Apple's Thunderbolt monitor costs Apple more than what it costs NEC for their $1200 MSRP monitor, but the $1200 NEC is not their best or most expensive monitor. BH sells the PA271W for $1199, essentially full MSRP.
I've seen them offered for $800, but something tells me they might be B stock, from $1200 to $800 is a big price drop, so maybe NEC is EOL the PA271W, they are a little on the thick side. That happens a lot with these heavy discounters. Apple doesn't offer Thunderbolt displays as refurbished all that often, but when they do, they obviously sell them for less than $999. Apple manages their inventory pretty well and they rarely get caught with too much inventory where they have to dump product at a loss. But a lot of these monitor mfg dump product at a loss from time to time, that's why most of the monitor mfg aren't doing so well.
I think Apple's getting ready to release their refreshed product and it'll probably be IGZO and I'm sure they'll have at least two models to choose from and one will be 4K for the MacPro crowd and then the updated Thunderbolt for everyone that doesn't need 4K.
I don't think Apple is too out of line for the price of the Thunderbolt monitor. They don't make the panels, so they have contracted pricing for the specs they use.
BTW, NEC is not doing well financially, the company as a whole has either been losing money or making VERY little in Net Profits. They actually might become the next casualty if they aren't careful. The monitor industry takes a heavy beating since there are just too many mfg with too many products and most of them build up inventories and then they end up having to dump a lot of product at a loss. Panasonic has been hit, Sharp has been hit. Sony, etc., etc. I know those 3D TVs a while back was a big mess, they didn't sell well.
I used to like NEC products, I don't have anything against them per se, but I think they offer too many products and that's just too costly to manage. These companies that make little to no profits need to slim down their product offerings to the models that actually make decent profits. They have about 50 different desktop monitors alone. That's just ridiculous too many different models.
Then you have the electronics and other guts inside, plus the box it ships in. I think that monitor costs Apple more like $500 to $600 for finished goods and I actually might still be a little low on it.
This is actually a slightly lower end panel than what was in the Dell U2711 (LG LM270WQ2).
The Apple 27" TB display does not cost $600 to manufacture. Especially not in 2013 two and a half years after initial launch. Margins on retail sales are north of 40% given Dell isn't selling at a loss. Frankly, if the BOM is around $500 then gross margins is around 50% for Apple retail sales and 37% for wholesale.
Its really overdue for a refresh. Probably with the Mac Pro.
BTW, NEC is not doing well financially, the company as a whole has either been losing money or making VERY little in Net Profits. They actually might become the next casualty if they aren't careful. The monitor industry takes a heavy beating since there are just too many mfg with too many products and most of them build up inventories and then they end up having to dump a lot of product at a loss. Panasonic has been hit, Sharp has been hit. Sony, etc., etc. I know those 3D TVs a while back was a big mess, they didn't sell well.
I used to like NEC products, I don't have anything against them per se, but I think they offer too many products and that's just too costly to manage. These companies that make little to no profits need to slim down their product offerings to the models that actually make decent profits. They have about 50 different desktop monitors alone. That's just ridiculous too many different models.
I'm not going to argue msrp. Spectraview versions cost a bit more, but they include the colorimeter and software. What I linked was of the same type for monitor only, as it's sold in the US. In the UK spectraview and non-spectraview use different firmware, but it's different here. I don't expect that they are losing money on their most expensive units. Aside from that evidence suggests that the price of panels has come down or these guys have recouped their development costs. Most of the current top 27" displays came out in 2010. I think a couple came out toward the end of 2009, so we're not looking at launch pricing. It's just that Apple basically keeps it the same. They did include the thunderbolt docking hardware to add value to the total package. If you're looking for slim margins, you're more likely to find that issue on the low end models. Outside of televisions, Panasonic only makes specialty displays, like broadcast displays. If a business can afford a waveform deck, they can probably afford more than $2k for a display. That's cheap enough for a well paid freelance colorist. I don't think Sharp really deals with that market.
