You can not be so gullible as to believe the marketing crap Apple let's out of the gate every so often. History, very recent history, shows that Apple is very concerned about sales and will kill a product so quickly that it catches many by surprise. If Apple wasn't concerned with Numbers we would still have a 17" MBP in the lineup.
That depends on what you mean by numbers. If the cost is too high compared to the profit then it becomes a poor investment for continuing the product line, regardless of how many units they can sell. They still have the Mac Pro and the Mac mini, both of which have been rumoured many times to be going away because they weren't updated often.
Cook better not pull this shit too often or he'll be going the way of the 17" MBP.
It's certainly a pain, but at least we have specs, pricing, and a date range that is set to a 30 to 31 day window. That is much better than we saw from other vendors who like to give us a handful of specs and a date range that is a season long. It's certainly not a good sign — and all the other little issues are adding up — but I think it looks worse because it's so unusual for Apple.
To be fair, pretty much all their products have been updated recently and it's gone quite well for the number of products, countries and sales.
Imacs will help boost sales. However post recession and hurricane effects will hurt sales this quarter but boost sales next quarter as people will have to replace damaged Pc's Laptops etc.
I felt so too, but my little sister was convinced that she needed the $1999 256 as a replacement for her G4 MBP. She got more storage, and an SD card slot that she could put extra stuff onto easily enough, and shed a couple pounds in the process.
Apple does a great job playing the price points and features. It works.
This quarter will be hard without the iMacs or the updated Pro, and the Mini just doesn't seem competitive to me. But I doubt Apple will do "much" worse than the PC market.
The entry level storage size does seem like a bait-and-switch, but maybe there are people that don't really need any storage.
The entry level storage size does seem like a bait-and-switch, but maybe there are people that don't really need any storage.
Bait-and-switch is a form of fraud, most commonly used in retail sales but also applicable to other contexts. First, customers are "baited" by advertising for a product or service at a low price; second, the customers discover that the advertised good is not available and are "switched" to a costlier product.
Maybe there aren't enough factories in the world qualified to make Apple products. If the Iphone and the Ipad draw too many manufacturing resources to meet demand then the Mac computer line may be stuck with second string. Same might be true of Apple engineering systems.
The cost of making a 17" MacBook should be minuscule. They use the same motherboard. The could use the same layout cut in the 17' body and just add the 17" screen. It would be that big of a tool up.
The cost of making a 17" MacBook should be minuscule. They use the same motherboard. The could use the same layout cut in the 17' body and just add the 17" screen. It would be that big of a tool up.
And they don't so either your analysis is wrong or the cost to profit ratio is less desirable than what you've considered.
Have no fear boys and girls, SantaMan will have enough goodies (and even iMacs) for your holiday pleasure. Watch for his Apple-red svelte figure to bring you one of those razor-thin iDevices or an MBA...
ive returned two macbook pro retinas due serious issues. the screens are faulty as hell. both had ghosting /IR issues.
Now ive left the mac after 17 years of being a macuser. will order my samsung laptop soon.
If Mac sales actually are down at the end of the quarter, will anyone THEN be willing to consider the possibility that maybe the current direction of hardware development is less appealing to buyers? I don't begrudge Jony the right to jerk off however he wants, but I just wish he would also consider MY needs.
[...] The Fusion Drive is a major attractive feature.
Is it really? I don't know...
My hard drive died last weekend so I replaced it with a Seagate hybrid. Beyond an improvement in boot time -- not what I'd call dramatic, but clearly apparent -- I haven't really noticed any difference. I wonder if use patterns affect the degree of improvement one realizes?
To put it bluntly Apple has screwed up the management of the Mac line significantly. At least in the sense of the desktops. To highlight some of the screwups:
They waited far to long to get USB3 bearing Mac desktops out after Ivy Bridge arrived. Many will say it doesn't matter to Apples customer base to which I say bull shit! Apples dragging of its feet with respect to USB3 has put off many customers.
Yes, yes, yes. I put off buying a new machine while I waited for Apple to FINALLY include USB3, and by the time they did they had screwed up the rest of the machine by letting Jony's obsession with anorexic form factors force us into awkward choices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
On that Mini regression they dropped the model with the discrete GPU which was Apples only low cost solution for people needing GPU acceleration. Frankly many if us where waiting for a significant improvement in the built in GPU, instead we get a regression.
