Apple is no comparison to BMW because BMW still makes their own products in their own factories. Apple has been outsourcing their products to the same foreign companies other manufacturers use for the last few years. Yes, they may use some better quality parts in their casings, and yes some of the designs are nice to look at but its the same stuff inside except for the overpriced CPUs.
They save money by outsourcing and send the savings........to themselves.
P.S. If Apple opens a reply page and they pick and choose which replys to read by their use of punctuation and grammar and level of anger thats quite pathetic. He isn't sending them his Resume for Christ sake. You want people to reply you accept their reply and hopefully learn something................
First of all, it is a fact, however sad, that people will judge your submission based on things like formatting, spelling and grammar. The logic is simple: You clearly respect the reader if your post is clear and well-written, and you probably thought your feedback/post/letter through and revised it before sending. Something like the above feedback submission, with chat shortcuts like 'u' and 'ur', run-on sentences, sentence fragments and ellipses, comes across as a carelessly dashed off, emotional rant. (Consider: Xtreme, in the above feedback, describes Apple's consumer offerings as "splendid machines in form and function" [my emphasis] and "SEVERELY crippled by out-of-date... hardware" in the same breath. Which is it? And what does it have to do with feedback about the new PowerMac?) It might make you feel better to dash it off, but if you want it to be read you have to take the reader into consideration as well.
Second, the link is for feedback about the new PowerMac. I don't think it's hard to figure out that it is intended for feedback about the new PowerMac, not as a target for another generalized complaint about Apple's pricing (which is competitive, feature for feature, with brand-name PCs, especially at the consumer level). Furthermore, it implies to me at least that it should be used by people who have actually used the new PowerMac and therefor have something to say about it.
Apple is trying to listen to its userbase. It should be commended for that, and it should be encouraged to listen. Spamming every such attempt with rants will not reward its attempt.
I have not addressed criticism about price or performance in this post, and I am certainly not trying to silence or suppress any such criticism. I am, however, claiming that sloppy, emotional criticism of Apple's entire hardware strategy sent through inappropriate channels will accomplish nothing, except to discourage them from soliciting public feedback at all. If you have a complaint about price or performance, state it clearly and concisely, and send it to the appropriate place.
Please use the above link to submit cogent, coherent feedback about the new PowerMacs. It's in everyone's interest.
<strong>I work for Apple and I created the web form where you can submit feedback. If more than 5% of the words are spelled incorrectly or with all capital letters the submission is automatically deleted from the database before anybody ever reads it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I thought about submitting my own feedback, but I had a problem with the form.
The questions "What computer do you use," "what operation system do you use," and "which display do you use" only allow for one selection each. I, and most of my associates, are using more then one computer, OS, and monitor.
The form should really allow for multiple choices for those questions.
<strong>Apple is no comparison to BMW because BMW still makes their own products in their own factories. Apple has been outsourcing their products to the same foreign companies other manufacturers use for the last few years. Yes, they may use some better quality parts in their casings, and yes some of the designs are nice to look at but its the same stuff inside except for the overpriced CPUs.
They save money by outsourcing and send the savings........to themselves.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Welcome to the world of basic economics:
1. BMW does own plants but they are for assembly only. All their parts are delivered just-in-time by the same suppliers all the other manufacturers have contracted to too. And there are very few of them - kind of like the OEM situation on the computer market. They do the design and contract the production out.
2. We live in a world of the share-holder value. Corporations are expected to make the most money they can for the share-holder - they are not the salvation army.
Let me give you a little hint if that's true. When you're young..you will most likely make the least amount of money. Work hard...humble yourself and buy an eMac. Someday you will look back fondly at those days.
If you're an Adult. And Apples prices sting you that bad...get a new job skill.
The core of your arguement is good...it's just the execution that is lacking. A little "sweetness goes a long way" is a saying.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think that sweetness will get you very far with a company like Apple. They're far too big to be particularly concerned with that kind of mellow lamer who patiently suggests this or that with a large dose of company ass-kissing. Besides, if they listened to their base consumers, obviously they would have done many things differently.
There's nothing about Apple that says "We'll give you what you want when you want it." However, they do sometimes say "We'll give you what you want." The difference in that respect is quite clear, and very frequently little modifications are exactly how such business is done.
So far as I've seen, Apple has consistently been the kind of company that gives people just enough to tide them over here and there, and once in a while they release something very significant and good, though usually they do this when lacking in some other field at the time. When have they, in at least 2 or 3 years, made something at a competitive price, or as of late, even a competitive Hardware product at all (besides the iPod)?