Anyway I'm not sure what it has to do with anything, as I would be surprised if they cut their more expensive displays. They did cut costs, but so did everyone else. That's why everything in desktop displays uses an LG panel now.
I'm not going to argue msrp. Spectraview versions cost a bit more, but they include the colorimeter and software. What I linked was of the same type for monitor only, as it's sold in the US. In the UK spectraview and non-spectraview use different firmware, but it's different here. I don't expect that they are losing money on their most expensive units. Aside from that evidence suggests that the price of panels has come down or these guys have recouped their development costs. Most of the current top 27" displays came out in 2010. I think a couple came out toward the end of 2009, so we're not looking at launch pricing. It's just that Apple basically keeps it the same. They did include the thunderbolt docking hardware to add value to the total package. If you're looking for slim margins, you're more likely to find that issue on the low end models. Outside of televisions, Panasonic only makes specialty displays, like broadcast displays. If a business can afford a waveform deck, they can probably afford more than $2k for a display. That's cheap enough for a well paid freelance colorist. I don't think Sharp really deals with that market.
Anyway I'm not sure what it has to do with anything, as I would be surprised if they cut their more expensive displays. They did cut costs, but so did everyone else. That's why everything in desktop displays uses an LG panel now.
Not all of the desktops are using LG, some are still using Samsung. I guess it depends on which model. Apple doesn't make it easy for us to tell which display mfg is being used in which models and product that we actually get.
I think I read a while back that Panasonic is going to focus more on mobile device panels rather than TVs. Obviously whatever moves they make take a little while. They are still making some of the best Plasma screen, which for some, are more desirable for TVs.
Huh? I don't think I taught you that. I don't really offer much in the way of teaching unless you're referring to what I said about iOS hardware capability, but I do link to silly stuff like people playing cellos with lightsabers. That thing still makes me laugh.
Not all of the desktops are using LG, some are still using Samsung. I guess it depends on which model. Apple doesn't make it easy for us to tell which display mfg is being used in which models and product that we actually get.
I think I read a while back that Panasonic is going to focus more on mobile device panels rather than TVs. Obviously whatever moves they make take a little while. They are still making some of the best Plasma screen, which for some, are more desirable for TVs.
Typically LG makes IPS when it comes to desktop displays intended for general use. I know Panasonic does make some IPS panels, but they seem to be relegated to highly specialized use cases. Mitsubishi and Hitachi ceased doing so long ago. Samsung comes up more in the notebooks and mobile devices. I was surprised to see their name come up at times with imacs, as IPS falls outside of their general territory. Samsung may have won the battle if PVA didn't have the gamma shift issues relative to viewing angle a few years ago. It lacked quite a few other problems.
Typically LG makes IPS when it comes to desktop displays intended for general use. I know Panasonic does make some IPS panels, but they seem to be relegated to highly specialized use cases. Mitsubishi and Hitachi ceased doing so long ago. Samsung comes up more in the notebooks and mobile devices. I was surprised to see their name come up at times with imacs, as IPS falls outside of their general territory. Samsung may have won the battle if PVA didn't have the gamma shift issues relative to viewing angle a few years ago. It lacked quite a few other problems.
Samsung and LG are two of Apple's panel suppliers. According to Wikipedia, which I know isn't always 100% reliable, but they have LG, Samsung, Sony Pro, Japan Display, Panasonic, and AU Optronics that mfg IPS based screens. Which companies that mfg screens for Apple have included, that I'm aware of, LG, Samsung, and Panasonic, it's just a matter of who is supplying which screens for which products.
Samsung and LG are two of Apple's panel suppliers. According to Wikipedia, which I know isn't always 100% reliable, but they have LG, Samsung, Sony Pro, Japan Display, Panasonic, and AU Optronics that mfg IPS based screens. Which companies that mfg screens for Apple have included, that I'm aware of, LG, Samsung, and Panasonic, it's just a matter of who is supplying which screens for which products.
