Sony makes computers too and they don't shoot for the $299/$399 market either.
Why do folks assume that Apple is targeting the low end segments for their pool of switchers and not the pool of windows users that buy mid to high end PCs like the VIAO?
I'm not assuming that Apple is targeting those users. I'm acknowledging that Apple don't target those users and suggesting that they should (well, the $399 end, anyway), in addition to targeting the users that they already do.
This is where I'm coming from:
Apple should be aiming for around 10% market share to stop marginalisation of the platform.
What is Sony's share of the PC market? It isn't that high. Let's assume half of their customers don't actually like Windows. Slowly, that half will switch to OS X, but that won't result in a huge increase in market share for Apple.
IMHO, if Apple sticks with only its current machines, they will attain around 6% market share. If they want more market share than that, they will have to start offering more hardware options.
I'm happy for you, and anyone else, to disagree with me, but only if you are disagreeing with what I'm actually saying, rather than what you think I'm saying.
At the same $499 price point everyone would have been happy. Apple blew it with this $599 model, IMHO.
Would you like to price that model, item by item?
Start with the $207 or so the chip costs, and go to the cost of the mobo, case, power supply, external connectors, HD, optical drive (which one, or what type), RAM, 64 Mb 3D graphics board (which GPU?), internal modem, iWork, power cord, packaging, manuals, disk, box, cost of shipping from factory to USA California port, and shipping to store or home (included in price).
I'm assuming, of course, that both WiFi and Bluetooth, as well as Front Row with remote aren't included.
Please try to use realistic pricing models. Off the cuff numbers are of no value to anyone. Don't guess, look up the relevant information.
If you are going to be definite about this, you should be able to show us exactly how you arrived at it.
EDIT: I almost forgot. Are you including the iLife Suite that comes with it now, as well as iWork? Because, that's what most people want.
I'm not assuming that Apple is targeting those users. I'm acknowledging that Apple don't target those users and suggesting that they should (well, the $399 end, anyway), in addition to targeting the users that they already do.
This is where I'm coming from:
Apple should be aiming for around 10% market share to stop marginalisation of the platform.
What is Sony's share of the PC market? It isn't that high.
In 2004 Sony was right below Apple but now that Apple is up to 4.4% (US) they trail further behind. So you want Apple to regain share close to its peak. Eh...seems unlikely.
And you haven't made the case that chasing that lower end market would be successful in reaching 10% share assuming that is a goal. You haven't made the case that 10% share is a valid goal for Apple.
With respect to the consumer desktop market would you prefer to have the upper 6% of the market or the bottom 10% of the market? Which segment is more profitable?
What are the opportunity costs of chasing that bottom 4% of the market to add to your upper end 6%?
Does a $399 Mini cannibalize your $599 Mini sales? Does the engineering and production effort of a $399 Mini cost you a rev of some other machine?
By pushing upper end of technology (GigE, BT, Core Duo) Apple is establishing the Intel Mac line as above the ordinary for Intel machines. What does a cut rate $399 Mini using older technology do to the branding?
Quote:
IMHO, if Apple sticks with only its current machines, they will attain around 6% market share. If they want more market share than that, they will have to start offering more hardware options.
I'm happy for you, and anyone else, to disagree with me, but only if you are disagreeing with what I'm actually saying, rather than what you think I'm saying.
Well, you're not the only person arguing for a lower cost mac.
You also bring up Dell but ignore that Sony has a different strategy. Share is important but so is profitability and the ability to execute. I suspect that Apple's corporate culture is sufficiently different from Dell's that it would be unsuccessful in using the same low cost strategy or achieve the same economies of scale and efficiency.
4-6% share is credible and Apple WILL release new machines. We're at the beginning of the transition not the end. They still need to get a lower cost notebook out the door and transition their high end.
There is time for variants and there IS opportunity for a lower cost mini from Intel's roadmap.
The difference between you and me is that what I'm suggesting for $499 is possible, what you are suggesting is not. Apple could not do that and make a profit.