I guarantee that they know exactly how loyal their userbase is, and they keep the secrecy just under top notch in order to make the majority curious, interested, and anxious, ALL THE TIME. So long as they have this reliable group of people, and so long as they continue these persistent mind games of barely giving half a handful of the necessities of life, and Always keeping people hoping, expecting, faithfully waiting, hoping, expecting, hoping and expecting and waiting more, they will keep going at this very same pace.
Do they want to be ahead? Perhaps, but never for long. That could be bad for business and credibility in the long run, if they were to be on the top for any period other than just long enough to tease people with the idea that they really can do it. Their loyal buyers might fall a bit harder if Apple sold consistently superior hardware for a time, and later happened upon an unintentional down period like Right Now (I'm not sure it's unintentional anymore though). They could just be milking their inferiority complex and Blame-Motorola scheme for a bit longer in order to seem more like a great big huge Saviour (HAH! saviour from what?? Themselves, that's who, every time.) when they finally do come out with a significantly improved desktop.
I am a cranky mac user who refuses to buy another apple product until their prices become more reasonable AND their products become more competitive with the rest of the computer industry.
Oh, and also: I'm sure someone will think my comments are absolutely overflowing with ignorance and foolishness, but that's Your problem, being unable to see some of the possibilities.
I have little doubt that Apple is very good at what they do. However, like all large companies, and especially those ones with less than top-notch products available, their primary business has become Mind Games. The main problem I have with this form of livelihood is that, when any organization, corporation, etc, does this, they often discover that holding back on superior products is actually better for business, not because of production costs or other issues, but because of the ability to keep the upper hand consistently, and to always be secure should an uprising occur. The plan has a safety net. Good for the business, but bad for the consumers.
At the same time, you can't just walk out on Apple as a group and expect them to survive; the safety net only works in less major situations. So the problem is, you can't Tell apple to do anything (because they just won't listen), and yet you can't Not buy their stuff anymore (because they'll cease to exist). Sounds like they've got us between a rock and a hard place, and I'll bet they know that, too.
[quote] Apple is no comparison to BMW because BMW still makes their own products in their own factories. <hr></blockquote>
My point wasn't of of manufacturing but company ideology. BMW has a minimum level of design that they don't go below. They're not looking to enter the "economy" sector for autos.
[quote] P.S. If Apple opens a reply page and they pick and choose which replys to read by their use of punctuation and grammar and level of anger thats quite pathetic. <hr></blockquote>
I don't know, which is more pathetic? The fact that Apple may disregard these messages or the fact that every person has the opportunity to state their grievances and some choose to do it without a shred of eloquence?
Apple or any of its employees do not accept or consider unsolicited ideas, including ideas for new advertising campaigns, new promotions, new or improved products or technologies,product enhancements, processes, materials, marketing plans or new product names.
...
Please provide only specific feedback on Apple's existing products or marketing strategies; do not include any ideas that Apple's policy will not permit it to accept or consider. It's just one more way that Apple can learn how to best satisfy your needs.
<hr></blockquote>
So if you give feedback, no suggesting how they could make it better. So you can say "Firewire is too slow" but not "Firewire should be faster"
I thought about submitting my own feedback, but I had a problem with the form.
The questions "What computer do you use," "what operation system do you use," and "which display do you use" only allow for one selection each. I, and most of my associates, are using more then one computer, OS, and monitor.
The form should really allow for multiple choices for those questions.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, me saying I made that form was an attempt to suggest not writing like a retard. Some attempt at grammar and spelling would make Apple take him at least a little bit seriously.
As for the form only having one choice? I don't know. Improvise! Pick your most commonly used computer maybe? I mean, if you fill out a form asking for your e-mail address do you sit and stare at it for hours trying to figure out which of your many e-mail addresses to put in? If that's the case it's amazing that you figured out how to sign up for this forum!
I don't know, which is more pathetic? The fact that Apple may disregard these messages or the fact that every person has the opportunity to state their grievances and some choose to do it without a shred of eloquence?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Eloquence? He's not writing an article for Newsweek! You want feedback take the damn feedback!......................................... ....
I have been a Powermac user for seven years, until last week. I mainly use my computer for hobbyist 3d animation (Cinema4d) and audio (Cubase). My last mac was a g4 400. Last week I built a dual Athlon mp2000 PC with ATI radeon 9700 pro etc. (This week I will probably spend trying to get XP Professional to work as it says on the box!). I generally buy a new computer every 2-3 years. I want to tell you why I have abandoned Apple after a long spell, and what must change in order for me to willingly switch back, which I really would like to do.