Yeah I forgot about AU Optronics. Note that I was going over those used in desktop displays for anything other than highly specialized use. I can't think of a desktop display over 21" that uses a panel by Sony or Panasonic. Both seem to deal with broadcast displays only. There might be other circumstances such as those designed for medical use. Both make televisions and may or may note make the panels for their own televisions. They don't seem like realistic suppliers for Apple, even though they have some IPS experience. A few years ago it was a bit different. You had a greater number of display and panel brands in use. Falling prices/margins forced many of them out around 2008-2010.
Imagine the Lennon-esque PR shock wave it would produce if Tim Cook stepped outside and announced "Okay, we've now got more money than Europe and Asia combined so we're gonna ease up and lower the price of everything we sell." I'm definitely no economist and there are at least a million ways I could be wrong, but something in my gut insists it would be a better approach than the current strategy of making buyers choose between a Mac or food!
[/COLOR]
I've always felt they should bring prices down a notch to boost marketshare but I don't think the numbers work out. If their gross margins are 30%, a $1999 rMBP makes about $600 gross profit. If they drop the price to $1699, they have to sell double the amount to make the same profit. Apple sells about 1/3 the volume of the biggest PC manufacturers that are selling way down to $500. There's no way they'd double their volume at $1699 so all that happens is they lose money. If they made a $1299 15" Air, that could help boost volumes but it drives people down from the Pro, which lowers their average selling prices.
I wish there was a way for them to increase Mac volume to allow them to get the prices down but the market as a whole isn't upgrading often enough. The increased prices don't help that trend of course so the problem worsens. I personally think it's crazy to have an entry 15" laptop (the most popular form factor) starting at $1999. I think there should be a dual-core model, possibly with 4GB RAM and starting more like $1499. I don't like the idea of it having 128GB but some people can get by with that amount.
Yeah I forgot about AU Optronics. Note that I was going over those used in desktop displays for anything other than highly specialized use. I can't think of a desktop display over 21" that uses a panel by Sony or Panasonic. Both seem to deal with broadcast displays only. There might be other circumstances such as those designed for medical use. Both make televisions and may or may note make the panels for their own televisions. They don't seem like realistic suppliers for Apple, even though they have some IPS experience. A few years ago it was a bit different. You had a greater number of display and panel brands in use. Falling prices/margins forced many of them out around 2008-2010.
Yeah, I know. I read an article I believe it was last year that Panasonic was going to start focusing more on the mobile device market, whether or not that has happened yet. Unfortunately, it's not listed in the About this Mac s/w which panels they use. It would be nice, but obviously, it's not that important as long as it works and Apple has replacement parts on hand.
I took a 3 day IBM training course and it was hilarious when one of the IBM instructors was giving a hypothetical customer presentation on their solution and when the discussion got technical, he said "But you don't need to know that" insinuating that what technology they use wasn't important to the customer as the actual solution was what was the key factor about the presentation. We all cracked up and I almost fell out of my chair. It kind of reminds me how consumers get wrapped up with technical information, but they forget that it's the solution that is what is key. Sometimes, I really don't give a rat's ass about what technology they are using, if it's fast, reliable, and does what I need to have done, I sometimes could care less what's inside the box. Because in the long run, whatever they use now will most likely change a few years from now, so all of the information about what technology is used today becomes trivial.
I wish there was a way for them to increase Mac volume to allow them to get the prices down but the market as a whole isn't upgrading often enough.