They didn't make a profit on the previous Mini?
What I proposed were simple upgrades using pieces that get cheaper over time. Of course they could make a profit, maybe not a Apple sized profit, but a profit.
Start with the $207 or so the chip costs, and go to the cost of the mobo, case, power supply, external connectors, HD, optical drive (which one, or what type), RAM, 64 Mb 3D graphics board (which GPU?), internal modem, iWork, power cord, packaging, manuals, disk, box, cost of shipping from factory to USA California port, and shipping to store or home (included in price).
I'm assuming, of course, that both WiFi and Bluetooth, as well as Front Row with remote aren't included.
Please try to use realistic pricing models. Off the cuff numbers are of no value to anyone. Don't guess, look up the relevant information.
If you are going to be definite about this, you should be able to show us exactly how you arrived at it.
EDIT: I almost forgot. Are you including the iLife Suite that comes with it now, as well as iWork? Because, that's what most people want.
What are you smoking?
They are charging $599 for the Intel Mini with airport and bluetooth installed and the remote control.
Why the hell couldnt they profit from it if they sold the previous Mini for the same price?
Not with the BMW name. If people complain about the mini being cheap it doesn't really affect BMWs image. Churn out $399 cheap mac boxes with Apple's anme on them then people get on the internet and slam all Macs. See the critisism of Dell. All that for what $15 or $30 of profit. I can see why Apple doesn't want to jump into that market.
I'm not assuming that Apple is targeting those users. I'm acknowledging that Apple don't target those users and suggesting that they should (well, the $399 end, anyway), in addition to targeting the users that they already do.
This is where I'm coming from:
Apple should be aiming for around 10% market share to stop marginalisation of the platform.
What is Sony's share of the PC market? It isn't that high. Let's assume half of their customers don't actually like Windows. Slowly, that half will switch to OS X, but that won't result in a huge increase in market share for Apple.
IMHO, if Apple sticks with only its current machines, they will attain around 6% market share. If they want more market share than that, they will have to start offering more hardware options.
I'm happy for you, and anyone else, to disagree with me, but only if you are disagreeing with what I'm actually saying, rather than what you think I'm saying.
I agree that if they offer a low cost machine they can increase market share. I think it unnecessary. They are already profitable at current market share and in many ways are leaders. People look to Apple to see where things are going. If Dell announced an event to introduce some new products would anyone care? No. They make boxes efficiently and cheaply. They are in a race with Lennovo to see who can make a pc for free. It's a race to the bottom. I grant Apple their margins so they will continue to innovate. It's the price of progress.
At the same $499 price point everyone would have been happy. Apple blew it with this $599 model, IMHO.
So I did some of the leg work for you and priced this puppy ... here's how it breaks down sticking with 667 MHz FSB (since we don't want to go backwards...)
iWork -- $79.00 (Since we all know Apple employees don't work for free, software does cost money to develop...)
Modem -- $5.00
Motherboard, Case, Cables -- $100 - $150
We're at $531 and we haven't included things people might need ... like ethernet and USB and FireWire. I'm sure this isn't Apple's cost ... I just googled the cheapest stuff I could find. Once you put all that together, it's just not cost-effective to make a computer with a Core Solo for under $500. As it is, Apple can't be making tons of profit on the mini. No one knows Apple's costs ... so we're all just speculating. You're wanting something unreasonable though
So I did some of the leg work for you and priced this puppy ... here's how it breaks down sticking with 667 MHz FSB (since we don't want to go backwards...)
iWork -- $79.00 (Since we all know Apple employees don't work for free, software does cost money to develop...)
Modem -- $5.00
Motherboard, Case, Cables -- $100 - $150
We're at $531 and we haven't included things people might need ... like ethernet and USB and FireWire. I'm sure this isn't Apple's cost ... I just googled the cheapest stuff I could find. Once you put all that together, it's just not cost-effective to make a computer with a Core Solo for under $500. As it is, Apple can't be making tons of profit on the mini. No one knows Apple's costs ... so we're all just speculating. You're wanting something unreasonable though
Your prices are all wrong, dude. Apple doesnt pay anywhere near what you're quoting, and Apple doesnt pay a dime to include iWork.
