We all know that a new generation of machines MUST come before sales pick up. Recession or not, all Apple's products are stale, and the current spec just 'seems' way too slow to really bring in any switchers. With any Apple die-hard, those most likely to buy even a sub-standard machine now wisely waiting for IBM powered machines, Apple is going to have a tough time selling it's current machines. Potential Switchers won't budge for the same price-performance reasons that have dogged Apple for the last few years, and Apple fans know better than to buy a machine with (for once) real knowledge of the next great thing.
<strong>We all know that a new generation of machines MUST come before sales pick up. Recession or not, all Apple's products are stale, and the current spec just 'seems' way too slow to really bring in any switchers. With any Apple die-hard, those most likely to buy even a sub-standard machine now wisely waiting for IBM powered machines, Apple is going to have a tough time selling it's current machines. Potential Switchers won't budge for the same price-performance reasons that have dogged Apple for the last few years, and Apple fans know better than to buy a machine with (for once) real knowledge of the next great thing.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So Apple should just fold up shop until these chips come out in late 2003? What do you, oh wise Matsu, suggest that they do? Drop price? That's what they're doing. Cut 'em some slack for pete's sake.
If they are going to talk about how Pro users are smaller because of the economy, then why don't they cut the prices of the Pro machines. I mean cutting 100 off the low end iMac does not do me a thing. I wouldn't buy it and that doesn't make it more affordable for me to get that Powerbook. I just don't understand why if they talk about the Pro lines struggling, they don't do something. They talked about having iBooks and iPods under the tree for Christmas. iPods I understand but they are not going to sell any more iBooks unless they update the specs.
<strong>If they are going to talk about how Pro users are smaller because of the economy, then why don't they cut the prices of the Pro machines. I mean cutting 100 off the low end iMac does not do me a thing. I wouldn't buy it and that doesn't make it more affordable for me to get that Powerbook. I just don't understand why if they talk about the Pro lines struggling, they don't do something. They talked about having iBooks and iPods under the tree for Christmas. iPods I understand but they are not going to sell any more iBooks unless they update the specs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Again, what are they supposed to do? Let's say they make $500 per pro machine (in line with their margins). If they cut the price $250, would they sell 2x machines? No, they wouldn't because pro users are waiting. So they end up deeper in the hole than when they started.
Cutting prices is not the way out for Apple. It would help, but it's not going to fix things. They, to use their tagline, are trying to innovate out of this situation. Software is where it's at for them right now.
Think about Elvis for a minute. They have been able to stick a jfs on top of their current file system. How awesome is that? We're looking at a completely innovative solution to the problem of changing file systems. It appears that there's a lot more to the UNIX underpinnings than we even first realized.
Right now, it's just a waiting game. Apple's not going anywhere for a long time. They could not sell a single computer for a year, continue spending on R&D and still be around. That's what they're trying to do.
Again, what are they supposed to do? Let's say they make $500 per pro machine (in line with their margins). If they cut the price $250, would they sell 2x machines? No, they wouldn't because pro users are waiting. So they end up deeper in the hole than when they started.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I understand but some claim they won't release new hardware until they get rid of current hardware. If they can't sell the current stuff at the current price, then we will never get updates. Taking a little off of profits to clear the channels could be a good thing since then they would be able to introduce the new products, and then if they have to, fix the prices to what they need to be. I have no problem paying $3000 for a piece of hardware that I feel is worth it which I can't see doing for the current PowerBooks. Again, I like the PowerMacs so I am not talking about those.
iBooks are still selling strong. According to Apple's conference call, it''s one of the few products that actually saw an increase in sales from the previous quarter.
i/eMacs are down 16%, but up yearly
PB G4 is down 38%, but up slightly yearly
iBook sales are up 8%, but down yearly
Powermacs are up 5%, but down significantly yearly
Yes, they are cutting prices, but are they doing it because of their present bind, or have they realized that price points in general have shifted downwards more than they like to admit? Lower prices are good, but when worthy hardware arrives, it won't do to once again raise prices to ridiculous levels. Machines cannot only be semi-affordable when they've reached a horribly stale state. Lower prices won't move many machines then.
Their current state is largely a problem of their own making. Moto may have screwed them up, but Apple never helped itself win fans untill it was too late. Had they been selling twice as many PPC's (by selling more machines and constantly offering all dual pro line-ups) Moto might have seen fit to make something better for them, or work closer with Apple to meet certain needs.
Market-share matters yet again...
One wonders how long before IBM tires of the PPC yet again? Remember, they're content to sell you a PPC604 based machine at a huge premium, even now. If IBM tires of linux/AIX et al, or makes nice nice with M$, will they care to make a chip just for Apple then? The current Moto situation could very well repeat itself 4 years from now
Given that the 17" iMac apparently accounts for almost 50% of all iMac sales (according to MacInTouch), I don't think Apple has learned much about price points shifting downward. Price is trickier than "cheaper -> better."
It's pretty clear to me that they're trying to get rid of the 15" iMac. The eMac's selling well, and the 17" is selling well, and the 15" is doing OK, but it's the runt of the pack at this point.
All other things being equal, cheaper is most certainly better, unless you're made out of money.
I'm not so sure that the pric of the 17" iMac disproves my point. A big LCD and a Superdrive make it one of the better deals in the Mac line-up if you value those two features. It's certainly a LOT cheaper than trying to get those same features from Apple in PM form. Is the 17" iMac winning iMac users, or is it winning PM users? Probably a bit of both, and a few switchers too, as for a big display and a DVD burning solution the price is not-too-bad.