Do you think Apple is a victim of their own success. Their products last a long time, CPU's in their desktops also remain fast for a very long time do to OSX , heck most users can get by just fine with a 5 -7 year old iMac with a Core2Duo chip. My husbands sister still uses a Titanium series for goodnesss sake and it's still very usable, though it's been upgraded a little, G4 1Ghz, 2GB RAM and a KingSpec 64 GB PATA SSD. Anyway it's still a very fast machine, I opened up 12 movies and played them all at once, not one frame dropped. I told her that if she ever get's another computer I want it as it was one of my favorite mac portables after the Powerbook 2400c that I h,ave owned and hers is spotless, looks like the day she bought it, I think December 14th 2002 is what her receipt said. Heck the DVD still works, I forgot they made that weird noise when ejecting a disk
Do you think Apple is a victim of their own success. Their products last a long time, CPU's in their desktops also remain fast for a very long time do to OSX , heck most users can get by just fine with a 5 -7 year old iMac with a Core2Duo chip.
I do think that, especially with the iOS devices. They make such high quality products from the outset now that people can happily hang onto them for years. They at least seal in components that will always go bad eventually to force a repair or upgrade - batteries and SSD will always fail eventually and the display has a good chance of going bad. But this is nothing like years ago when people had to deal with MHz clock speeds and KB of RAM and performance upgrades were driving sales.
Heck the DVD still works, I forgot they made that weird noise when ejecting a disk
I'm glad they've removed those from newer models, that noise was weird and it makes people think the machine is broken because it does it when rebooting and no disk is in. Now with SSDs, they are pretty much silent. I'd guess the next step for the Air is to go passively cooled like the iPad.
That will still be a while, especially if you get the i7 CPU like I did. When Apple goes all ARM we will start to see passive cooling. Intel chips just run too hot, I actually wouldn't mind if Apple used a Quad core Atom CPU for an ultra long battery version of the Air. The one thing I want more then passive cooling though is a battery slice that can attach itself to the bottom. I have one for my Thinkpad X220, when used with the 9 cell battery I easily get 23 hours. I was in Paris last year for 4 days, I charged the laptop once before leaving and when I got home I still had like 7 hours left. Battery slices are easy to implement and wouldn't hinder the look of the unit. I just don't understand Apples aversion to laptop accessories like; docking stations, removable batteries, battery slices, etc. I really like the 11" Air and I am defiantly done with laptops that are any larger. Actually, I already made a deal with myself, if I survive I'm going simplfy my computer life, iPad Air, Surface Pro 2 for everyday computing needs, a Mac Mini for the family rooms TV and a Samsung Chromebox i5 for the TV in my room. I will continue with my super server that is in my bomb shelter, that will never change, I love that Sun, sounds like a jet taking off when you first turn it on but still one of the coolest pieces of hardware I have owned in recent times.
Yeah, I know. I read an article I believe it was last year that Panasonic was going to start focusing more on the mobile device market, whether or not that has happened yet. Unfortunately, it's not listed in the About this Mac s/w which panels they use. It would be nice, but obviously, it's not that important as long as it works and Apple has replacement parts on hand.
I took a 3 day IBM training course and it was hilarious when one of the IBM instructors was giving a hypothetical customer presentation on their solution and when the discussion got technical, he said "But you don't need to know that" insinuating that what technology they use wasn't important to the customer as the actual solution was what was the key factor about the presentation. We all cracked up and I almost fell out of my chair. It kind of reminds me how consumers get wrapped up with technical information, but they forget that it's the solution that is what is key. Sometimes, I really don't give a rat's ass about what technology they are using, if it's fast, reliable, and does what I need to have done, I sometimes could care less what's inside the box. Because in the long run, whatever they use now will most likely change a few years from now, so all of the information about what technology is used today becomes trivial.
It isn't just Apple, the industry has hit a certain maturity where more performance isn't a huge requirement for the average user. This is more a function of software than anything. To drive PC sales you need to put more intelligence into software. Here I mean artificial intelligence and other techniques that would leverage higher performance machines.
The problem Apple has is that they have no machines acceptable to industry except in some situations the Mini. Apple could easily increase sales to the business world with machine suitable for that world. Apple sales could improve simply by offering hardware into markets the don't currently have a play.