Firstly, Apples complete lack of visibility in the marketplace. I feel that there is such a tight hold on information, that I could not plan a substantial purchase without feeling that current offerings are no more that a stop-gap solution. Intel demoes a 4.1GHZ p4, AMD shows Hammers etc. My concern isn't overly in MHZ, but Apple's competitors demonstrate clearly that their platform is alive and progressing rapidly. Apple hasn't as far as I can remember shown any worthwhile future hardware demos for several years. My concern is that Apple will progress well behind the average of the PC platform, giving rise to concerns that Apple may become an even more isolated/niche vendor in the future.
My main use of a PC dictates that realworld performance is as good as possible, and currently, my options of a new computer fell into the Dual 867 G4, or low-end tower category. Unfortunately at this price point, the alternative PC option offered me twice the real-world processing power, and a graphics option many times in excess of your offering at this level, and a very nice custom case to boot. While I had never even considered buying any Microsoft OS before, I feel that XP, is probably on a par somewhere between OS9 and X, and that is good enough for the level I am at.
While I Applaud Apples software offerings are vastly superior to the other side, that alone is not a good enough reason to invest in a platform that has no accepted visible future. Harsh, maybe, but there is no indication from Apple as to where the Hardware at least might be in the near future, and being of prudent nature, I can only deduce that Apple must be scrabbling for whatever parts they get from their suppliers, either there is no future with any certainty, or that its too embarrasing to publish. Either way, I cannot accept possible random breakthrough products as a valid business model.
Pretty soon, PC's are going to be fast enough for everybody, myself included, when that happens, Microsoft and others may well be forced to evalute the advantages that they can offer to keep their revenues afloat. In my opinion, as soon as MS releases an OS that is as good as whatever OSX is current, and the OEM vendors offer stability, reliability and ease of use as good as Apple, Apple will have no chance of ever expanding marketshare, and will probably be relagated to a very niche vendor. I feel that this time cannot be very far away, even by MS standards, and that Apple must make every effort to get its Hardware Performance, and pricing structures atleast at Parity with the PC world in as short a time as possible, in order for the Software to be seen in a favourable light, while the opportunity still remains. If this meant changing CPU architecture, Im all for it.
Living in the UK, Apple support is practically non-existant, overpriced, delayed, out-of-stock products from most vendors was another reason why I left.
Im hoping that my next computer purchase will be another Apple, sometime in 2004.
I have been a Powermac user for seven years, until last week. I mainly use my computer for hobbyist 3d animation (Cinema4d) and audio (Cubase). My last mac was a g4 400. Last week I built a dual Athlon mp2000 PC with ATI radeon 9700 pro etc. (This week I will probably spend trying to get XP Professional to work as it says on the box!).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh yeah, that sounds real efficient! You think the speed difference will really add up to the week you say you'll waste getting the computer going? Not to mention the week you'll spend a few months down the road when you're trying to figure out what went wrong?
[quote]<strong>Firstly, Apples complete lack of visibility in the marketplace. I feel that there is such a tight hold on information, that I could not plan a substantial purchase without feeling that current offerings are no more that a stop-gap solution. Intel demoes a 4.1GHZ p4, AMD shows Hammers etc. My concern isn't overly in MHZ, but Apple's competitors demonstrate clearly that their platform is alive and progressing rapidly.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Intel and AMD are not computer manufactures. Apple is not a chip maker. It's IBM and Motorola's job to show off new chips. It's Apple's job to show off current hardware. You don't see Dell or Gateway showing off what computer they will release in 8 months.
[quote]<strong>
My main use of a PC dictates that realworld performance is as good as possible, and currently, my options of a new computer fell into the Dual 867 G4, or low-end tower category. Unfortunately at this price point, the alternative PC option offered me twice the real-world processing power...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know this because you've used the dual 867 and know for a fact that the Athlon performs twice as fast?
[quote]<strong>While I Applaud Apples software offerings are vastly superior to the other side, that alone is not a good enough reason to invest in a platform that has no accepted visible future.</strong><hr></blockquote>
??? I have no idea where this "accepted visible future" idea comes from.
[quote]<strong>
Harsh, maybe, but there is no indication from Apple as to where the Hardware at least might be in the near future, and being of prudent nature, I can only deduce that Apple must be scrabbling for whatever parts they get from their suppliers, either there is no future with any certainty, or that its too embarrasing to publish. Either way, I cannot accept possible random breakthrough products as a valid business model.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, it sounds more like you are just pissed off because you don't know what they're going to announce 6 months down the road, and really, if you did know, you wouldn't buy an Apple now either, because you'd be waiting for what's coming next. I mean, if a Mac that's more than 4x faster than your current machine is not good enough, then I suppose nothing is. It also sounds like you don't know that Cinema 4D doesn't really benefit much, if at all, from the graphics card you put into your Athlon.
