Price, Price, Price...

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
From the How to make a G5 suck thread, someone posted a link to the http://www.sharkyforums.com forum pages. I had a quick read of a few threads regarding Apple.



The most prevalent issue made by what seems to be most of their replies, seems to be that the price of buying a Mac is ridiculous.



We all know this isn't true, and we also know why.



? The software bundled with a new Mac...

? The quality...

? ...



I'm not going to go on, you can add dot points as you see fit.



It seems to me that once the world gets over the price myth, market share will begin to rise. This is the issue that Apple needs to address. It is still prohibiting PC buyers from even looking at the Mac as an alternative.



Instead of pushing the iPod, which is already very famous and very popular, Apple should be turning their attention towards Switchers? again, but not in the way they did before, which was incredibly boring and tactless, but confront the issue(s) head on. Actually use the TV screen as a Mac desktop even, to show how easy it is to do things on OS X.



But most importantly, get the price myth out of the way.



The more reasons we can post in this thread, just tells me that there are so many reasons why a Mac is cheaper than its Wintel counterparts.



What reasons can you think of, why a Mac is cheaper? m.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 34
    ast3r3xast3r3x Posts: 5,012member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Merovingian



    Instead of pushing the iPod, which is already very famous and very popular, Apple should be turning their attention towards Switchers? again, but not in the way they did before, which was incredibly boring and tactless, but confront the issue(s) head on. Actually use the TV screen as a Mac desktop even, to show how easy it is to do things on OS X.



    What reasons can you think of, why a Mac is cheaper? m.




    Firstly Macs ARE ridiculously more expensive. It comes down to if it's worth it to use the Mac OS X or not. Hardware is nice, but the Mac OS is why I continue to be a mac person, I had a beige motorola clone box and loved that just as much as anything else.



    Quality...I don't know that their hardware is any more quality then any other pricer (but still cheaper then a mac) PC. Don't forget Apple almost always has Rev. A syndrome.



    Haven't there been studies saying macs are cheaper in the long run?
  • Reply 2 of 34
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ast3r3x

    Haven't there been studies saying macs are cheaper in the long run?



    There may very well have been...but perhaps the majority of people don't think that way.



    The problem is not just price...but the large price gap between Macs and PC. If priced closer and were better valued (i.e. iMac), consumers may stop and consider why and research further. Currently they see the Mac's sticker price and immediately dismiss it altogether.
  • Reply 3 of 34
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    problem is intial price doesn't include:



    resale value

    productivity

    easy of use

    reliability

    cost of down time



    that's where you more than make up the difference.
  • Reply 4 of 34
    aslan^aslan^ Posts: 599member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by alcimedes

    problem is intial price doesn't include:



    productivity

    easy of use

    reliability

    cost of down time



    that's where you more than make up the difference.




    I took out resale value... but the others are the real reasons to buy a mac, especially the laptops.



    I will be buying a computer for my mother shortly, I recommended a mac but said she could look around. I was thinking the other day, Im going to insist on a mac, she doesnt understand and has no interest in worms, firewalls, system crashes, installing drivers, configuring text files, bash shells, kernel panics, blue screens of death, viruses, or anything else to do with the computer not behaving.



    From past experience I would say an unmaintained PC running windows with internet connectivity has a six to twelve month lifespan. After that there is usually a severe decrease in overall system stability and performance usually requiring a fresh install of OS and software. So if I buy my mother a computer I hope it will last her about three years. There is no way a PC would last that long, Ive seen it time and again. The only people who get serious uptime from their Windows PC's are the kind of people who relish installing patches and virus updates or editing their registry by hand.



    For some, computers are tools, and tools shouldn't break when used for their intended purpose. Sometimes thats what I need from my mac and thats what I want for my mother.



    I think thats worth paying a little extra for.
  • Reply 5 of 34
    aslan^aslan^ Posts: 599member
    duplicate post...
  • Reply 6 of 34
    There was a study that in over 4-5 years your mac will most likely beat out your PC in price. However, your PC will also likely be a whole new PC, while your mac is still 4-5 years old.



