All joking aside, that's a very key issue related to Apple's shrinking market share. The fewer people there are buying Apple computers, the fewer people there are buying software for Mac OS X, the fewer developers there are that can afford to make applications for Mac OS X.
Say I am a software development manager at XYZ Software Corp. I have a choice. I can invest $X and sell my program to 2 people or I can invest the same $X and sell it to 98 people. Which choice offers me the better return on investment? It's the simplest of economics.
Market share matters.
We can already see this happening in the case of software giants like Adobe. Adobe was once the poster child of a happy Mac-loving company. Where is it today? A quick skim over Adobe's product page shows us Adobe's level of dedication to Mac OS X. Acrobat Elements, Acrobat Elements Server, Acrobat Capture, Acrobat Distiller Server, Messenger, Document Server, Central Pro Output Server, Content Server, Photoshop Album, Graphics Server, Encore DVD, Audition, FrameMaker, FrameMaker Server, and Atmosphere are not available for Mac OS X. Let's also not forget the big scare a few months ago where a manual writer for Adobe "slammed" Apple and recommended using a faster Windows-based PC instead. It has been discussed many times how Adobe is shifting more towards Windows and how it wouldn't hurt so much to drop Mac support in the coming years.
One reason that Apples market share is still dropping is that the G5 has not made it to the whole line yet.
Right now the price/performance rato of the iMacs are terrible. When the standard low end PC is coming in with a 2.66 - 2.8GHz P4 on a 533MHz front side bus, and iMacs are coming in with a 1-1.24GHz G4 on a 167MHz bus, it does not compare well at all.
The iMacs current slogan -- less then half the power, for more then twice the price!
If Apple were to put a 2.4 GHz G5 into an all new iMac, even at the current premium price, I think it would start flying off the shelves and we would get a bit if an increase in market share.
Windows has become the computer, and Internet Explorer has become the Internet. A lot of discussions here and elsewhere tend to focus on Apple's problems with price and value, and of course Apple would do well to concentrate on these areas. However, nothing a company does with its products will help if the consumer never sets an eye on them.
In my area, Apple makes this particularly easy. They rely on American ads to sell their products. They rarely advertise Macs anyway, let alone do so effectively. They have no retail presence, save for two or three models in Future Shop, a subsidiary of Best Buy. Having a wide variety of products to be pushed by incompetent, commission-based staff, Future Shop sells things based on price. They could not possibly sell any Apple products, so they never advertise them, don't even try to sell them, and don't keep any software in stock. Without any print, television or retail presence, the innovation, interface and intangibles that we cherish, don't matter. Consumers need to know that the Mac delivers something tangibly better than the Windows experience to even consider any kind of switch. Apple needs to go over and above other manufacturers with their advertising.
To give a counterexample, this household routinely recieves flyers from Dell. I see their TV advertisements regularly; sometimes several times a day. They can easily advertise their extremely low prices, but they also have a reputation for quality. There is no way a computer buyer could ignore them, despite their alleged lack of substance. Dell is always in my face as an easy choice with products starting at extremely low price points. Dell wants my business.
Besides problems of perception, there's also the problem of reality. In price comparisons between Macs and PCs, much is made of the concept of value. The easiest point to argue: due to superior design, Macs can be more enjoyable and productive to use. On the other hand, regardless of what level of specs we deem are actually necessary for a user, people buy based on them. From that perspective, Apple's consumer hardware is both underwhelming and costly. Even if a customer doesn't really need a 2.4 GHz Celeron from Dell, it's cheaper than an eMac anyway.
Furthermore, a product has no value if it's beyond the means of the buyer. I could pay Dell seven hundred bucks and get a computer. Even if Apple has something better than Dell at a higher price point, plenty of people wouldn't pay that much in the first place.
I should add that Apple was able to command a price premium over PCs during its heyday because of its massive advantages in graphics technology and user interface. These advantages are significantly reduced today. Besides decreasing prices, Apple could raise the value of their product through significant innovation.
Dell sells to the lowest common denominator. Poor people skew the results. Installed base. Rich people will always pay more to look cool. Whatever. My concern is not over whether a self-styled elite will still be able to get their executive toys. The less prevalent Macs are, the less diverse and competitive computing becomes, and the less all of us will be able to enjoy it.
Apple will need mindshare. Can iTunes provide enough of it?
Alone?
Nope.
The next digital frontier is the couch. The set-top/console/home entertainment computer will be the last great PC frontier.
This is very Apple territory: small, hermetically sealed devices with lovely interfaces. It's very Apple in all but one detail, price! About 1000 settling to 500 as the form factor gains acceptance.
Playstation will probably be a bigegr platform than Mac, heck, it already is.
Say I am a software development manager at XYZ Software Corp. I have a choice. I can invest $X and sell my program to 2 people or I can invest the same $X and sell it to 98 people. Which choice offers me the better return on investment? It's the simplest of economics.
Market share matters.
I knew this was coming.
But I've also read reports where on average, the cost to develop and support Windows applications is 50% higher per dollar of revenue than the cost to develop for Macintosh.