So I did some of the leg work for you and priced this puppy ... here's how it breaks down sticking with 667 MHz FSB (since we don't want to go backwards...)
iWork -- $79.00 (Since we all know Apple employees don't work for free, software does cost money to develop...)
Modem -- $5.00
Motherboard, Case, Cables -- $100 - $150
We're at $531 and we haven't included things people might need ... like ethernet and USB and FireWire. I'm sure this isn't Apple's cost ... I just googled the cheapest stuff I could find. Once you put all that together, it's just not cost-effective to make a computer with a Core Solo for under $500. As it is, Apple can't be making tons of profit on the mini. No one knows Apple's costs ... so we're all just speculating. You're wanting something unreasonable though
That's some strong research. Finally somebody's put some numbers together. Like I've said all along, I don't know why Apple is going after this market at all.
Your prices are all wrong, dude. Apple doesnt pay anywhere near what you're quoting, and Apple doesnt pay a dime to include iWork.
He said that Apple probably doesn't pay that. But it's a good starting point for discussion. Do you think Apple gets the components for free? Does Apple's vendors give products away at a loss for market share? Knock 15% off and its only about $75. Where's Apple's profit?
Your prices are all wrong, dude. Apple doesnt pay anywhere near what you're quoting, and Apple doesnt pay a dime to include iWork.
That's why I said no one knows what Apple's costs are ... you don't, I don't. So, my unreasonable pricing is the same as your unreasonable assumption. Apple doesn't have to pay for the iWork software ... you're right, but they have to get money from it - their software people don't work for free. The prices I quoted are real prices to the consumer buying one unit. Soooo ... please, let us all know Apple's cost since apparently they can build this computer you're talking about ... even though it's shit. No USB, no FW, no WiFi or Bluetooth ... what the hell would you use this computer for? Basically all you did was put an Intel chip into a mini case and attach a GPU to it to give it the semblance of some kind of computer. Sorry ... people need a LITTLE more than that.
That's why I said no one knows what Apple's costs are ... you don't, I don't. So, my unreasonable pricing is the same as your unreasonable assumption. Apple doesn't have to pay for the iWork software ... you're right, but they have to get money from it - their software people don't work for free. The prices I quoted are real prices to the consumer buying one unit. Soooo ... please, let us all know Apple's cost since apparently they can build this computer you're talking about ... even though it's shit. No USB, no FW, no WiFi or Bluetooth ... what the hell would you use this computer for? Basically all you did was put an Intel chip into a mini case and attach a GPU to it to give it the semblance of some kind of computer. Sorry ... people need a LITTLE more than that.
The USB and Firewire were obvious, of course those should be there.
Like I said, the Mini would be the same as the last Mini, except for the Intel Chip, larger hard drive, 64 Mb Video RAM instead of 32.
The USB and Firewire were obvious, of course those should be there.
Like I said, the Mini would be the same as the last Mini, except for the Intel Chip, larger hard drive, 64 Mb Video RAM instead of 32.
Yeh, that's just insane! What was I thinking !?
You're right ... it is insane of you to think that you can add all that stuff at no extra cost. Do you really think if Apple could pay the same price for a larger drive, they stick with the smaller one just to screw with your head? Bigger HDD costs money ...bigger GPU costs money ... and yes, the Intel chip costs money. Money Money Money. You're wanting a new mac with higher cost features at the same price ... sorry, Apple isn't going to start taking a profit loss because you want them to. USB and FW yes were obvious ... but what about WiFi and bluetooth? Do you want those standard also ... cause that costs money as well.
But this is the case with Apple sometimes -- just way too ahead of the curve.
1. They can offer pentium Ms instead of Core Solo or Core Duo
2. They can offer 3.5" drives instead of the 2.5"
Do you think Joe Schmoe would care that his Mac has "the latest CPU that's the best ever!!"???!!???