I wish there was a way for them to increase Mac volume to allow them to get the prices down but the market as a whole isn't upgrading often enough.
Do you think Apple is a victim of their own success. Their products last a long time, CPU's in their desktops also remain fast for a very long time do to OSX , heck most users can get by just fine with a 5 -7 year old iMac with a Core2Duo chip. My husbands sister still uses a Titanium series for goodnesss sake and it's still very usable, though it's been upgraded a little, G4 1Ghz, 2GB RAM and a KingSpec 64 GB PATA SSD. Anyway it's still a very fast machine, I opened up 12 movies and played them all at once, not one frame dropped. I told her that if she ever get's another computer I want it as it was one of my favorite mac portables after the Powerbook 2400c that I h,ave owned and hers is spotless, looks like the day she bought it, I think December 14th 2002 is what her receipt said. Heck the DVD still works, I forgot they made that weird noise when ejecting a disk
Comments
Apple's Thunderbolt monitor costs Apple more than what it costs NEC for their $1200 MSRP monitor, but the $1200 NEC is not their best or most expensive monitor. BH sells the PA271W for $1199, essentially full MSRP.
I've seen them offered for $800, but something tells me they might be B stock, from $1200 to $800 is a big price drop, so maybe NEC is EOL the PA271W, they are a little on the thick side. That happens a lot with these heavy discounters. Apple doesn't offer Thunderbolt displays as refurbished all that often, but when they do, they obviously sell them for less than $999. Apple manages their inventory pretty well and they rarely get caught with too much inventory where they have to dump product at a loss. But a lot of these monitor mfg dump product at a loss from time to time, that's why most of the monitor mfg aren't doing so well.
I think Apple's getting ready to release their refreshed product and it'll probably be IGZO and I'm sure they'll have at least two models to choose from and one will be 4K for the MacPro crowd and then the updated Thunderbolt for everyone that doesn't need 4K.
I don't think Apple is too out of line for the price of the Thunderbolt monitor. They don't make the panels, so they have contracted pricing for the specs they use.
BTW, NEC is not doing well financially, the company as a whole has either been losing money or making VERY little in Net Profits. They actually might become the next casualty if they aren't careful. The monitor industry takes a heavy beating since there are just too many mfg with too many products and most of them build up inventories and then they end up having to dump a lot of product at a loss. Panasonic has been hit, Sharp has been hit. Sony, etc., etc. I know those 3D TVs a while back was a big mess, they didn't sell well.
I used to like NEC products, I don't have anything against them per se, but I think they offer too many products and that's just too costly to manage. These companies that make little to no profits need to slim down their product offerings to the models that actually make decent profits. They have about 50 different desktop monitors alone. That's just ridiculous too many different models.
Then you have the electronics and other guts inside, plus the box it ships in. I think that monitor costs Apple more like $500 to $600 for finished goods and I actually might still be a little low on it.
The 27" Thunderbolt Display uses the same LG panel thats in the Dell U2713HM and 2009 iMac (LG LM270WQ1). The Dell MSRPs for $799 and retails for $600. (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/906906-REG/Dell_469_3852_U2713HM_27_LED_LCD.html)
This is actually a slightly lower end panel than what was in the Dell U2711 (LG LM270WQ2).
The Apple 27" TB display does not cost $600 to manufacture. Especially not in 2013 two and a half years after initial launch. Margins on retail sales are north of 40% given Dell isn't selling at a loss. Frankly, if the BOM is around $500 then gross margins is around 50% for Apple retail sales and 37% for wholesale.
Its really overdue for a refresh. Probably with the Mac Pro.
BTW, NEC is not doing well financially, the company as a whole has either been losing money or making VERY little in Net Profits. They actually might become the next casualty if they aren't careful. The monitor industry takes a heavy beating since there are just too many mfg with too many products and most of them build up inventories and then they end up having to dump a lot of product at a loss. Panasonic has been hit, Sharp has been hit. Sony, etc., etc. I know those 3D TVs a while back was a big mess, they didn't sell well.