I *was* going to replace my one-year-old Mini to get USB3, but now won't bother. I don't know what I'm going to do, because both the video capture and storage devices I was hoping to use are USB3. I *could* use Thunderbolt instead, but the devices themselves are a full third-again more expensive and I'm looking at $100 worth of cables to connect them.
Added to the list:
8. Having to choose between inadequate storage and RAM or paying absolutely EGREGIOUS upgrade prices. $2/GB for storage?! That's insulting.
And they don't so either your analysis is wrong or the cost to profit ratio is less desirable than what you've considered.
Well, at least three of us just on this thread seem to want a 17" so it SEEMS like there must be close to as many of us as there are people who want a 13" Pro (not to be confused with the horde that want a 13" computer but buy the Air rather than the Pro).
I fully realize that it's wishful thinking, but I'd like it if Apple retained the occasional "goodwill" product. Maybe it doesn't matter to Apple if some mobile creatives choose another platform over a smaller screen, but it would sure make me feel warm and fuzzy if Apple adopted a stance like "The 17" isn't a big money maker but it's not a money loser either, and our core old guard seem to really like it so why not? Hell, we can afford it. We've got more money than... well, ANYBODY."
You can not be so gullible as to believe the marketing crap Apple let's out of the gate every so often. History, very recent history, shows that Apple is very concerned about sales and will kill a product so quickly that it catches many by surprise. If Apple wasn't concerned with Numbers we would still have a 17" MBP in the lineup.
Of course, they're concerned about sales -- but only in the market sectors they sell in.
They're not interested in the market sector for cheap machines because that's where the PC manufacturers are struggling to stay profitable.
Well, at least three of us just on this thread seem to want a 17" so it SEEMS like there must be close to as many of us as there are people who want a 13" Pro (not to be confused with the horde that want a 13" computer but buy the Air rather than the Pro).
I fully realize that it's wishful thinking, but I'd like it if Apple retained the occasional "goodwill" product.
And which 'goodwill' product, of the hundreds of hardware/software combinations that Mac users ask for, should they pick? Your particular favourite? Someone else's?
Comments
That depends on what you mean by numbers. If the cost is too high compared to the profit then it becomes a poor investment for continuing the product line, regardless of how many units they can sell. They still have the Mac Pro and the Mac mini, both of which have been rumoured many times to be going away because they weren't updated often.
It's certainly a pain, but at least we have specs, pricing, and a date range that is set to a 30 to 31 day window. That is much better than we saw from other vendors who like to give us a handful of specs and a date range that is a season long. It's certainly not a good sign — and all the other little issues are adding up — but I think it looks worse because it's so unusual for Apple.
To be fair, pretty much all their products have been updated recently and it's gone quite well for the number of products, countries and sales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shuntsu
It's all tablets this year - macs (and PCs) are just not gonna be the big sellers they once were.
Won't just be this year.
Imacs will help boost sales. However post recession and hurricane effects will hurt sales this quarter but boost sales next quarter as people will have to replace damaged Pc's Laptops etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh
I felt so too, but my little sister was convinced that she needed the $1999 256 as a replacement for her G4 MBP. She got more storage, and an SD card slot that she could put extra stuff onto easily enough, and shed a couple pounds in the process.
Apple does a great job playing the price points and features. It works.
This quarter will be hard without the iMacs or the updated Pro, and the Mini just doesn't seem competitive to me. But I doubt Apple will do "much" worse than the PC market.
The entry level storage size does seem like a bait-and-switch, but maybe there are people that don't really need any storage.
Bait-and-switch is a form of fraud, most commonly used in retail sales but also applicable to other contexts. First, customers are "baited" by advertising for a product or service at a low price; second, the customers discover that the advertised good is not available and are "switched" to a costlier product.
Maybe there aren't enough factories in the world qualified to make Apple products. If the Iphone and the Ipad draw too many manufacturing resources to meet demand then the Mac computer line may be stuck with second string. Same might be true of Apple engineering systems.
The cost of making a 17" MacBook should be minuscule. They use the same motherboard. The could use the same layout cut in the 17' body and just add the 17" screen. It would be that big of a tool up.
And they don't so either your analysis is wrong or the cost to profit ratio is less desirable than what you've considered.