[quote]<strong>Pretty soon, PC's are going to be fast enough for everybody, myself included, when that happens, Microsoft and others may well be forced to evalute the advantages that they can offer to keep their revenues afloat. In my opinion, as soon as MS releases an OS that is as good as whatever OSX is current, and the OEM vendors offer stability, reliability and ease of use as good as Apple, Apple will have no chance of ever expanding marketshare, and will probably be relagated to a very niche vendor. I feel that this time cannot be very far away, even by MS standards...</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is a joke, right? You think Windows NT 5.2 will be much better than 5.1?
[quote]<strong>Living in the UK, Apple support is practically non-existant, overpriced, delayed, out-of-stock products from most vendors was another reason why I left.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah, a good point in all this drivel! Yes, it's pretty rough being a Mac user in the UK. With the Apple store in Paris now, I'd guess that Apple's going to work on getting some stronger presence in Eurpoe in the next few years, but I don't blame you for being unhappy with the current retail situation over there.
Wether my arguments are correct or not, they are my real concerns about the future viability of the mac platform, wether Apple choses to dismiss them as the rant of an ex Mac user is up too them, but as they're asking, I decided to tell them, and Im pretty sure my concerns are pretty universal amongst long-time mac users at present.
As for your comments on Cinema4d.
The dual Athlon I built performs at almost exactly twice the speed in rendering and Open GL as the dual 867 in every bench I have seen. And I have now Benched my machine, and have got a result exactly as expected, except, the Radeon 9700 pro is exceeding the nVidia ti4600 WITH Anit-alaising set to 6x and anisotropic set to 16x, while the nVidia's scores are without these options on. Also Cinema r8 is a few weeks away, reportedly with much improved OGL efficiency.
There's some proof. Want more? Maya for Mac is still 3.X while it's 4 for PC! Also, it doesn't support Multiple Processors on Mac! Here's more: 3DMAX, one of the most widely used 3d apps for creating video game models, is PC only! Want still more? Softimage! Not available for mac, though they're considering a port right now. I'm sorry, ElectricImage doesn't really count because it's not of the same quality anymore. Yes, I have spent long periods of time viewing many, many renders done with all of these programs. Does that mean I'm right? Of course not! I'm not the one who's right, the Facts are! I'm only speaking from the facts (with possible questionability regarding EI). Thank you, Goodbye! E.T. Phone Home.............
I really want to buy a PowerMac. The 17" iMac is lovely, but is crippled without real dual monitor support.
The problem I have, is that as an Australian, PowerMacs are very expensive ( as a percentage of income ). My PC cost a lot, $6000 Au +, but it was possible to spread that cost over two years.
I would love to see Apple offer much more comprehensive build-to-order, and after market options.
Give me the ability to leverage my existing investment in hardware ( RAM, hard-drives, video cards, mouse, keyboard, monitors, optical drives ), so that I can afford to hop on the wagon.
Let me buy a bare 867.
I understand that some of Apple's margins come from these products ( RAM prices in BTO are unbeleivable ). I also realise that you must be affraid that resellers would buy bare machines and then add after market components before resale. Both of these issues would need to be addressed. But I believe that you would be better off embracing, and growing from these approaches, rather than trying to stifle them and suffering poor sales.
The next problem is that once I buy a new machine you provide nearly no after market options. I just cant afford to buy a new machine every two years, why not sell cpu upgrades? Why not sell an Apple brand DVD burner with iDvd bundled? What about some Apple brand video cards?
Once again, I understand that Apple would prefer its users to buy new machines, with bigger margins. But unfortunately that flies in the face of expanding market share. I cant afford to buy what I want now, and you dont give the option to get it in the future, so Ill go to someone who does.
If you are really serious about growing market share, then you need to address the fact that Apple's computers sell to the affluent. There just arent enough of them around to support you into the future ( this aint the car market, you need developers, and they need customers too ).
As a demographic note, Im extremely well off in Australia ( top 5% salary ), and I still cant afford to walk down to the shop and buy a Mac.
You need to grow your connection with your customers, repeat sales, good experiences, a retail chain that enjoys working with you. Dont leave people feeling abandoned, and forced to buy a new computer every year.
2. We live in a world of the share-holder value. Corporations are expected to make the most money they can for the share-holder - they are not the salvation army.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Which share-holders would those be? A quick look at the history of P/E ratios shows that they have gotten progressively worse for the last two decades. Small share holders should just give up any aspirations of actually getting a meaningful dividend. The situation is ridiculous when the average company with a 50-150 dollar share price manages, at best, to return a few pennies per quarter.
The executive caste is bleeding shareholders dry andfor the most part we're just sitting their with a little analyst hand holding to tell us it's all OK. Just about everyone has been reduced to speculating on share price. It's pathetic.