Of course its all about the $$$$ at the end of the day but there's still a lot of room to play with. It's Apple's fixation with cost AND must-have features that's the killer.
Comments
Originally posted by backtomac
Let me change the anology as you are correct. BMW doesn't make $12000 subcompact- as far as I know.
They make a $16K one...the Mini (Cooper)
Originally posted by vinea
Sony makes computers too and they don't shoot for the $299/$399 market either.
Why do folks assume that Apple is targeting the low end segments for their pool of switchers and not the pool of windows users that buy mid to high end PCs like the VIAO?
I'm not assuming that Apple is targeting those users. I'm acknowledging that Apple don't target those users and suggesting that they should (well, the $399 end, anyway), in addition to targeting the users that they already do.
This is where I'm coming from:
Apple should be aiming for around 10% market share to stop marginalisation of the platform.
What is Sony's share of the PC market? It isn't that high. Let's assume half of their customers don't actually like Windows. Slowly, that half will switch to OS X, but that won't result in a huge increase in market share for Apple.
IMHO, if Apple sticks with only its current machines, they will attain around 6% market share. If they want more market share than that, they will have to start offering more hardware options.
I'm happy for you, and anyone else, to disagree with me, but only if you are disagreeing with what I'm actually saying, rather than what you think I'm saying.
Originally posted by steve666
Yup, at least they could have kept it at $499.
The $499 model should have looked like this:
Intel Chip
60Gb Hard Drive
512Mb RAM
64 Mb Dedicated 3D Graphics Card.
Internal Modem.
iWork.
At the same $499 price point everyone would have been happy. Apple blew it with this $599 model, IMHO.
Would you like to price that model, item by item?
Start with the $207 or so the chip costs, and go to the cost of the mobo, case, power supply, external connectors, HD, optical drive (which one, or what type), RAM, 64 Mb 3D graphics board (which GPU?), internal modem, iWork, power cord, packaging, manuals, disk, box, cost of shipping from factory to USA California port, and shipping to store or home (included in price).
I'm assuming, of course, that both WiFi and Bluetooth, as well as Front Row with remote aren't included.
Please try to use realistic pricing models. Off the cuff numbers are of no value to anyone. Don't guess, look up the relevant information.
If you are going to be definite about this, you should be able to show us exactly how you arrived at it.
EDIT: I almost forgot. Are you including the iLife Suite that comes with it now, as well as iWork? Because, that's what most people want.
Originally posted by Mr. H
Apple should be aiming for around 10% market share to stop marginalisation of the platform.
If Apple can reach 10%, and I think they can, then I think the mindshare of people will tilt further, and Apple will continue to rise.
It's already easier than it was, I notice. The more people that have Macs, the easier it is for someone else to consider one.
Originally posted by steve666
Yup, at least they could have kept it at $499.
The $499 model should have looked like this:
Intel Chip
60Gb Hard Drive
512Mb RAM
64 Mb Dedicated 3D Graphics Card.
Internal Modem.
iWork.
At the same $499 price point everyone would have been happy. Apple blew it with this $599 model, IMHO.
To be realistic that'd have to be something like:
Intel Core Solo
40Gb Hard Drive
512Mb RAM
64mb Integrated Graphics
Ethernet Port
Combo drive
And probably 2 of 4 usb ports.
499
And that's probably still streching the dollar.
Originally posted by Mr. H
I'm not assuming that Apple is targeting those users. I'm acknowledging that Apple don't target those users and suggesting that they should (well, the $399 end, anyway), in addition to targeting the users that they already do.
This is where I'm coming from:
Apple should be aiming for around 10% market share to stop marginalisation of the platform.
What is Sony's share of the PC market? It isn't that high.
In 2004 Sony was right below Apple but now that Apple is up to 4.4% (US) they trail further behind. So you want Apple to regain share close to its peak. Eh...seems unlikely.
And you haven't made the case that chasing that lower end market would be successful in reaching 10% share assuming that is a goal. You haven't made the case that 10% share is a valid goal for Apple.