Returns are also higher as there is fewer competing Mac developers.
Of course it would be nicer if we had at least 10% marketshare.
Short of an even greater worldwide viral epidemic spewed upon Windows, my sense is that we'll never get there again.
I think Mac the Fork is right about Dell. Apple may spend a fortune on advertising but it's not in the right place. You can't open a newspaper without a flier for Dell falling out. And it's cheap advertising. It wouldn't cost Apple much money to cobble together a flier that describes the OS and has the cheapest Macs available. Something like the advert for the original Mac back in 1984. Get people comfortable with the OS while their drinking their coffee and taking the bus to work.
The minimalist look works for computers, but not advertising.
How about this...find some short comings or things more complicated in windows and list the steps (probably under 5 or else it's too much to read) on how to do it on a mac.
All joking aside, that's a very key issue related to Apple's shrinking market share. The fewer people there are buying Apple computers, the fewer people there are buying software for Mac OS X, the fewer developers there are that can afford to make applications for Mac OS X.
From you of all people I expect better than this.
Yes, Apple's share of this expanding market is 'shrinking'. Does this mean that there are fewer people buying Apple computers or less software bought or less developers?
I honestly don't know, but I think the answers deserve more thought and analysis than big number good!, small number bad!.
All joking aside, that's a very key issue related to Apple's shrinking market share. The fewer people there are buying Apple computers, the fewer people there are buying software for Mac OS X, the fewer developers there are that can afford to make applications for Mac OS X.
Say I am a software development manager at XYZ Software Corp. I have a choice. I can invest $X and sell my program to 2 people or I can invest the same $X and sell it to 98 people. Which choice offers me the better return on investment? It's the simplest of economics.
I also would like Apple's market share to grow, but this kind of logic is just wrong. It's not 98 and 2 people. It's 98 and 2 COMPUTERS!
How many of those 98 computers are servers and glorified cash registers?
How many of the 98 are sitting in cubicles all over corporate USA (and the rest of the world!) and then have the SAME PEOPLE going home and using another fraction of the 98 computers?
How many of the 98 computers SOLD in any given quarter are going to PC folk who just tend to upgrade more frequently? (With cheaper hardware and Intel's "faster every month" strategy)
If I was XYZ Software Corp. I would be more interested in how many individuals are using any particular OS, than how many computers are sold per platform.
Quote:
Let's also not forget the big scare a few months ago where a manual writer for Adobe "slammed" Apple and recommended using a faster Windows-based PC instead. It has been discussed many times how Adobe is shifting more towards Windows and how it wouldn't hurt so much to drop Mac support in the coming years.
This was before the G5 and one of Adobe's head honchos has recently come out and said that Adobe does not endorse those comments. Last I heard Mac versions of Photoshop accounted for around 30% of all sales.
Unfortunately, Apple Computer as we currently know them is dying.
Let's face the facts:
Apple cannot produce hardware that is competitively priced.
Except for the CPU, Apple is using all industry standard components in their computers and has them made overseas. Even if Apple makes 30% profit on its low end G5 tower, that mean it cost them $1260 to make. How much does it cost Dell to make one of their Dimension desktops or Precision workstations?
Apple cannot afford to create other products lines.
Two desktops and two laptops are a joke. Both Dell and Gateway have 8 laptop lines to choose from. Gateway has 4 desktop lines (plus a gaming system). Dell has 5 consumer desktops lines and 3 professional workstations. Other computer vendors give their customers more choices. They don't force people to buy configurations they don't what.
Apple cannot sell a computer for $500.
If they could, they would. As simple as that.
Apple's retail stores are not attracting new people to Macs as fast as Apple is losing education, government, consumer, and business customers.
We all saw pictures on the internet people flooding Apple's retail stores. Maybe we should see images of the floods of people leaving Apple's stores empty handed. Granted, while the stores are doing well, they aren't doing all that well either.
Apple is focusing more and more resources on iPods and iTunes.
Jobs views this at a chance for his personal redemption and he is taking it. While Apple currently enjoys a large market share presence in both online music and MP3 players. I wonder how long this will not last. How many places can one buy music CDs? In five years, you will have the same number of choices for online music sales.
Apple computer can not compete with "House Brand" computers.
While it is true that the Dells, Gateways, HPs, etc can't compete with them either on a price level, the fact is that other guys have education, government, and business sales to fall back. Because, you typically don't see beige boxes in any of those three places. Apple doesn't have the same sales to fall back on.
Apple makes it extremely difficult to repair the simplest things on their computers.
For example, when a DVD-RW drive in a Dell PC goes bad, I can go to a local OfficeMax buy a new drive, replace the bad one and be ready to go in 10 minutes. When my SuperDrive in my QuickSilver tower goes, is it as easy as a repair?
Internet software piracy is way out of control.
While this isn't Apple's direct fault, 3rd party Apple developers are losing software sales because of this (Mac Halo anyone?). Is it too much to ask for Apple to produce their own file sharing application (for legitimate file sharing purposes using Rendezvous) while at the same time breaking all the other ones that are KNOWN to be used for piracy? Or building in some sort of Non-Invasive software registration scheme into Mac OS X that developers would rejoice to? Who would be pissed off? Developers? No. Paying Consumers? Only if the software registration is transparent. Software Pirates? Yes. But who really cares about them.