Comments
They save money by outsourcing and send the savings........to themselves.
P.S. If Apple opens a reply page and they pick and choose which replys to read by their use of punctuation and grammar and level of anger thats quite pathetic. He isn't sending them his Resume for Christ sake. You want people to reply you accept their reply and hopefully learn something................
Second, the link is for feedback about the new PowerMac. I don't think it's hard to figure out that it is intended for feedback about the new PowerMac, not as a target for another generalized complaint about Apple's pricing (which is competitive, feature for feature, with brand-name PCs, especially at the consumer level). Furthermore, it implies to me at least that it should be used by people who have actually used the new PowerMac and therefor have something to say about it.
Apple is trying to listen to its userbase. It should be commended for that, and it should be encouraged to listen. Spamming every such attempt with rants will not reward its attempt.
I have not addressed criticism about price or performance in this post, and I am certainly not trying to silence or suppress any such criticism. I am, however, claiming that sloppy, emotional criticism of Apple's entire hardware strategy sent through inappropriate channels will accomplish nothing, except to discourage them from soliciting public feedback at all. If you have a complaint about price or performance, state it clearly and concisely, and send it to the appropriate place.
Please use the above link to submit cogent, coherent feedback about the new PowerMacs. It's in everyone's interest.
[ 09-13-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
<strong>I work for Apple and I created the web form where you can submit feedback. If more than 5% of the words are spelled incorrectly or with all capital letters the submission is automatically deleted from the database before anybody ever reads it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I thought about submitting my own feedback, but I had a problem with the form.
The questions "What computer do you use," "what operation system do you use," and "which display do you use" only allow for one selection each. I, and most of my associates, are using more then one computer, OS, and monitor.
The form should really allow for multiple choices for those questions.
<strong>Apple is no comparison to BMW because BMW still makes their own products in their own factories. Apple has been outsourcing their products to the same foreign companies other manufacturers use for the last few years. Yes, they may use some better quality parts in their casings, and yes some of the designs are nice to look at but its the same stuff inside except for the overpriced CPUs.
They save money by outsourcing and send the savings........to themselves.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Welcome to the world of basic economics:
1. BMW does own plants but they are for assembly only. All their parts are delivered just-in-time by the same suppliers all the other manufacturers have contracted to too. And there are very few of them - kind of like the OEM situation on the computer market. They do the design and contract the production out.
2. We live in a world of the share-holder value. Corporations are expected to make the most money they can for the share-holder - they are not the salvation army.
<strong>Sammy you sound like a Teenager.
Let me give you a little hint if that's true. When you're young..you will most likely make the least amount of money. Work hard...humble yourself and buy an eMac. Someday you will look back fondly at those days.
If you're an Adult. And Apples prices sting you that bad...get a new job skill.
The core of your arguement is good...it's just the execution that is lacking. A little "sweetness goes a long way" is a saying.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think that sweetness will get you very far with a company like Apple. They're far too big to be particularly concerned with that kind of mellow lamer who patiently suggests this or that with a large dose of company ass-kissing. Besides, if they listened to their base consumers, obviously they would have done many things differently.
There's nothing about Apple that says "We'll give you what you want when you want it." However, they do sometimes say "We'll give you what you want." The difference in that respect is quite clear, and very frequently little modifications are exactly how such business is done.
So far as I've seen, Apple has consistently been the kind of company that gives people just enough to tide them over here and there, and once in a while they release something very significant and good, though usually they do this when lacking in some other field at the time. When have they, in at least 2 or 3 years, made something at a competitive price, or as of late, even a competitive Hardware product at all (besides the iPod)?
I guarantee that they know exactly how loyal their userbase is, and they keep the secrecy just under top notch in order to make the majority curious, interested, and anxious, ALL THE TIME. So long as they have this reliable group of people, and so long as they continue these persistent mind games of barely giving half a handful of the necessities of life, and Always keeping people hoping, expecting, faithfully waiting, hoping, expecting, hoping and expecting and waiting more, they will keep going at this very same pace.
Do they want to be ahead? Perhaps, but never for long. That could be bad for business and credibility in the long run, if they were to be on the top for any period other than just long enough to tease people with the idea that they really can do it. Their loyal buyers might fall a bit harder if Apple sold consistently superior hardware for a time, and later happened upon an unintentional down period like Right Now (I'm not sure it's unintentional anymore though). They could just be milking their inferiority complex and Blame-Motorola scheme for a bit longer in order to seem more like a great big huge Saviour (HAH! saviour from what?? Themselves, that's who, every time.) when they finally do come out with a significantly improved desktop.