    So your PC will perform far better than it did 4-5 years ago, and your mac won't, and will most likely be worth less than the PC when it was new.



    Eitherway, I doubt it's even true anymore, that study was done like a year ago at least, and since then there have been 2 OS updates that cost $129 each, so if you are going to be updating your OS, over 4-5 years that could likely be $300-400 which was about the same amount of 4-5 year upkeep a PC has, usually.
  • Reply 7 of 34
    garageband itself has over $40,000 worth of amps and effects (the amps and pedals would cost over 40K)... so there. and if you get a chance to peruse ilife04, you'll realize its a steal. mac's are worth it b/c they dont crash, theres great software, and design/interface is 10 years ahead of its time.
  • Reply 8 of 34
    My powerbook crashed a couple days ago.



    first time any of my computers crashed in....at least 2 years.



    actually I think it was a kernel panic, but that might as well be a crash. \
  • Reply 9 of 34
    Quote:

    Merovingian wrote:

    It seems to me that once the world gets over the price myth, market share will begin to rise.



    The perception that the Apple Macintosh is more expensive than a comparable PC (re: Wintel) has been in the minds of American consumers since 1984.



    Quote:

    It is still prohibiting PC buyers from even looking at the Mac as an alternative.



    Agreed.



    Quote:

    Actually use the TV screen as a Mac desktop even, to show how easy it is to do things on OS X.



    Apple computer actually tried this strategy back in the mid-eighties. Then, IBM came out with a commercial featuring a Charlie Chaplin lookalike who bobbed around onscreen trying to balance THOUSANDS of software titles in his hands.



    The message was very clear: Buy Macintosh if you want ease of use. Buy an IBM PC if you want a lot of software and a much cheaper pricetag.



    20 years later, we see which was (is) more important to the ?average? consumer.



    Quote:

    ast3r3x wrote:

    Firstly Macs ARE ridiculously more expensive. It comes down to if it's worth it to use the Mac OS X or not. Hardware is nice, but the Mac OS is why I continue to be a mac person, I had a beige motorola clone box and loved that just as much as anything else.



    More Macintosh users would do well to memorize this text. It is 100% correct.



    Quote:

    segovius wrote:

    Imo, it's pointless to try to argue Macs are cheaper (if that's what's happening), they aren't meant to be - there's no need to justify it. That's the niche they fill.



    I agree with this statement, as well.



    In my opinion, what happens is that the Macintosh community sees bold statements from Apple?s management saying that they?re going to, ?...increase market share...? Then, Apple continues with the same business model they?ve had for 20 years, and (of course) there?s little to no increase in market share DESPITE amazing technological advances and innovations.



    So, the Macintosh community feels the need to somehow COMPENSATE by telling PC (Wintel) users how much BETTER the Apple platform is. Ironically, Wintel users already REGCOGNIZE that OSX is quite good. They simply don?t want to have to pay the money for hardware that is inferior to their own (Talking G4 desktops here, folks. NOT G5s).



    Quote:

    AsLan^ wrote:

    The only people who get serious uptime from their Windows PC's are the kind of people who relish installing patches and virus updates or editing their registry by hand.



    I think you?re being a bit melodramatic.
    • Norton Antivirus takes care of all my updates in the background--without any intervention from me.

    • Spybot requires all of 5 minutes from me once a week.

    • I utilize Windows Update on XP only as often as I utilized Software Update in OSX.

    • I have never (re: NEVER) had to even so much as LOOK at a Windows registry in XP.

    And my PCs have been running for WELL over a year without a single re-installation.



    Respectfully,

    -Antithesis
  • Reply 10 of 34
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,837member
    My solution to the price dilemma (which has received lukewarm reaction on AI) has always been to commoditize the eMac.



    Mac retailers make no significant money on it, and neither does Apple.



    Put it in Walmart, Costco and Staples. Surround it with a basic set of Mac Software choices. Office, Filemaker, Keynote, Quickbooks etc.

    The Mac aisle at the big box stores.