Unfortunately, Apple Computer as we currently know them is dying.
Let's face the facts:
Apple cannot produce hardware that is competitively priced.
Apple's hardware is competitive if you try to match feature for feature (which Dell can't, in the case of the PM G5). However, since they don't do "stripped down" configurations or high-clocked but sluggish CPUs (Celerons) on crap boards, the starting price is always significantly higher.
Quote:
Apple cannot sell a computer for $500.
If they could, they would. As simple as that.
Thank you. Thank you. I've been trying to tell people this for a long time.
Anyone remember Steve's comment that he'd love to sell $199 iMacs?
Quote:
We all saw pictures on the internet people flooding Apple's retail stores. Maybe we should see images of the floods of people leaving Apple's stores empty handed. Granted, while the stores are doing well, they aren't doing all that well either.
They're getting better "conversion" (i.e. shoppers -> sales) now, and they're focused on improving their %age rate. This was a big early problem with the stores, and it seems like they're tackling it. But your point is taken: At present, the stores do not account for that much of Apple's sales, so even if half their sales are someone's first Mac, that represents about 4% of their total sales.
At least higher ed is looking up.
Quote:
Apple is focusing more and more resources on iPods and iTunes.
Can you blame them? I don't think this has to do with personal redemption so much as it has to do with getting out of that market share ghetto. The conclusion that Apple has to have come to is that the Windows lock on the market is just too hard for them to crack with a direct assault. Apple is a much admired brand; Macintosh is not, really. So I can't really fault Apple for trying other brands. It all comes back to the Macintosh anyway; the point is to get Apple designs into people's hands, so that they see that Apple products rock, and are compatible with PCs.
Quote:
How many places can one buy music CDs? In five years, you will have the same number of choices for online music sales.
Not necessarily. With physical media, location and store size matter. With digital media, they don't (hard drive space is cheap). iTMS is tied to iTunes, and if Apple can get more bundling deals like the one with HP (the #1 PC vendor), then iTMS is right there on everyone's desktop (is there any better location?), hooked to the most popular jukebox, which just happens to work with the most popular digital music player.
I think you'll be surprised at how long Apple can keep that going. At this point, their worst enemy is themselves.
Quote:
Apple computer can not compete with "House Brand" computers.
While it is true that the Dells, Gateways, HPs, etc can't compete with them either on a price level, the fact is that other guys have education, government, and business sales to fall back.
You've got that backwards. Institutional sales are the bread and butter of the white box market. Consumers generally prefer brands.
Quote:
Apple makes it extremely difficult to repair the simplest things on their computers.
For example, when a DVD-RW drive in a Dell PC goes bad, I can go to a local OfficeMax buy a new drive, replace the bad one and be ready to go in 10 minutes. When my SuperDrive in my QuickSilver tower goes, is it as easy as a repair?
Yes.
The SuperDrive is a standard part, not a custom Apple thing, housed in a standard bay. The QS has one of the most accessible cases besides the G5. You even have your choice of brands (Sony, Matsushita, etc.).
Quote:
Internet software piracy is way out of control.
And nowhere is this more true than in the Windows market.
I was just thinking...Apple's customer base is growing quite well...it's just that people who formerly didn't own computers are buying Dells, because to most people, that's the only computer that exists, and it's cheap.
Look at it this way: no one's switching to PC, at least if they can help it.
[B]Apple's hardware is competitive if you try to match feature for feature (which Dell can't, in the case of the PM G5). However, since they don't do "stripped down" configurations or high-clocked but sluggish CPUs (Celerons) on crap boards, the starting price is always significantly higher.
Are you kidding? Macs are NOT competitive price. This is Apple biggest problem. Competitively priced means if a PC sells for $1300, Apple price should be at the most $1500. And that is comparing simliar specifications, expandability, and performance.
Quote:
Can you blame them? I don't think this has to do with personal redemption so much as it has to do with getting out of that market share ghetto. The conclusion that Apple has to have come to is that the Windows lock on the market is just too hard for them to crack with a direct assault. Apple is a much admired brand; Macintosh is not, really. So I can't really fault Apple for trying other brands. It all comes back to the Macintosh anyway; the point is to get Apple designs into people's hands, so that they see that Apple products rock, and are compatible with PCs.
Not necessarily. With physical media, location and store size matter. With digital media, they don't (hard drive space is cheap). iTMS is tied to iTunes, and if Apple can get more bundling deals like the one with HP (the #1 PC vendor), then iTMS is right there on everyone's desktop (is there any better location?), hooked to the most popular jukebox, which just happens to work with the most popular digital music player.
I think you'll be surprised at how long Apple can keep that going. At this point, their worst enemy is themselves.
I blame Apple for not putting more effort into Macs. Apple appears not to be too concerned with its Macintosh computers.
Look at what Gateway is doing. Gateway is in the fight of their life. They are trying to expand their business into new markets. They purchased eMachines in the hope they can sell more computers. And they are advertising like mad. I think Apple could afford to advertise maybe a little more.