I am a cranky mac user who refuses to buy another apple product until their prices become more reasonable AND their products become more competitive with the rest of the computer industry.
I have little doubt that Apple is very good at what they do. However, like all large companies, and especially those ones with less than top-notch products available, their primary business has become Mind Games. The main problem I have with this form of livelihood is that, when any organization, corporation, etc, does this, they often discover that holding back on superior products is actually better for business, not because of production costs or other issues, but because of the ability to keep the upper hand consistently, and to always be secure should an uprising occur. The plan has a safety net. Good for the business, but bad for the consumers.
At the same time, you can't just walk out on Apple as a group and expect them to survive; the safety net only works in less major situations. So the problem is, you can't Tell apple to do anything (because they just won't listen), and yet you can't Not buy their stuff anymore (because they'll cease to exist). Sounds like they've got us between a rock and a hard place, and I'll bet they know that, too.
My point wasn't of of manufacturing but company ideology. BMW has a minimum level of design that they don't go below. They're not looking to enter the "economy" sector for autos.
[quote] P.S. If Apple opens a reply page and they pick and choose which replys to read by their use of punctuation and grammar and level of anger thats quite pathetic. <hr></blockquote>
I don't know, which is more pathetic? The fact that Apple may disregard these messages or the fact that every person has the opportunity to state their grievances and some choose to do it without a shred of eloquence?
[quote]
Apple or any of its employees do not accept or consider unsolicited ideas, including ideas for new advertising campaigns, new promotions, new or improved products or technologies,product enhancements, processes, materials, marketing plans or new product names.
...
Please provide only specific feedback on Apple's existing products or marketing strategies; do not include any ideas that Apple's policy will not permit it to accept or consider. It's just one more way that Apple can learn how to best satisfy your needs.
<hr></blockquote>
So if you give feedback, no suggesting how they could make it better. So you can say "Firewire is too slow" but not "Firewire should be faster"
I think pointing out that the G4 is bandwidth starved is pointless.
G-News
<strong>
I thought about submitting my own feedback, but I had a problem with the form.
The questions "What computer do you use," "what operation system do you use," and "which display do you use" only allow for one selection each. I, and most of my associates, are using more then one computer, OS, and monitor.
The form should really allow for multiple choices for those questions.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, me saying I made that form was an attempt to suggest not writing like a retard. Some attempt at grammar and spelling would make Apple take him at least a little bit seriously.
As for the form only having one choice? I don't know. Improvise! Pick your most commonly used computer maybe? I mean, if you fill out a form asking for your e-mail address do you sit and stare at it for hours trying to figure out which of your many e-mail addresses to put in? If that's the case it's amazing that you figured out how to sign up for this forum!
<strong>
I don't know, which is more pathetic? The fact that Apple may disregard these messages or the fact that every person has the opportunity to state their grievances and some choose to do it without a shred of eloquence?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Eloquence? He's not writing an article for Newsweek! You want feedback take the damn feedback!......................................... ....
I have been a Powermac user for seven years, until last week. I mainly use my computer for hobbyist 3d animation (Cinema4d) and audio (Cubase). My last mac was a g4 400. Last week I built a dual Athlon mp2000 PC with ATI radeon 9700 pro etc. (This week I will probably spend trying to get XP Professional to work as it says on the box!). I generally buy a new computer every 2-3 years. I want to tell you why I have abandoned Apple after a long spell, and what must change in order for me to willingly switch back, which I really would like to do.
Firstly, Apples complete lack of visibility in the marketplace. I feel that there is such a tight hold on information, that I could not plan a substantial purchase without feeling that current offerings are no more that a stop-gap solution. Intel demoes a 4.1GHZ p4, AMD shows Hammers etc. My concern isn't overly in MHZ, but Apple's competitors demonstrate clearly that their platform is alive and progressing rapidly. Apple hasn't as far as I can remember shown any worthwhile future hardware demos for several years. My concern is that Apple will progress well behind the average of the PC platform, giving rise to concerns that Apple may become an even more isolated/niche vendor in the future.
My main use of a PC dictates that realworld performance is as good as possible, and currently, my options of a new computer fell into the Dual 867 G4, or low-end tower category. Unfortunately at this price point, the alternative PC option offered me twice the real-world processing power, and a graphics option many times in excess of your offering at this level, and a very nice custom case to boot. While I had never even considered buying any Microsoft OS before, I feel that XP, is probably on a par somewhere between OS9 and X, and that is good enough for the level I am at.