With respect to the consumer desktop market would you prefer to have the upper 6% of the market or the bottom 10% of the market? Which segment is more profitable?
What are the opportunity costs of chasing that bottom 4% of the market to add to your upper end 6%?
Does a $399 Mini cannibalize your $599 Mini sales? Does the engineering and production effort of a $399 Mini cost you a rev of some other machine?
By pushing upper end of technology (GigE, BT, Core Duo) Apple is establishing the Intel Mac line as above the ordinary for Intel machines. What does a cut rate $399 Mini using older technology do to the branding?
IMHO, if Apple sticks with only its current machines, they will attain around 6% market share. If they want more market share than that, they will have to start offering more hardware options.
I'm happy for you, and anyone else, to disagree with me, but only if you are disagreeing with what I'm actually saying, rather than what you think I'm saying.
Well, you're not the only person arguing for a lower cost mac.
You also bring up Dell but ignore that Sony has a different strategy. Share is important but so is profitability and the ability to execute. I suspect that Apple's corporate culture is sufficiently different from Dell's that it would be unsuccessful in using the same low cost strategy or achieve the same economies of scale and efficiency.
4-6% share is credible and Apple WILL release new machines. We're at the beginning of the transition not the end. They still need to get a lower cost notebook out the door and transition their high end.
There is time for variants and there IS opportunity for a lower cost mini from Intel's roadmap.
Vinea
Originally posted by Mr. H
The difference between you and me is that what I'm suggesting for $499 is possible, what you are suggesting is not. Apple could not do that and make a profit.
They didn't make a profit on the previous Mini?
What I proposed were simple upgrades using pieces that get cheaper over time. Of course they could make a profit, maybe not a Apple sized profit, but a profit.
Originally posted by melgross
Would you like to price that model, item by item?
Start with the $207 or so the chip costs, and go to the cost of the mobo, case, power supply, external connectors, HD, optical drive (which one, or what type), RAM, 64 Mb 3D graphics board (which GPU?), internal modem, iWork, power cord, packaging, manuals, disk, box, cost of shipping from factory to USA California port, and shipping to store or home (included in price).
I'm assuming, of course, that both WiFi and Bluetooth, as well as Front Row with remote aren't included.
Please try to use realistic pricing models. Off the cuff numbers are of no value to anyone. Don't guess, look up the relevant information.
If you are going to be definite about this, you should be able to show us exactly how you arrived at it.
EDIT: I almost forgot. Are you including the iLife Suite that comes with it now, as well as iWork? Because, that's what most people want.
What are you smoking?
They are charging $599 for the Intel Mini with airport and bluetooth installed and the remote control.
Why the hell couldnt they profit from it if they sold the previous Mini for the same price?
Originally posted by steve666
What are you smoking?
They are charging $599 for the Intel Mini with airport and bluetooth installed and the remote control.
Why the hell couldnt they profit from it if they sold the previous Mini for the same price?
That's not an answer.
Either you can show it, or not.
Originally posted by melgross
That's not an answer.
Either you can show it, or not.
I quoted specs almost identical to the previous Mini G4.
Hard Drive prices have gone down so thats a wash.
A 64Mb Graphics card now should cost no more than the previous card.
If Apple spent more for a Core Single chip than the G4 than they are morons.
If they can charge only $100 more for a Mini WITH Airport, Bluetooth, and a remote they should be able to charge $499 for My Mini.
Originally posted by vinea
They make a $16K one...the Mini (Cooper)
Not with the BMW name. If people complain about the mini being cheap it doesn't really affect BMWs image. Churn out $399 cheap mac boxes with Apple's anme on them then people get on the internet and slam all Macs. See the critisism of Dell. All that for what $15 or $30 of profit. I can see why Apple doesn't want to jump into that market.
Originally posted by Mr. H
I'm not assuming that Apple is targeting those users. I'm acknowledging that Apple don't target those users and suggesting that they should (well, the $399 end, anyway), in addition to targeting the users that they already do.