Quote:
You've got that backwards. Institutional sales are the bread and butter of the white box market. Consumers generally prefer brands.
Really? My wife's school replaced all of its Apple computers with Dells. My cousin's high school did the same thing. The college I am attending is all Dell.
As for consumers. The only people I know who aren't buying white boxes are the consumers who don't tinker with their computer. Every weekend there is a computer show in my town with thousands of users buying white boxes and accessories. My CompUSA is filled with custom crazy designed cases and accessories. Many, many small businesses opened up selling white boxes.
I think you underestimated how many consumers are buying white boxes.
I think consumers and white boxes are huge right now, and Apple can't do anything about it.
Quote:
The SuperDrive is a standard part, not a custom Apple thing, housed in a standard bay. The QS has one of the most accessible cases besides the G5. You even have your choice of brands (Sony, Matsushita, etc.).
Yes the SuperDrive is not an Apple exclusive part, but it really really sucks that Apple does this. The QS, G5 towers, original iMac, iMac2, eMac all have this problem.
I was just thinking...Apple's customer base is growing quite well...it's just that people who formerly didn't own computers are buying Dells, because to most people, that's the only computer that exists, and it's cheap.
Look at it this way: no one's switching to PC, at least if they can help it.
Talk to school systems who are leaving the Mac in droves.
Yes the SuperDrive is not an Apple exclusive part, but it really really sucks that Apple does this. The QS, G5 towers, original iMac, iMac2, eMac all have this problem.
Sucks that Apple does what? What problem?
Sucks that you can replace the Superdrive with a generic part, and access it in the case more easily than most PCs? Sure, it's not as easy with the iMacs, but with the towers it's super easy to replace the optical drive.
Are you kidding? Macs are NOT competitive price. This is Apple biggest problem. Competitively priced means if a PC sells for $1300, Apple price should be at the most $1500. And that is comparing simliar specifications, expandability, and performance.
OK, so which notebook is competitive with the iBook? That includes the capability to survive a 3 foot fall and the 5 hour battery life, and omits rebates.
If you're thinking of the iMac, everyone knows that's a problem, including Apple. It's exceptional in that regard.
Quote:
Look at what Gateway is doing. Gateway is in the fight of their life. They are trying to expand their business into new markets. They purchased eMachines in the hope they can sell more computers. And they are advertising like mad.
And they're losing money, and they're dying.
Why should Apple act desperate? They're debt-free, profitable, have the best brand name in the industry, etc. They have problems, but none as serious as Gateway's.
Quote:
Really? My wife's school replaced all of its Apple computers with Dells. My cousin's high school did the same thing. The college I am attending is all Dell.
That's because *drumroll* Dell is attacking the white-box market with a vengeance. They said as much a few years ago, when they started the initiative.
As for the switch from Apple to Dell at your school, I'd be surprised if the Apple rep even knew about it until it was decided and implemented. Switches to Windows in schools are almost always handed down from the top after secret deliberations, or occasionally demanded by parents who want their kids to learn what businesses use. In neither case is any action on Apple's part relevant, because the explicit goal is to get rid of Apple computers.
Quote:
As for consumers. The only people I know who aren't buying white boxes are the consumers who don't tinker with their computer.
Do you want to guess what percentage of the consumer market that is?
Quote:
I think you underestimated how many consumers are buying white boxes.
Here there's one shabby little place offering white boxes and used brand-name computers, and everyone either buys Dell or whatever's at Best Buy. So I can cancel your anecdote with mine.
Quote:
Yes the SuperDrive is not an Apple exclusive part, but it really really sucks that Apple does this.
Does what?! A Mac with a SuperDrive is not in any way different from a Sony with a DVD-R.
Apple need to advertise their products. This means:
? OS X. Relating to security, ease of use, stability, UNIX underpinnings, etc. Apple need to scare people about viruses and such, using real statistics to show how "dangerous" the Internet is, and how many of these viruses have killed Macs, (0). We all know what is needed here.
? The hardware that runs OS X. Need I say more. And for Switchers, offer a special low price deal that perhaps includes Office v.X in it for FREE.
No Windows user wants to pay that ridiculous price for Office v.X upon Switching?. Microsoft is a monopolist, and they know that potential switchers don't want to pay for Office for Mac after using it for Windows. This is one reason why potential Switchers? are being scared off.
If Apple make some sort of Switcher? campaign that includes a discount, and Office v.X for FREE, then more switchers will come. Just don't do the ads that you had before ? they were shit. Simple as that.
? iLife, .Mac, etc...
So Apple, what about it? ADVERTISE!!! AND ADVERTISE GLOBALLY!!! Do you know what globally means? It means NOT JUST THE US, BUT THE ENTIRE PLANET!!!
A worldwide advertising campaign is what is needed, and a campaign that actually advertises their products. The iPod air-time is finished. Move on to what Apple is all about, Macs.
And for goodness sake, fix your worldwide pricing, it stinks! No wonder international sales aren't something to be proud of ? you don't fscking care.