While I Applaud Apples software offerings are vastly superior to the other side, that alone is not a good enough reason to invest in a platform that has no accepted visible future. Harsh, maybe, but there is no indication from Apple as to where the Hardware at least might be in the near future, and being of prudent nature, I can only deduce that Apple must be scrabbling for whatever parts they get from their suppliers, either there is no future with any certainty, or that its too embarrasing to publish. Either way, I cannot accept possible random breakthrough products as a valid business model.
Pretty soon, PC's are going to be fast enough for everybody, myself included, when that happens, Microsoft and others may well be forced to evalute the advantages that they can offer to keep their revenues afloat. In my opinion, as soon as MS releases an OS that is as good as whatever OSX is current, and the OEM vendors offer stability, reliability and ease of use as good as Apple, Apple will have no chance of ever expanding marketshare, and will probably be relagated to a very niche vendor. I feel that this time cannot be very far away, even by MS standards, and that Apple must make every effort to get its Hardware Performance, and pricing structures atleast at Parity with the PC world in as short a time as possible, in order for the Software to be seen in a favourable light, while the opportunity still remains. If this meant changing CPU architecture, Im all for it.
Living in the UK, Apple support is practically non-existant, overpriced, delayed, out-of-stock products from most vendors was another reason why I left.
Im hoping that my next computer purchase will be another Apple, sometime in 2004.
Marcus
[QB] proper spelling and grammer. AND LAYED OFF
<hr></blockquote>
<strong>say, I sent them feedback.
I have been a Powermac user for seven years, until last week. I mainly use my computer for hobbyist 3d animation (Cinema4d) and audio (Cubase). My last mac was a g4 400. Last week I built a dual Athlon mp2000 PC with ATI radeon 9700 pro etc. (This week I will probably spend trying to get XP Professional to work as it says on the box!).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh yeah, that sounds real efficient! You think the speed difference will really add up to the week you say you'll waste getting the computer going? Not to mention the week you'll spend a few months down the road when you're trying to figure out what went wrong?
[quote]<strong>Firstly, Apples complete lack of visibility in the marketplace. I feel that there is such a tight hold on information, that I could not plan a substantial purchase without feeling that current offerings are no more that a stop-gap solution. Intel demoes a 4.1GHZ p4, AMD shows Hammers etc. My concern isn't overly in MHZ, but Apple's competitors demonstrate clearly that their platform is alive and progressing rapidly.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Intel and AMD are not computer manufactures. Apple is not a chip maker. It's IBM and Motorola's job to show off new chips. It's Apple's job to show off current hardware. You don't see Dell or Gateway showing off what computer they will release in 8 months.
[quote]<strong>
My main use of a PC dictates that realworld performance is as good as possible, and currently, my options of a new computer fell into the Dual 867 G4, or low-end tower category. Unfortunately at this price point, the alternative PC option offered me twice the real-world processing power...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know this because you've used the dual 867 and know for a fact that the Athlon performs twice as fast?
[quote]<strong>While I Applaud Apples software offerings are vastly superior to the other side, that alone is not a good enough reason to invest in a platform that has no accepted visible future.</strong><hr></blockquote>
??? I have no idea where this "accepted visible future" idea comes from.
[quote]<strong>
Harsh, maybe, but there is no indication from Apple as to where the Hardware at least might be in the near future, and being of prudent nature, I can only deduce that Apple must be scrabbling for whatever parts they get from their suppliers, either there is no future with any certainty, or that its too embarrasing to publish. Either way, I cannot accept possible random breakthrough products as a valid business model.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, it sounds more like you are just pissed off because you don't know what they're going to announce 6 months down the road, and really, if you did know, you wouldn't buy an Apple now either, because you'd be waiting for what's coming next. I mean, if a Mac that's more than 4x faster than your current machine is not good enough, then I suppose nothing is. It also sounds like you don't know that Cinema 4D doesn't really benefit much, if at all, from the graphics card you put into your Athlon.
[quote]<strong>Pretty soon, PC's are going to be fast enough for everybody, myself included, when that happens, Microsoft and others may well be forced to evalute the advantages that they can offer to keep their revenues afloat. In my opinion, as soon as MS releases an OS that is as good as whatever OSX is current, and the OEM vendors offer stability, reliability and ease of use as good as Apple, Apple will have no chance of ever expanding marketshare, and will probably be relagated to a very niche vendor. I feel that this time cannot be very far away, even by MS standards...</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is a joke, right? You think Windows NT 5.2 will be much better than 5.1?
[quote]<strong>Living in the UK, Apple support is practically non-existant, overpriced, delayed, out-of-stock products from most vendors was another reason why I left.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah, a good point in all this drivel! Yes, it's pretty rough being a Mac user in the UK. With the Apple store in Paris now, I'd guess that Apple's going to work on getting some stronger presence in Eurpoe in the next few years, but I don't blame you for being unhappy with the current retail situation over there.
