic RAM powered up so its contents aren't lost. Just how much power do you think it takes to refresh RAM?
I haven?t experienced the heat issues from sleeping my Macs, but his initial point still stands. The InstantOn is different from the way Mac notebooks went into stand by/hibernation mode before.
Not sleep, where everything is still stored in RAM and resumes instantly when you open the lid or touch the mouse/keyboard, but that mode past sleep where the contents of the RAM are saved to the HDD in a file that mirrors the amount of RAM you have installed. On my MBP with a fast SSD and 4GB RAM it takes about 5 seconds to resume after sitting in this state.