I used to like NEC products, I don't have anything against them per se, but I think they offer too many products and that's just too costly to manage. These companies that make little to no profits need to slim down their product offerings to the models that actually make decent profits. They have about 50 different desktop monitors alone. That's just ridiculous too many different models.
I'm not going to argue msrp. Spectraview versions cost a bit more, but they include the colorimeter and software. What I linked was of the same type for monitor only, as it's sold in the US. In the UK spectraview and non-spectraview use different firmware, but it's different here. I don't expect that they are losing money on their most expensive units. Aside from that evidence suggests that the price of panels has come down or these guys have recouped their development costs. Most of the current top 27" displays came out in 2010. I think a couple came out toward the end of 2009, so we're not looking at launch pricing. It's just that Apple basically keeps it the same. They did include the thunderbolt docking hardware to add value to the total package. If you're looking for slim margins, you're more likely to find that issue on the low end models. Outside of televisions, Panasonic only makes specialty displays, like broadcast displays. If a business can afford a waveform deck, they can probably afford more than $2k for a display. That's cheap enough for a well paid freelance colorist. I don't think Sharp really deals with that market.
Anyway I'm not sure what it has to do with anything, as I would be surprised if they cut their more expensive displays. They did cut costs, but so did everyone else. That's why everything in desktop displays uses an LG panel now.
I'm not going to argue msrp. Spectraview versions cost a bit more, but they include the colorimeter and software. What I linked was of the same type for monitor only, as it's sold in the US. In the UK spectraview and non-spectraview use different firmware, but it's different here. I don't expect that they are losing money on their most expensive units. Aside from that evidence suggests that the price of panels has come down or these guys have recouped their development costs. Most of the current top 27" displays came out in 2010. I think a couple came out toward the end of 2009, so we're not looking at launch pricing. It's just that Apple basically keeps it the same. They did include the thunderbolt docking hardware to add value to the total package. If you're looking for slim margins, you're more likely to find that issue on the low end models. Outside of televisions, Panasonic only makes specialty displays, like broadcast displays. If a business can afford a waveform deck, they can probably afford more than $2k for a display. That's cheap enough for a well paid freelance colorist. I don't think Sharp really deals with that market.
Anyway I'm not sure what it has to do with anything, as I would be surprised if they cut their more expensive displays. They did cut costs, but so did everyone else. That's why everything in desktop displays uses an LG panel now.
Not all of the desktops are using LG, some are still using Samsung. I guess it depends on which model. Apple doesn't make it easy for us to tell which display mfg is being used in which models and product that we actually get.
I think I read a while back that Panasonic is going to focus more on mobile device panels rather than TVs. Obviously whatever moves they make take a little while. They are still making some of the best Plasma screen, which for some, are more desirable for TVs.
Hope they release the pricing for the BTO options soon.
I would consider a 6 or 8 core machine with D300 and 32GB RAM and a 1TB SSD. Drool...
However, I would prefer to wait for the first update and speed bump.
Huh? I don't think I taught you that. I don't really offer much in the way of teaching unless you're referring to what I said about iOS hardware capability, but I do link to silly stuff like people playing cellos with lightsabers
Ooops, do many drugs, I meant to say DrBlank.
Hope they release the pricing for the BTO options soon.
I would consider a 6 or 8 core machine with D300 and 32GB RAM and a 1TB SSD. Drool...
However, I would prefer to wait for the first update and speed bump.
Wow, a post that's actually on topic in this thread!
Ooops, do many drugs, I meant to say DrBlank.
You really are pathetic Relic. Seriously, you need to start your own website and get off this one.
Not all of the desktops are using LG, some are still using Samsung. I guess it depends on which model. Apple doesn't make it easy for us to tell which display mfg is being used in which models and product that we actually get.