This is where I'm coming from:
Apple should be aiming for around 10% market share to stop marginalisation of the platform.
What is Sony's share of the PC market? It isn't that high. Let's assume half of their customers don't actually like Windows. Slowly, that half will switch to OS X, but that won't result in a huge increase in market share for Apple.
IMHO, if Apple sticks with only its current machines, they will attain around 6% market share. If they want more market share than that, they will have to start offering more hardware options.
I'm happy for you, and anyone else, to disagree with me, but only if you are disagreeing with what I'm actually saying, rather than what you think I'm saying.
I agree that if they offer a low cost machine they can increase market share. I think it unnecessary. They are already profitable at current market share and in many ways are leaders. People look to Apple to see where things are going. If Dell announced an event to introduce some new products would anyone care? No. They make boxes efficiently and cheaply. They are in a race with Lennovo to see who can make a pc for free. It's a race to the bottom. I grant Apple their margins so they will continue to innovate. It's the price of progress.
Originally posted by steve666
Yup, at least they could have kept it at $499.
The $499 model should have looked like this:
Intel Chip
60Gb Hard Drive
512Mb RAM
64 Mb Dedicated 3D Graphics Card.
Internal Modem.
iWork.
At the same $499 price point everyone would have been happy. Apple blew it with this $599 model, IMHO.
So I did some of the leg work for you and priced this puppy ... here's how it breaks down sticking with 667 MHz FSB (since we don't want to go backwards...)
Intel Core Solo (2M L2 Cache 1.66 GHz 667 MHz FSB 65 nm) -- $209
Western Digital Scorpio WD600UE ATA-6 (NOT SATA) 2.5" Drive -- $82.00
Corsair ValueSelect 512MB 200 pin DDR2 667 MHz So-DIMM -- $56.00
iWork -- $79.00 (Since we all know Apple employees don't work for free, software does cost money to develop...)
Modem -- $5.00
Motherboard, Case, Cables -- $100 - $150
We're at $531 and we haven't included things people might need ... like ethernet and USB and FireWire. I'm sure this isn't Apple's cost ... I just googled the cheapest stuff I could find. Once you put all that together, it's just not cost-effective to make a computer with a Core Solo for under $500. As it is, Apple can't be making tons of profit on the mini. No one knows Apple's costs ... so we're all just speculating. You're wanting something unreasonable though
Originally posted by AgNuke1707
So I did some of the leg work for you and priced this puppy ... here's how it breaks down sticking with 667 MHz FSB (since we don't want to go backwards...)
Intel Core Solo (2M L2 Cache 1.66 GHz 667 MHz FSB 65 nm) -- $209
Western Digital Scorpio WD600UE ATA-6 (NOT SATA) 2.5" Drive -- $82.00
Corsair ValueSelect 512MB 200 pin DDR2 667 MHz So-DIMM -- $56.00
iWork -- $79.00 (Since we all know Apple employees don't work for free, software does cost money to develop...)
Modem -- $5.00
Motherboard, Case, Cables -- $100 - $150
We're at $531 and we haven't included things people might need ... like ethernet and USB and FireWire. I'm sure this isn't Apple's cost ... I just googled the cheapest stuff I could find. Once you put all that together, it's just not cost-effective to make a computer with a Core Solo for under $500. As it is, Apple can't be making tons of profit on the mini. No one knows Apple's costs ... so we're all just speculating. You're wanting something unreasonable though
Your prices are all wrong, dude. Apple doesnt pay anywhere near what you're quoting, and Apple doesnt pay a dime to include iWork.
Originally posted by AgNuke1707
So I did some of the leg work for you and priced this puppy ... here's how it breaks down sticking with 667 MHz FSB (since we don't want to go backwards...)
Intel Core Solo (2M L2 Cache 1.66 GHz 667 MHz FSB 65 nm) -- $209
Western Digital Scorpio WD600UE ATA-6 (NOT SATA) 2.5" Drive -- $82.00
Corsair ValueSelect 512MB 200 pin DDR2 667 MHz So-DIMM -- $56.00
iWork -- $79.00 (Since we all know Apple employees don't work for free, software does cost money to develop...)