The point being..
Wether my arguments are correct or not, they are my real concerns about the future viability of the mac platform, wether Apple choses to dismiss them as the rant of an ex Mac user is up too them, but as they're asking, I decided to tell them, and Im pretty sure my concerns are pretty universal amongst long-time mac users at present.
As for your comments on Cinema4d.
The dual Athlon I built performs at almost exactly twice the speed in rendering and Open GL as the dual 867 in every bench I have seen. And I have now Benched my machine, and have got a result exactly as expected, except, the Radeon 9700 pro is exceeding the nVidia ti4600 WITH Anit-alaising set to 6x and anisotropic set to 16x, while the nVidia's scores are without these options on. Also Cinema r8 is a few weeks away, reportedly with much improved OGL efficiency.
SO it looks like you dont know JACK after all.
<a href="http://www.blanos.com/benchmark/index.html"; target="_blank">http://www.blanos.com/benchmark/index.html</a>;
There's some proof. Want more? Maya for Mac is still 3.X while it's 4 for PC! Also, it doesn't support Multiple Processors on Mac! Here's more: 3DMAX, one of the most widely used 3d apps for creating video game models, is PC only! Want still more? Softimage! Not available for mac, though they're considering a port right now. I'm sorry, ElectricImage doesn't really count because it's not of the same quality anymore. Yes, I have spent long periods of time viewing many, many renders done with all of these programs. Does that mean I'm right? Of course not! I'm not the one who's right, the Facts are! I'm only speaking from the facts (with possible questionability regarding EI). Thank you, Goodbye! E.T. Phone Home.............
[ 09-15-2002: Message edited by: Lemmingway ]</p>
<strong>Maya for Mac is still 3.X while it's 4 for PC! </strong><hr></blockquote>
hmhm...
<a href="http://www.aliaswavefront.com/en/products/maya/whatsnew/v4.5/maya45mac.shtml;$sessionid$J5TH5GAAAA5OVQCLCVBRT4Q " target="_blank">Maya Complete 4.5 for Macintosh</a>
..i can see apple becoming the next sgi..
sadly.
the g4 mhz thing is the marketing bs problem but what about the internals..? <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
Im a switcher, waiting to switch
I really want to buy a PowerMac. The 17" iMac is lovely, but is crippled without real dual monitor support.
The problem I have, is that as an Australian, PowerMacs are very expensive ( as a percentage of income ). My PC cost a lot, $6000 Au +, but it was possible to spread that cost over two years.
I would love to see Apple offer much more comprehensive build-to-order, and after market options.
Give me the ability to leverage my existing investment in hardware ( RAM, hard-drives, video cards, mouse, keyboard, monitors, optical drives ), so that I can afford to hop on the wagon.
Let me buy a bare 867.
I understand that some of Apple's margins come from these products ( RAM prices in BTO are unbeleivable ). I also realise that you must be affraid that resellers would buy bare machines and then add after market components before resale. Both of these issues would need to be addressed. But I believe that you would be better off embracing, and growing from these approaches, rather than trying to stifle them and suffering poor sales.
The next problem is that once I buy a new machine you provide nearly no after market options. I just cant afford to buy a new machine every two years, why not sell cpu upgrades? Why not sell an Apple brand DVD burner with iDvd bundled? What about some Apple brand video cards?
Once again, I understand that Apple would prefer its users to buy new machines, with bigger margins. But unfortunately that flies in the face of expanding market share. I cant afford to buy what I want now, and you dont give the option to get it in the future, so Ill go to someone who does.
If you are really serious about growing market share, then you need to address the fact that Apple's computers sell to the affluent. There just arent enough of them around to support you into the future ( this aint the car market, you need developers, and they need customers too ).
As a demographic note, Im extremely well off in Australia ( top 5% salary ), and I still cant afford to walk down to the shop and buy a Mac.
You need to grow your connection with your customers, repeat sales, good experiences, a retail chain that enjoys working with you. Dont leave people feeling abandoned, and forced to buy a new computer every year.
<strong>
Welcome to the world of basic economics:
2. We live in a world of the share-holder value. Corporations are expected to make the most money they can for the share-holder - they are not the salvation army.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Which share-holders would those be? A quick look at the history of P/E ratios shows that they have gotten progressively worse for the last two decades. Small share holders should just give up any aspirations of actually getting a meaningful dividend. The situation is ridiculous when the average company with a 50-150 dollar share price manages, at best, to return a few pennies per quarter.
The executive caste is bleeding shareholders dry andfor the most part we're just sitting their with a little analyst hand holding to tell us it's all OK. Just about everyone has been reduced to speculating on share price. It's pathetic.