I think I read a while back that Panasonic is going to focus more on mobile device panels rather than TVs. Obviously whatever moves they make take a little while. They are still making some of the best Plasma screen, which for some, are more desirable for TVs.
Typically LG makes IPS when it comes to desktop displays intended for general use. I know Panasonic does make some IPS panels, but they seem to be relegated to highly specialized use cases. Mitsubishi and Hitachi ceased doing so long ago. Samsung comes up more in the notebooks and mobile devices. I was surprised to see their name come up at times with imacs, as IPS falls outside of their general territory. Samsung may have won the battle if PVA didn't have the gamma shift issues relative to viewing angle a few years ago. It lacked quite a few other problems.
Typically LG makes IPS when it comes to desktop displays intended for general use. I know Panasonic does make some IPS panels, but they seem to be relegated to highly specialized use cases. Mitsubishi and Hitachi ceased doing so long ago. Samsung comes up more in the notebooks and mobile devices. I was surprised to see their name come up at times with imacs, as IPS falls outside of their general territory. Samsung may have won the battle if PVA didn't have the gamma shift issues relative to viewing angle a few years ago. It lacked quite a few other problems.
Samsung and LG are two of Apple's panel suppliers. According to Wikipedia, which I know isn't always 100% reliable, but they have LG, Samsung, Sony Pro, Japan Display, Panasonic, and AU Optronics that mfg IPS based screens. Which companies that mfg screens for Apple have included, that I'm aware of, LG, Samsung, and Panasonic, it's just a matter of who is supplying which screens for which products.
Samsung and LG are two of Apple's panel suppliers. According to Wikipedia, which I know isn't always 100% reliable, but they have LG, Samsung, Sony Pro, Japan Display, Panasonic, and AU Optronics that mfg IPS based screens. Which companies that mfg screens for Apple have included, that I'm aware of, LG, Samsung, and Panasonic, it's just a matter of who is supplying which screens for which products.
Yeah I forgot about AU Optronics. Note that I was going over those used in desktop displays for anything other than highly specialized use. I can't think of a desktop display over 21" that uses a panel by Sony or Panasonic. Both seem to deal with broadcast displays only. There might be other circumstances such as those designed for medical use. Both make televisions and may or may note make the panels for their own televisions. They don't seem like realistic suppliers for Apple, even though they have some IPS experience. A few years ago it was a bit different. You had a greater number of display and panel brands in use. Falling prices/margins forced many of them out around 2008-2010.
I've always felt they should bring prices down a notch to boost marketshare but I don't think the numbers work out. If their gross margins are 30%, a $1999 rMBP makes about $600 gross profit. If they drop the price to $1699, they have to sell double the amount to make the same profit. Apple sells about 1/3 the volume of the biggest PC manufacturers that are selling way down to $500. There's no way they'd double their volume at $1699 so all that happens is they lose money. If they made a $1299 15" Air, that could help boost volumes but it drives people down from the Pro, which lowers their average selling prices.
I wish there was a way for them to increase Mac volume to allow them to get the prices down but the market as a whole isn't upgrading often enough. The increased prices don't help that trend of course so the problem worsens. I personally think it's crazy to have an entry 15" laptop (the most popular form factor) starting at $1999. I think there should be a dual-core model, possibly with 4GB RAM and starting more like $1499. I don't like the idea of it having 128GB but some people can get by with that amount.
Yeah I forgot about AU Optronics. Note that I was going over those used in desktop displays for anything other than highly specialized use. I can't think of a desktop display over 21" that uses a panel by Sony or Panasonic. Both seem to deal with broadcast displays only. There might be other circumstances such as those designed for medical use. Both make televisions and may or may note make the panels for their own televisions. They don't seem like realistic suppliers for Apple, even though they have some IPS experience. A few years ago it was a bit different. You had a greater number of display and panel brands in use. Falling prices/margins forced many of them out around 2008-2010.