Need I say more... It's all about advertising. Forcing the facts down peoples throats, so they just might consider the Mac for their next computer. m.
Comments
Originally posted by satchmo
Will Apple be around in another 20 years? I hope so. And as long as they remain profitable, why wouldn't they?
To quote Steve Ballmer:
"Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!"
All joking aside, that's a very key issue related to Apple's shrinking market share. The fewer people there are buying Apple computers, the fewer people there are buying software for Mac OS X, the fewer developers there are that can afford to make applications for Mac OS X.
Say I am a software development manager at XYZ Software Corp. I have a choice. I can invest $X and sell my program to 2 people or I can invest the same $X and sell it to 98 people. Which choice offers me the better return on investment? It's the simplest of economics.
Market share matters.
We can already see this happening in the case of software giants like Adobe. Adobe was once the poster child of a happy Mac-loving company. Where is it today? A quick skim over Adobe's product page shows us Adobe's level of dedication to Mac OS X. Acrobat Elements, Acrobat Elements Server, Acrobat Capture, Acrobat Distiller Server, Messenger, Document Server, Central Pro Output Server, Content Server, Photoshop Album, Graphics Server, Encore DVD, Audition, FrameMaker, FrameMaker Server, and Atmosphere are not available for Mac OS X. Let's also not forget the big scare a few months ago where a manual writer for Adobe "slammed" Apple and recommended using a faster Windows-based PC instead. It has been discussed many times how Adobe is shifting more towards Windows and how it wouldn't hurt so much to drop Mac support in the coming years.
Right now the price/performance rato of the iMacs are terrible. When the standard low end PC is coming in with a 2.66 - 2.8GHz P4 on a 533MHz front side bus, and iMacs are coming in with a 1-1.24GHz G4 on a 167MHz bus, it does not compare well at all.
The iMacs current slogan -- less then half the power, for more then twice the price!
If Apple were to put a 2.4 GHz G5 into an all new iMac, even at the current premium price, I think it would start flying off the shelves and we would get a bit if an increase in market share.
In my area, Apple makes this particularly easy. They rely on American ads to sell their products. They rarely advertise Macs anyway, let alone do so effectively. They have no retail presence, save for two or three models in Future Shop, a subsidiary of Best Buy. Having a wide variety of products to be pushed by incompetent, commission-based staff, Future Shop sells things based on price. They could not possibly sell any Apple products, so they never advertise them, don't even try to sell them, and don't keep any software in stock. Without any print, television or retail presence, the innovation, interface and intangibles that we cherish, don't matter. Consumers need to know that the Mac delivers something tangibly better than the Windows experience to even consider any kind of switch. Apple needs to go over and above other manufacturers with their advertising.
To give a counterexample, this household routinely recieves flyers from Dell. I see their TV advertisements regularly; sometimes several times a day. They can easily advertise their extremely low prices, but they also have a reputation for quality. There is no way a computer buyer could ignore them, despite their alleged lack of substance. Dell is always in my face as an easy choice with products starting at extremely low price points. Dell wants my business.
Besides problems of perception, there's also the problem of reality. In price comparisons between Macs and PCs, much is made of the concept of value. The easiest point to argue: due to superior design, Macs can be more enjoyable and productive to use. On the other hand, regardless of what level of specs we deem are actually necessary for a user, people buy based on them. From that perspective, Apple's consumer hardware is both underwhelming and costly. Even if a customer doesn't really need a 2.4 GHz Celeron from Dell, it's cheaper than an eMac anyway.
Furthermore, a product has no value if it's beyond the means of the buyer. I could pay Dell seven hundred bucks and get a computer. Even if Apple has something better than Dell at a higher price point, plenty of people wouldn't pay that much in the first place.
I should add that Apple was able to command a price premium over PCs during its heyday because of its massive advantages in graphics technology and user interface. These advantages are significantly reduced today. Besides decreasing prices, Apple could raise the value of their product through significant innovation.
Dell sells to the lowest common denominator. Poor people skew the results. Installed base. Rich people will always pay more to look cool. Whatever. My concern is not over whether a self-styled elite will still be able to get their executive toys. The less prevalent Macs are, the less diverse and competitive computing becomes, and the less all of us will be able to enjoy it.
Get cheaper, stay competitive, milk services.
Apple will need mindshare. Can iTunes provide enough of it?
Alone?
Nope.
The next digital frontier is the couch. The set-top/console/home entertainment computer will be the last great PC frontier.
This is very Apple territory: small, hermetically sealed devices with lovely interfaces. It's very Apple in all but one detail, price! About 1000 settling to 500 as the form factor gains acceptance.
Playstation will probably be a bigegr platform than Mac, heck, it already is.
Told ya so, telling ya again.
Originally posted by Brad
Say I am a software development manager at XYZ Software Corp. I have a choice. I can invest $X and sell my program to 2 people or I can invest the same $X and sell it to 98 people. Which choice offers me the better return on investment? It's the simplest of economics.
Market share matters.
I knew this was coming.
But I've also read reports where on average, the cost to develop and support Windows applications is 50% higher per dollar of revenue than the cost to develop for Macintosh.