    It's the Mac for the Masses. None of those people are going to buy G5s anyway. Put an Apple Store catalog in every box.



    If they don't want to dilute the Apple brand with a low cost offering, revive the Power Computing name.



    It will take five years, but once this market has an investment in Mac Software already at home, it's much easier to sell them an iMac.



    Finally, we can be the ones to say: "Do you really want to repurchase all your software all over again?"
  • Reply 11 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Frank777

    *snipped*



    Okay, you've got my attention.



    What kind of numbers are we talking about here (price)?



    -Antithesis
  • Reply 12 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Frank777

    If they don't want to dilute the Apple brand with a low cost offering, revive the Power Computing name.



    Yeah, that'd be cool. Release Macs that have crappy ATX cases, sub-par internals, crazy-loud fans, yadda, yadda, yadda... but look good on a Dell-style spec sheet. You could sell these crap boxes for really cheap and get the Mac marketshare up, all without hurting the premium Apple image.



    Apple would, of course, lose some sales to this wholly-owned subsidiary, but as long as Apple's machines are spiffy enough, I think most existing customers would stick with Apple. The new Power Computing would be mostly for switchers, and they would advertise exclusively to non-Mac customers. i.e. You'd never see an ad for one in a Mac magazine or website, but they'd be all over the PC-centric ones. The hope would be that when these switchers want a second Mac, they'll at least look at Apple, which is something they probably wouldn't have done before.



    Plus, Apple could use it as a testing ground. Power Computing could be like Dell... produce all manner of computer, without worrying too much about whether one line will cannibalize another. If it looks like there's a market for a particular kind of computer, make it and promote it. If certain lines of computers do especially well, and Apple isn't currently making one that fills that space, they can make one themselves, and be pretty sure that it'll sell.



    I know I'd never buy one of these things, but it might make the cost of entry low enough to tempt some Windows and Linux users over.



    Speaking of Linux, you could even make a Linux/OSX dual-boot configuration as a free option, to encourage those users to give a Power Computing Mac a shot. They have a brand new, highly-speced (at least on paper) computer running Linux, which they're used to. Meanwhile, they've got OSX sitting right there in case they want to give it a shot.
  • Reply 13 of 34
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Frank777

    My solution to the price dilemma (which has received lukewarm reaction on AI) has always been to commoditize the eMac.



    [...]



    Put it in Walmart, Costco and Staples. Surround it with a basic set of Mac Software choices. Office, Filemaker, Keynote, Quickbooks etc.




    This assumes that it would be sold - or even treated with any respect at all - in those stores. Certainly, I'd be surprised if the institutionally Mac-phobic Staples took any care to place the machines prominently, surround them with attractive software, or pitch them.



    The mass retailers' collective record selling Macs sucks. They've been there, done that, got the eggs and tomatoes. That's why they're opening their own stores now.
  • Reply 14 of 34
    Just to point out what was said in the elarier post about patches for XP. 10.3 is nearing its 3 service pack in like 4 months? XP has had 1, and 2 will be out in 6 months. Compared to the amount of services packs on OSX and the amount of Patches on XP they are about the same... However XP has been out longer then 10.3 which isn't very good in that sense. The difference is OSX seems to have a yearly update cycle, Windows is every 3 or 4 years... With that in mind Windows is cheaper in the long run.



    On another note, I really don't see why apple can't drop its prices down to the level of Gateway or Dell. Make a cheap tower and sell it with a crappy CRT that's rebranded, and you'll get some sales. The Price/Preformance ratio is awful on Mac's Hardware, compared to a x86 hardware.



    I don't really see why apple can't cut costs. With exception of the processor and motherboard, all the other are standard pieces. Except the superdrive, which in my view sucks compared to a LiteOn or Plextor.