Yeah, I know. I read an article I believe it was last year that Panasonic was going to start focusing more on the mobile device market, whether or not that has happened yet. Unfortunately, it's not listed in the About this Mac s/w which panels they use. It would be nice, but obviously, it's not that important as long as it works and Apple has replacement parts on hand.
I took a 3 day IBM training course and it was hilarious when one of the IBM instructors was giving a hypothetical customer presentation on their solution and when the discussion got technical, he said "But you don't need to know that" insinuating that what technology they use wasn't important to the customer as the actual solution was what was the key factor about the presentation. We all cracked up and I almost fell out of my chair. It kind of reminds me how consumers get wrapped up with technical information, but they forget that it's the solution that is what is key. Sometimes, I really don't give a rat's ass about what technology they are using, if it's fast, reliable, and does what I need to have done, I sometimes could care less what's inside the box. Because in the long run, whatever they use now will most likely change a few years from now, so all of the information about what technology is used today becomes trivial.
Wow, a post that's actually on topic in this thread!
Had to try!
I wish there was a way for them to increase Mac volume to allow them to get the prices down but the market as a whole isn't upgrading often enough.
Do you think Apple is a victim of their own success. Their products last a long time, CPU's in their desktops also remain fast for a very long time do to OSX , heck most users can get by just fine with a 5 -7 year old iMac with a Core2Duo chip. My husbands sister still uses a Titanium series for goodnesss sake and it's still very usable, though it's been upgraded a little, G4 1Ghz, 2GB RAM and a KingSpec 64 GB PATA SSD. Anyway it's still a very fast machine, I opened up 12 movies and played them all at once, not one frame dropped. I told her that if she ever get's another computer I want it as it was one of my favorite mac portables after the Powerbook 2400c that I h,ave owned and hers is spotless, looks like the day she bought it, I think December 14th 2002 is what her receipt said. Heck the DVD still works, I forgot they made that weird noise when ejecting a disk
I do think that, especially with the iOS devices. They make such high quality products from the outset now that people can happily hang onto them for years. They at least seal in components that will always go bad eventually to force a repair or upgrade - batteries and SSD will always fail eventually and the display has a good chance of going bad. But this is nothing like years ago when people had to deal with MHz clock speeds and KB of RAM and performance upgrades were driving sales.
I'm glad they've removed those from newer models, that noise was weird and it makes people think the machine is broken because it does it when rebooting and no disk is in. Now with SSDs, they are pretty much silent. I'd guess the next step for the Air is to go passively cooled like the iPad.
Air is to go passively cooled like the iPad.
That will still be a while, especially if you get the i7 CPU like I did. When Apple goes all ARM we will start to see passive cooling. Intel chips just run too hot, I actually wouldn't mind if Apple used a Quad core Atom CPU for an ultra long battery version of the Air. The one thing I want more then passive cooling though is a battery slice that can attach itself to the bottom. I have one for my Thinkpad X220, when used with the 9 cell battery I easily get 23 hours. I was in Paris last year for 4 days, I charged the laptop once before leaving and when I got home I still had like 7 hours left. Battery slices are easy to implement and wouldn't hinder the look of the unit. I just don't understand Apples aversion to laptop accessories like; docking stations, removable batteries, battery slices, etc. I really like the 11" Air and I am defiantly done with laptops that are any larger. Actually, I already made a deal with myself, if I survive I'm going simplfy my computer life, iPad Air, Surface Pro 2 for everyday computing needs, a Mac Mini for the family rooms TV and a Samsung Chromebox i5 for the TV in my room. I will continue with my super server that is in my bomb shelter, that will never change, I love that Sun, sounds like a jet taking off when you first turn it on but still one of the coolest pieces of hardware I have owned in recent times.
The problem Apple has is that they have no machines acceptable to industry except in some situations the Mini. Apple could easily increase sales to the business world with machine suitable for that world. Apple sales could improve simply by offering hardware into markets the don't currently have a play.