However, to really have a runaway success, you need both features and a low price, and Apple won't have such market-share expanding success untill the price is a bit more in line with the rest of the industry, and the specification aswell -- Current PPC's are slow in all but the PM range, where they're OK (thanks to duals).
Comments
<strong>Fresh on the heels of the conference call...interesting point ovrlaps with the eMac.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Probably not for long. Apple *should* slash $100 off the eMac.
<strong>We all know that a new generation of machines MUST come before sales pick up. Recession or not, all Apple's products are stale, and the current spec just 'seems' way too slow to really bring in any switchers. With any Apple die-hard, those most likely to buy even a sub-standard machine now wisely waiting for IBM powered machines, Apple is going to have a tough time selling it's current machines. Potential Switchers won't budge for the same price-performance reasons that have dogged Apple for the last few years, and Apple fans know better than to buy a machine with (for once) real knowledge of the next great thing.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So Apple should just fold up shop until these chips come out in late 2003? What do you, oh wise Matsu, suggest that they do? Drop price? That's what they're doing. Cut 'em some slack for pete's sake.
[ 10-16-2002: Message edited by: torifile ]</p>
<strong>If they are going to talk about how Pro users are smaller because of the economy, then why don't they cut the prices of the Pro machines. I mean cutting 100 off the low end iMac does not do me a thing. I wouldn't buy it and that doesn't make it more affordable for me to get that Powerbook. I just don't understand why if they talk about the Pro lines struggling, they don't do something. They talked about having iBooks and iPods under the tree for Christmas. iPods I understand but they are not going to sell any more iBooks unless they update the specs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Again, what are they supposed to do? Let's say they make $500 per pro machine (in line with their margins). If they cut the price $250, would they sell 2x machines? No, they wouldn't because pro users are waiting. So they end up deeper in the hole than when they started.
Cutting prices is not the way out for Apple. It would help, but it's not going to fix things. They, to use their tagline, are trying to innovate out of this situation. Software is where it's at for them right now.
Think about Elvis for a minute. They have been able to stick a jfs on top of their current file system. How awesome is that? We're looking at a completely innovative solution to the problem of changing file systems. It appears that there's a lot more to the UNIX underpinnings than we even first realized.
Right now, it's just a waiting game. Apple's not going anywhere for a long time. They could not sell a single computer for a year, continue spending on R&D and still be around. That's what they're trying to do.
<strong>
Again, what are they supposed to do? Let's say they make $500 per pro machine (in line with their margins). If they cut the price $250, would they sell 2x machines? No, they wouldn't because pro users are waiting. So they end up deeper in the hole than when they started.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I understand but some claim they won't release new hardware until they get rid of current hardware. If they can't sell the current stuff at the current price, then we will never get updates. Taking a little off of profits to clear the channels could be a good thing since then they would be able to introduce the new products, and then if they have to, fix the prices to what they need to be. I have no problem paying $3000 for a piece of hardware that I feel is worth it which I can't see doing for the current PowerBooks. Again, I like the PowerMacs so I am not talking about those.
i/eMacs are down 16%, but up yearly
PB G4 is down 38%, but up slightly yearly
iBook sales are up 8%, but down yearly
Powermacs are up 5%, but down significantly yearly
See: <a href="http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0210/16.unitsales.php"; target="_blank">http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0210/16.unitsales.php</a>;
Yes, they are cutting prices, but are they doing it because of their present bind, or have they realized that price points in general have shifted downwards more than they like to admit? Lower prices are good, but when worthy hardware arrives, it won't do to once again raise prices to ridiculous levels. Machines cannot only be semi-affordable when they've reached a horribly stale state. Lower prices won't move many machines then.
Their current state is largely a problem of their own making. Moto may have screwed them up, but Apple never helped itself win fans untill it was too late. Had they been selling twice as many PPC's (by selling more machines and constantly offering all dual pro line-ups) Moto might have seen fit to make something better for them, or work closer with Apple to meet certain needs.
Market-share matters yet again...
One wonders how long before IBM tires of the PPC yet again? Remember, they're content to sell you a PPC604 based machine at a huge premium, even now. If IBM tires of linux/AIX et al, or makes nice nice with M$, will they care to make a chip just for Apple then? The current Moto situation could very well repeat itself 4 years from now
It's pretty clear to me that they're trying to get rid of the 15" iMac. The eMac's selling well, and the 17" is selling well, and the 15" is doing OK, but it's the runt of the pack at this point.
I'm not so sure that the pric of the 17" iMac disproves my point. A big LCD and a Superdrive make it one of the better deals in the Mac line-up if you value those two features. It's certainly a LOT cheaper than trying to get those same features from Apple in PM form. Is the 17" iMac winning iMac users, or is it winning PM users? Probably a bit of both, and a few switchers too, as for a big display and a DVD burning solution the price is not-too-bad.
However, to really have a runaway success, you need both features and a low price, and Apple won't have such market-share expanding success untill the price is a bit more in line with the rest of the industry, and the specification aswell -- Current PPC's are slow in all but the PM range, where they're OK (thanks to duals).
100Mhz Bus? Egads.
AGP 2X? Egads^2
I guess Im waiting for a new mobo and a Ghz G4.