Returns are also higher as there is fewer competing Mac developers.
Of course it would be nicer if we had at least 10% marketshare.
Short of an even greater worldwide viral epidemic spewed upon Windows, my sense is that we'll never get there again.
The minimalist look works for computers, but not advertising.
How about this...find some short comings or things more complicated in windows and list the steps (probably under 5 or else it's too much to read) on how to do it on a mac.
Originally posted by Brad
All joking aside, that's a very key issue related to Apple's shrinking market share. The fewer people there are buying Apple computers, the fewer people there are buying software for Mac OS X, the fewer developers there are that can afford to make applications for Mac OS X.
From you of all people I expect better than this.
Yes, Apple's share of this expanding market is 'shrinking'. Does this mean that there are fewer people buying Apple computers or less software bought or less developers?
I honestly don't know, but I think the answers deserve more thought and analysis than big number good!, small number bad!.
Originally posted by Brad
All joking aside, that's a very key issue related to Apple's shrinking market share. The fewer people there are buying Apple computers, the fewer people there are buying software for Mac OS X, the fewer developers there are that can afford to make applications for Mac OS X.
Say I am a software development manager at XYZ Software Corp. I have a choice. I can invest $X and sell my program to 2 people or I can invest the same $X and sell it to 98 people. Which choice offers me the better return on investment? It's the simplest of economics.
I also would like Apple's market share to grow, but this kind of logic is just wrong. It's not 98 and 2 people. It's 98 and 2 COMPUTERS!
How many of those 98 computers are servers and glorified cash registers?
How many of the 98 are sitting in cubicles all over corporate USA (and the rest of the world!) and then have the SAME PEOPLE going home and using another fraction of the 98 computers?
How many of the 98 computers SOLD in any given quarter are going to PC folk who just tend to upgrade more frequently? (With cheaper hardware and Intel's "faster every month" strategy)
If I was XYZ Software Corp. I would be more interested in how many individuals are using any particular OS, than how many computers are sold per platform.
Let's also not forget the big scare a few months ago where a manual writer for Adobe "slammed" Apple and recommended using a faster Windows-based PC instead. It has been discussed many times how Adobe is shifting more towards Windows and how it wouldn't hurt so much to drop Mac support in the coming years.
This was before the G5 and one of Adobe's head honchos has recently come out and said that Adobe does not endorse those comments. Last I heard Mac versions of Photoshop accounted for around 30% of all sales.
Let's face the facts:
Apple cannot produce hardware that is competitively priced.
Except for the CPU, Apple is using all industry standard components in their computers and has them made overseas. Even if Apple makes 30% profit on its low end G5 tower, that mean it cost them $1260 to make. How much does it cost Dell to make one of their Dimension desktops or Precision workstations?
Apple cannot afford to create other products lines.
Two desktops and two laptops are a joke. Both Dell and Gateway have 8 laptop lines to choose from. Gateway has 4 desktop lines (plus a gaming system). Dell has 5 consumer desktops lines and 3 professional workstations. Other computer vendors give their customers more choices. They don't force people to buy configurations they don't what.
Apple cannot sell a computer for $500.
If they could, they would. As simple as that.
Apple's retail stores are not attracting new people to Macs as fast as Apple is losing education, government, consumer, and business customers.
We all saw pictures on the internet people flooding Apple's retail stores. Maybe we should see images of the floods of people leaving Apple's stores empty handed. Granted, while the stores are doing well, they aren't doing all that well either.
Apple is focusing more and more resources on iPods and iTunes.
Jobs views this at a chance for his personal redemption and he is taking it. While Apple currently enjoys a large market share presence in both online music and MP3 players. I wonder how long this will not last. How many places can one buy music CDs? In five years, you will have the same number of choices for online music sales.
Apple computer can not compete with "House Brand" computers.
While it is true that the Dells, Gateways, HPs, etc can't compete with them either on a price level, the fact is that other guys have education, government, and business sales to fall back. Because, you typically don't see beige boxes in any of those three places. Apple doesn't have the same sales to fall back on.
Apple makes it extremely difficult to repair the simplest things on their computers.
For example, when a DVD-RW drive in a Dell PC goes bad, I can go to a local OfficeMax buy a new drive, replace the bad one and be ready to go in 10 minutes. When my SuperDrive in my QuickSilver tower goes, is it as easy as a repair?
Internet software piracy is way out of control.
While this isn't Apple's direct fault, 3rd party Apple developers are losing software sales because of this (Mac Halo anyone?). Is it too much to ask for Apple to produce their own file sharing application (for legitimate file sharing purposes using Rendezvous) while at the same time breaking all the other ones that are KNOWN to be used for piracy? Or building in some sort of Non-Invasive software registration scheme into Mac OS X that developers would rejoice to? Who would be pissed off? Developers? No. Paying Consumers? Only if the software registration is transparent. Software Pirates? Yes. But who really cares about them.
Thoughts?
Originally posted by Dave K.
Unfortunately, Apple Computer as we currently know them is dying.