Well, Apple hasn't yet released the iMacs for shipment, which would have probably increased those numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifij775
The entry level storage size does seem like a bait-and-switch, but maybe there are people that don't really need any storage.
Storage, who needs a boatload of storage when you got the iCloud...!
Have no fear boys and girls, SantaMan will have enough goodies (and even iMacs) for your holiday pleasure. Watch for his Apple-red svelte figure to bring you one of those razor-thin iDevices or an MBA...
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPersian
The recent releases havent been good exactly.
ive returned two macbook pro retinas due serious issues. the screens are faulty as hell. both had ghosting /IR issues.
Now ive left the mac after 17 years of being a macuser. will order my samsung laptop soon.
If Mac sales actually are down at the end of the quarter, will anyone THEN be willing to consider the possibility that maybe the current direction of hardware development is less appealing to buyers? I don't begrudge Jony the right to jerk off however he wants, but I just wish he would also consider MY needs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleGreen
[...] The Fusion Drive is a major attractive feature.
Is it really? I don't know...
My hard drive died last weekend so I replaced it with a Seagate hybrid. Beyond an improvement in boot time -- not what I'd call dramatic, but clearly apparent -- I haven't really noticed any difference. I wonder if use patterns affect the degree of improvement one realizes?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
To put it bluntly Apple has screwed up the management of the Mac line significantly. At least in the sense of the desktops. To highlight some of the screwups:
They waited far to long to get USB3 bearing Mac desktops out after Ivy Bridge arrived. Many will say it doesn't matter to Apples customer base to which I say bull shit! Apples dragging of its feet with respect to USB3 has put off many customers.
Yes, yes, yes. I put off buying a new machine while I waited for Apple to FINALLY include USB3, and by the time they did they had screwed up the rest of the machine by letting Jony's obsession with anorexic form factors force us into awkward choices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
On that Mini regression they dropped the model with the discrete GPU which was Apples only low cost solution for people needing GPU acceleration. Frankly many if us where waiting for a significant improvement in the built in GPU, instead we get a regression.
I *was* going to replace my one-year-old Mini to get USB3, but now won't bother. I don't know what I'm going to do, because both the video capture and storage devices I was hoping to use are USB3. I *could* use Thunderbolt instead, but the devices themselves are a full third-again more expensive and I'm looking at $100 worth of cables to connect them.
Added to the list:
8. Having to choose between inadequate storage and RAM or paying absolutely EGREGIOUS upgrade prices. $2/GB for storage?! That's insulting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
And they don't so either your analysis is wrong or the cost to profit ratio is less desirable than what you've considered.
Well, at least three of us just on this thread seem to want a 17" so it SEEMS like there must be close to as many of us as there are people who want a 13" Pro (not to be confused with the horde that want a 13" computer but buy the Air rather than the Pro).
I fully realize that it's wishful thinking, but I'd like it if Apple retained the occasional "goodwill" product. Maybe it doesn't matter to Apple if some mobile creatives choose another platform over a smaller screen, but it would sure make me feel warm and fuzzy if Apple adopted a stance like "The 17" isn't a big money maker but it's not a money loser either, and our core old guard seem to really like it so why not? Hell, we can afford it. We've got more money than... well, ANYBODY."
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter236
They need to reduce prices and produce models for the general public at all price points so that their market share can be increased.
No, they don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
You can not be so gullible as to believe the marketing crap Apple let's out of the gate every so often. History, very recent history, shows that Apple is very concerned about sales and will kill a product so quickly that it catches many by surprise. If Apple wasn't concerned with Numbers we would still have a 17" MBP in the lineup.
Of course, they're concerned about sales -- but only in the market sectors they sell in.
They're not interested in the market sector for cheap machines because that's where the PC manufacturers are struggling to stay profitable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v
Well, at least three of us just on this thread seem to want a 17" so it SEEMS like there must be close to as many of us as there are people who want a 13" Pro (not to be confused with the horde that want a 13" computer but buy the Air rather than the Pro).
I fully realize that it's wishful thinking, but I'd like it if Apple retained the occasional "goodwill" product.
And which 'goodwill' product, of the hundreds of hardware/software combinations that Mac users ask for, should they pick? Your particular favourite? Someone else's?