Modem -- $5.00
Motherboard, Case, Cables -- $100 - $150
We're at $531 and we haven't included things people might need ... like ethernet and USB and FireWire. I'm sure this isn't Apple's cost ... I just googled the cheapest stuff I could find. Once you put all that together, it's just not cost-effective to make a computer with a Core Solo for under $500. As it is, Apple can't be making tons of profit on the mini. No one knows Apple's costs ... so we're all just speculating. You're wanting something unreasonable though
That's some strong research. Finally somebody's put some numbers together. Like I've said all along, I don't know why Apple is going after this market at all.
Originally posted by steve666
Your prices are all wrong, dude. Apple doesnt pay anywhere near what you're quoting, and Apple doesnt pay a dime to include iWork.
He said that Apple probably doesn't pay that. But it's a good starting point for discussion. Do you think Apple gets the components for free? Does Apple's vendors give products away at a loss for market share? Knock 15% off and its only about $75. Where's Apple's profit?
Originally posted by steve666
Your prices are all wrong, dude. Apple doesnt pay anywhere near what you're quoting, and Apple doesnt pay a dime to include iWork.
That's why I said no one knows what Apple's costs are ... you don't, I don't. So, my unreasonable pricing is the same as your unreasonable assumption. Apple doesn't have to pay for the iWork software ... you're right, but they have to get money from it - their software people don't work for free. The prices I quoted are real prices to the consumer buying one unit. Soooo ... please, let us all know Apple's cost since apparently they can build this computer you're talking about ... even though it's shit. No USB, no FW, no WiFi or Bluetooth ... what the hell would you use this computer for? Basically all you did was put an Intel chip into a mini case and attach a GPU to it to give it the semblance of some kind of computer. Sorry ... people need a LITTLE more than that.
Originally posted by AgNuke1707
That's why I said no one knows what Apple's costs are ... you don't, I don't. So, my unreasonable pricing is the same as your unreasonable assumption. Apple doesn't have to pay for the iWork software ... you're right, but they have to get money from it - their software people don't work for free. The prices I quoted are real prices to the consumer buying one unit. Soooo ... please, let us all know Apple's cost since apparently they can build this computer you're talking about ... even though it's shit. No USB, no FW, no WiFi or Bluetooth ... what the hell would you use this computer for? Basically all you did was put an Intel chip into a mini case and attach a GPU to it to give it the semblance of some kind of computer. Sorry ... people need a LITTLE more than that.
The USB and Firewire were obvious, of course those should be there.
Like I said, the Mini would be the same as the last Mini, except for the Intel Chip, larger hard drive, 64 Mb Video RAM instead of 32.
Yeh, that's just insane! What was I thinking !?
Originally posted by steve666
The USB and Firewire were obvious, of course those should be there.
Like I said, the Mini would be the same as the last Mini, except for the Intel Chip, larger hard drive, 64 Mb Video RAM instead of 32.
Yeh, that's just insane! What was I thinking !?
You're right ... it is insane of you to think that you can add all that stuff at no extra cost. Do you really think if Apple could pay the same price for a larger drive, they stick with the smaller one just to screw with your head? Bigger HDD costs money ...bigger GPU costs money ... and yes, the Intel chip costs money. Money Money Money. You're wanting a new mac with higher cost features at the same price ... sorry, Apple isn't going to start taking a profit loss because you want them to. USB and FW yes were obvious ... but what about WiFi and bluetooth? Do you want those standard also ... cause that costs money as well.
1. They can offer pentium Ms instead of Core Solo or Core Duo
2. They can offer 3.5" drives instead of the 2.5"
Do you think Joe Schmoe would care that his Mac has "the latest CPU that's the best ever!!"???!!???
Of course its all about the $$$$ at the end of the day but there's still a lot of room to play with. It's Apple's fixation with cost AND must-have features that's the killer.