Let's face the facts:
Apple cannot produce hardware that is competitively priced.
Apple's hardware is competitive if you try to match feature for feature (which Dell can't, in the case of the PM G5). However, since they don't do "stripped down" configurations or high-clocked but sluggish CPUs (Celerons) on crap boards, the starting price is always significantly higher.
Apple cannot sell a computer for $500.
If they could, they would. As simple as that.
Thank you. Thank you. I've been trying to tell people this for a long time.
Anyone remember Steve's comment that he'd love to sell $199 iMacs?
We all saw pictures on the internet people flooding Apple's retail stores. Maybe we should see images of the floods of people leaving Apple's stores empty handed. Granted, while the stores are doing well, they aren't doing all that well either.
They're getting better "conversion" (i.e. shoppers -> sales) now, and they're focused on improving their %age rate. This was a big early problem with the stores, and it seems like they're tackling it. But your point is taken: At present, the stores do not account for that much of Apple's sales, so even if half their sales are someone's first Mac, that represents about 4% of their total sales.
At least higher ed is looking up.
Apple is focusing more and more resources on iPods and iTunes.
Can you blame them? I don't think this has to do with personal redemption so much as it has to do with getting out of that market share ghetto. The conclusion that Apple has to have come to is that the Windows lock on the market is just too hard for them to crack with a direct assault. Apple is a much admired brand; Macintosh is not, really. So I can't really fault Apple for trying other brands. It all comes back to the Macintosh anyway; the point is to get Apple designs into people's hands, so that they see that Apple products rock, and are compatible with PCs.
How many places can one buy music CDs? In five years, you will have the same number of choices for online music sales.
Not necessarily. With physical media, location and store size matter. With digital media, they don't (hard drive space is cheap). iTMS is tied to iTunes, and if Apple can get more bundling deals like the one with HP (the #1 PC vendor), then iTMS is right there on everyone's desktop (is there any better location?), hooked to the most popular jukebox, which just happens to work with the most popular digital music player.
I think you'll be surprised at how long Apple can keep that going. At this point, their worst enemy is themselves.
Apple computer can not compete with "House Brand" computers.
While it is true that the Dells, Gateways, HPs, etc can't compete with them either on a price level, the fact is that other guys have education, government, and business sales to fall back.
You've got that backwards. Institutional sales are the bread and butter of the white box market. Consumers generally prefer brands.
Apple makes it extremely difficult to repair the simplest things on their computers.
For example, when a DVD-RW drive in a Dell PC goes bad, I can go to a local OfficeMax buy a new drive, replace the bad one and be ready to go in 10 minutes. When my SuperDrive in my QuickSilver tower goes, is it as easy as a repair?
Yes.
The SuperDrive is a standard part, not a custom Apple thing, housed in a standard bay. The QS has one of the most accessible cases besides the G5. You even have your choice of brands (Sony, Matsushita, etc.).
Internet software piracy is way out of control.
And nowhere is this more true than in the Windows market.
Look at it this way: no one's switching to PC, at least if they can help it.
Originally posted by Amorph
[B]Apple's hardware is competitive if you try to match feature for feature (which Dell can't, in the case of the PM G5). However, since they don't do "stripped down" configurations or high-clocked but sluggish CPUs (Celerons) on crap boards, the starting price is always significantly higher.
Are you kidding? Macs are NOT competitive price. This is Apple biggest problem. Competitively priced means if a PC sells for $1300, Apple price should be at the most $1500. And that is comparing simliar specifications, expandability, and performance.
Can you blame them? I don't think this has to do with personal redemption so much as it has to do with getting out of that market share ghetto. The conclusion that Apple has to have come to is that the Windows lock on the market is just too hard for them to crack with a direct assault. Apple is a much admired brand; Macintosh is not, really. So I can't really fault Apple for trying other brands. It all comes back to the Macintosh anyway; the point is to get Apple designs into people's hands, so that they see that Apple products rock, and are compatible with PCs.
Not necessarily. With physical media, location and store size matter. With digital media, they don't (hard drive space is cheap). iTMS is tied to iTunes, and if Apple can get more bundling deals like the one with HP (the #1 PC vendor), then iTMS is right there on everyone's desktop (is there any better location?), hooked to the most popular jukebox, which just happens to work with the most popular digital music player.
I think you'll be surprised at how long Apple can keep that going. At this point, their worst enemy is themselves.
I blame Apple for not putting more effort into Macs. Apple appears not to be too concerned with its Macintosh computers.
Look at what Gateway is doing. Gateway is in the fight of their life. They are trying to expand their business into new markets. They purchased eMachines in the hope they can sell more computers. And they are advertising like mad. I think Apple could afford to advertise maybe a little more.
You've got that backwards. Institutional sales are the bread and butter of the white box market. Consumers generally prefer brands.
Really? My wife's school replaced all of its Apple computers with Dells. My cousin's high school did the same thing. The college I am attending is all Dell.
As for consumers. The only people I know who aren't buying white boxes are the consumers who don't tinker with their computer. Every weekend there is a computer show in my town with thousands of users buying white boxes and accessories. My CompUSA is filled with custom crazy designed cases and accessories. Many, many small businesses opened up selling white boxes.