    Apple's proprietary hardware kills them. ADC, no one uses it, use VGA or DVI be compatible with something for once. Superdrive... buy LiteOn OEM's. They are the best in the business and most Windows Powerusers Swear by them. On the Windows side Hardware beats Apple's ass. If apple would get with the picture we wouldn't have this problem.
  • Reply 15 of 34
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,837member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Amorph

    This assumes that it would be sold - or even treated with any respect at all - in those stores. Certainly, I'd be surprised if the institutionally Mac-phobic Staples took any care to place the machines prominently, surround them with attractive software, or pitch them.



    The mass retailers' collective record selling Macs sucks. They've been there, done that, got the eggs and tomatoes. That's why they're opening their own stores now.




    True, but couldn't Apple have staff that travel to individual stores and ensure the line is well displayed? I have a friend that does that for a distributor that sells products at Home Depot.



    Apple just needs to design a 360º display. eMac on top, with software, games and accessories below. Apple would sell stores the whole display, including the software - not just the eMac on top. Think The Apple Store-lite.



    I agree Staples in particular has been Mac-phobic. But the best product introductions in its history haven't been able to move Apple in marketshare department.



    Until the Apple store has 700 locations, the only option I can see is to commoditize the lowest end Mac and put it where the mass market can see it. Then upsell them two years later.
  • Reply 16 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Frank777

    Until the Apple store has 700 locations, the only option I can see is to commoditize the lowest end Mac and put it where the mass market can see it. Then upsell them two years later.



    I don't think Apple wants to commoditize the Apple brand, though, and I don't blame them. Plus, Apple has been bashed in all of these "commidity" stores every time they've tried to sell there.



    Resurrecting the Power Computing brand, and even marketing it as a Linux box, with OSX thrown in for free could make some in-roads. And if Staples bashes Power Computing, who cares? Apple still looks good.
  • Reply 17 of 34
    mcqmcq Posts: 1,543member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by scavanger



    On another note, I really don't see why apple can't drop its prices down to the level of Gateway or Dell. Make a cheap tower and sell it with a crappy CRT that's rebranded, and you'll get some sales. The Price/Preformance ratio is awful on Mac's Hardware, compared to a x86 hardware.





    While price/performance ratios aren't as good... dropping prices does nothing for Apple's bottom line, it would only help marketshare (and marginally I'd suspect, certainly not enough to overcome the loss in profits that would result).



    As far as Gateway, just pricing items low doesn't mean that sales (or profits) will be high... take a look at their results for last quarter:

    http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040129/lath094_1.html



    Quote:

    The company recorded a fourth-quarter net loss of $114 million, or 35 cents per share, including restructuring charges and transformation expenses stemming from its previously announced outsourcing and related initiatives, as well as tax provisions; these factors accounted for $65 million, or 20 cents per share, of the loss.



    Gateway sold 526,000 PCs in the quarter, off 6 percent sequentially and down 27 percent year-on-year. The quarterly decline reflected stiff competition in the lower-end of the PC market and constrained supply of the company's Media Center PCs, as previously announced.



    So, not including one-time restructing and other expenses, they still LOST 15 cents per share in the quarter. Heck, they even sold several hundred thousand less computers than Apple last quarter.



    HP isn't much better off regarding their Personal Computer division, they're making very little profit. The majority of HP's profit comes from their Imaging/Printing and Services groups.



    There has to be a substantial reason for Apple to drop prices, and I don't quite see what that reason would be.
  • Reply 18 of 34
    Gateway was a bad example... Dell is a good one. If you can sell at the prices dell can then you have a good thing, otherwise all this bottomline is worthless if they only have 3.5% marketshare.
  • Reply 19 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally posted by scavanger

    Gateway was a bad example... Dell is a good one. If you can sell at the prices dell can then you have a good thing, otherwise all this bottomline is worthless if they only have 3.5% marketshare.



    Check the locked thread.
  • Reply 20 of 34
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by scavanger

    Gateway was a bad example... Dell is a good one. If you can sell at the prices dell can then you have a good thing, otherwise all this bottomline is worthless if they only have 3.5% marketshare.



    Marketshare doesn't matter. If the market nsize is growing every year, then the marketshare can be decreasing while the company is still growing.
Sign In or Register to comment.