I think you underestimated how many consumers are buying white boxes.
I think consumers and white boxes are huge right now, and Apple can't do anything about it.
The SuperDrive is a standard part, not a custom Apple thing, housed in a standard bay. The QS has one of the most accessible cases besides the G5. You even have your choice of brands (Sony, Matsushita, etc.).
Yes the SuperDrive is not an Apple exclusive part, but it really really sucks that Apple does this. The QS, G5 towers, original iMac, iMac2, eMac all have this problem.
Originally posted by Placebo
I was just thinking...Apple's customer base is growing quite well...it's just that people who formerly didn't own computers are buying Dells, because to most people, that's the only computer that exists, and it's cheap.
Look at it this way: no one's switching to PC, at least if they can help it.
Talk to school systems who are leaving the Mac in droves.
Originally posted by Dave K.
Yes the SuperDrive is not an Apple exclusive part, but it really really sucks that Apple does this. The QS, G5 towers, original iMac, iMac2, eMac all have this problem.
Sucks that Apple does what? What problem?
Sucks that you can replace the Superdrive with a generic part, and access it in the case more easily than most PCs? Sure, it's not as easy with the iMacs, but with the towers it's super easy to replace the optical drive.
Originally posted by Luca Rescigno
Sounds like the Switch campaign, ast3r3x. Didn't work.
I switched.
You can all thank me for increasing Apple's market share by 0.00000001345%... heh. Er, um... right?
Originally posted by Dave K.
Are you kidding? Macs are NOT competitive price. This is Apple biggest problem. Competitively priced means if a PC sells for $1300, Apple price should be at the most $1500. And that is comparing simliar specifications, expandability, and performance.
OK, so which notebook is competitive with the iBook? That includes the capability to survive a 3 foot fall and the 5 hour battery life, and omits rebates.
If you're thinking of the iMac, everyone knows that's a problem, including Apple. It's exceptional in that regard.
Look at what Gateway is doing. Gateway is in the fight of their life. They are trying to expand their business into new markets. They purchased eMachines in the hope they can sell more computers. And they are advertising like mad.
And they're losing money, and they're dying.
Why should Apple act desperate? They're debt-free, profitable, have the best brand name in the industry, etc. They have problems, but none as serious as Gateway's.
Really? My wife's school replaced all of its Apple computers with Dells. My cousin's high school did the same thing. The college I am attending is all Dell.
That's because *drumroll* Dell is attacking the white-box market with a vengeance. They said as much a few years ago, when they started the initiative.
As for the switch from Apple to Dell at your school, I'd be surprised if the Apple rep even knew about it until it was decided and implemented. Switches to Windows in schools are almost always handed down from the top after secret deliberations, or occasionally demanded by parents who want their kids to learn what businesses use. In neither case is any action on Apple's part relevant, because the explicit goal is to get rid of Apple computers.
As for consumers. The only people I know who aren't buying white boxes are the consumers who don't tinker with their computer.
Do you want to guess what percentage of the consumer market that is?
I think you underestimated how many consumers are buying white boxes.
Here there's one shabby little place offering white boxes and used brand-name computers, and everyone either buys Dell or whatever's at Best Buy. So I can cancel your anecdote with mine.
Yes the SuperDrive is not an Apple exclusive part, but it really really sucks that Apple does this.
Does what?! A Mac with a SuperDrive is not in any way different from a Sony with a DVD-R.
? OS X. Relating to security, ease of use, stability, UNIX underpinnings, etc. Apple need to scare people about viruses and such, using real statistics to show how "dangerous" the Internet is, and how many of these viruses have killed Macs, (0). We all know what is needed here.
? The hardware that runs OS X. Need I say more. And for Switchers, offer a special low price deal that perhaps includes Office v.X in it for FREE.
No Windows user wants to pay that ridiculous price for Office v.X upon Switching?. Microsoft is a monopolist, and they know that potential switchers don't want to pay for Office for Mac after using it for Windows. This is one reason why potential Switchers? are being scared off.
If Apple make some sort of Switcher? campaign that includes a discount, and Office v.X for FREE, then more switchers will come. Just don't do the ads that you had before ? they were shit. Simple as that.
? iLife, .Mac, etc...
So Apple, what about it? ADVERTISE!!! AND ADVERTISE GLOBALLY!!! Do you know what globally means? It means NOT JUST THE US, BUT THE ENTIRE PLANET!!!
A worldwide advertising campaign is what is needed, and a campaign that actually advertises their products. The iPod air-time is finished. Move on to what Apple is all about, Macs.
And for goodness sake, fix your worldwide pricing, it stinks! No wonder international sales aren't something to be proud of ? you don't fscking care.
Need I say more... It's all about advertising. Forcing the facts down peoples throats, so they just might consider the Mac for their next computer. m.
a trade-off that stockholders would cringe at.
how much of their market-share slippage is due to folks buying sub-$500 desktops, a configuration apple seems to have no inclination of adding to.
i mean what's lexus's market share?
what is apple's market share of like configured models?