The same old mistake
Now that the revenue improved and profitability became the focus, Apple is making the same mistakes they did over and over in the old glory days: pricing too high to maximize short term profits at the expense of long term product unit growth.
I guess Steve decided the current market share in the PC segment is sufficient.
Instead of bringing the Mac Mini down to $399 price point, taking it to $599 will kill most of the potential low-end PC customers (yes there are tens of millions of them) who would have considered the Mini as a potential platform for "switching".
Now it is an expensive "cute" toy targeted at a much smaller potential market...
And what is the deal with the $99 leather covers?
I guess Steve decided the current market share in the PC segment is sufficient.
Instead of bringing the Mac Mini down to $399 price point, taking it to $599 will kill most of the potential low-end PC customers (yes there are tens of millions of them) who would have considered the Mini as a potential platform for "switching".
Now it is an expensive "cute" toy targeted at a much smaller potential market...
And what is the deal with the $99 leather covers?
Comments
I think the reality is people want $399 computers for their own equally selfish reason. We wish to save more money whilst Apple continues to grow theirs.
I think it's rather daft though to say Apple continues to make the same mistakes. Go take a look at their net worth a couple of years ago. If this is a mistake then they need to be making more
The clientele you bring in at $399 aren't the people you're going to get rich on. Are they they ones who'll buy Apple Care? Are they the ones who'll buy lots of software? Not usually. They are the ones who'll clog your tech support lines ranting about everything known to mankind because they spent $400
I like that Macs are a bit exclusive. As long as Apple is healthy and moving forward I have no desire to see cheapskates with Macs. Nor do I want to see junky low cost macs. I know that's just me but Apple is doing well enough to corroborate the message that they "don't" need loss leader macs to make money.
However don't let me interrupt your attempts to dangle a carrot in front of Apple in the form of mythical millions of PC user just wanting to switch for the right price. More like low thousands from my perspective.
Originally posted by macshark
Instead of bringing the Mac Mini down to $399 price point, taking it to $599 will kill most of the potential low-end PC customers (yes there are tens of millions of them) who would have considered the Mini as a potential platform for "switching".
They could never hit that price point with the Core Solo. No way, no how. They might have with the current Celeron, but Apple seems to have made the choice to stick with one chip family. That choice leaves them in a bit of a hard place at the low end right now, since the Core-derived Celerons aren't due for several months yet. I assume they crunched the numbers and decided they would gain more in sales from a more expensive, but new, Mini than from leaving it without a refresh for another six months - and would save more in engineering costs by sticking to Cores than they would gain in profit from selling a $399 Celeron machine for the next six months.
So for now it's a trade-off, but I'd consider it very likely that the Mini will float back to its original price point as Cores permeate Intel's low-end lineup.
But even now, you can get a dual-core 1.67 GHz mini-workstation that will give the $2499 G5 tower a serious run for its money - for just $799. The price point is higher than you'd like, but what you get is pretty damn remarkable.
Originally posted by macshark
Now that the revenue improved and profitability became the focus, Apple is making the same mistakes they did over and over in the old glory days
Ummm...
No.
Originally posted by Ebby
Unfortunately, my dad was looking to get one to replace his Dell laptop but the scrooge in him will notice the price increase before anything else. "Dual cores, 1394, USB..." that is all gibberish to him. But he does understand $$$.
What he seems to not understand is that you get what you pay for?
Originally posted by hmurchison
Pray tell how Apple is going to make money selling a $399 computer?
Others are able to make money selling $299 or even $199 computers (including keyboard, mouse and even speakers), so it is not inconceivable for Apple to make money at the $399 price point. Yes, they may have to downgrade the processor to a Celeron, but if you look at the new Mini, there is not much there other than a processor, a $20 motherboard, $20 worth of DRAM and a HD.
Thanks to the increased code density of the x86 ISA, it would even be conceivable that a $399 machine will come with 256MB and a 40G HD.
By the way, late availability of the new Celerons based on the same core as Core Due processors is purely a marketing decision by Intel. Apple probably has enough pull to negotiate with Intel on this.
I think the reality is people want $399 computers for their own equally selfish reason. We wish to save more money whilst Apple continues to grow theirs.
This is true. (Economists have been working on this problem for a few hundred years)
The fundamental question is whether Apple wants to remain a niche player or to increase their Mac volume sales to a critical level to make Macs and OS-X a viable platform third party application developers for the foreseeable future. Thanks to iPod, Apple has a once in-the-life-of-the-corporation chance of increasing market share over 5% (or even 10%). However, the only way to make this happen is to provide a very cheap entry level platform to get as many people to switch as fast as possible.
Originally posted by Zandros
What he seems to not understand is that you get what you pay for?
Neither do people who shop at Walmart - which is most people...
Originally posted by Towel
But even now, you can get a dual-core 1.67 GHz mini-workstation that will give the $2499 G5 tower a serious run for its money - for just $799. The price point is higher than you'd like, but what you get is pretty damn remarkable.
Based on my experiences with the intel Macs, I'd agree that the core duo mini is a remarkable machine. Obviously we have to wait for the benchmarks to start trickling in though.
http://www.apple.com/games/hardware/
Unless you look closely at the suggested games, some people could take from the description that they would be able to run Doom 3 and World of Warcraft on it.
If a switcher buys a $600 machine expecting to play 3D games only to find out they can only play Bejeweled and Lemonade Tycoon, that is not going to give them a good first impression of Macs.
- Xidius
Originally posted by macshark
Now that the revenue improved and profitability became the focus, Apple is making the same mistakes they did over and over in the old glory days: pricing too high to maximize short term profits at the expense of long term product unit growth.
I guess Steve decided the current market share in the PC segment is sufficient.
Instead of bringing the Mac Mini down to $399 price point, taking it to $599 will kill most of the potential low-end PC customers (yes there are tens of millions of them) who would have considered the Mini as a potential platform for "switching".
Now it is an expensive "cute" toy targeted at a much smaller potential market...
actually, i was just reminded how much the intel transition of the mini resembles the g4 transition of the imac.
and we all know how well that machine was doing...
Originally posted by >_>
I'm doing my part to help support Apple:
- Xidius
Wow you spent some serious money that day. Post a pic of the room you're gonna set that all up in once you get the stuff!
Originally posted by Ebby
The mini was a perfect low-risk intro to the Mac platform, and I think Apple lost sight of what it was introduced as.
G4 Mac Mini, with:
- Airport
- Bluetooth
- 80GB hdd
- 512MB RAM
Price: $599
Intel Core Solo Mini, with:
- Airport
- Bluetooth
- 60GB hdd
- 512MB RAM
Price: $599
Considering the increased cost of the CPU, additional USB ports, audio IN addition, drastically better FSB, FrontRow with Apple Remote, etc...I think Apple did an EXCELLENT job maintaining an entry-level price point.
I'll also point out that you are not comparing the cheapest Intel mini with the cheapest G4 mini.
Originally posted by Ebby
I'll also point out that you are not comparing the cheapest Intel mini with the cheapest G4 mini.
Cheapest Intel Mini with the comparible G4 Mini. Yes, they dropped the $499 option...But the low-end Intel is NOT a price hike as others are saying. It is EXACTLY the same price as the equally configured G4 Mini was.
Remember all the rave of an affordable mac way back when? That is practically gone as the mini evolves from a stepping stone (pun intended) for PC users to a full-blown PVR. That seems like the direction it is headed and that is the source of my frustration.
Originally posted by tubgirl
actually, i was just reminded how much the intel transition of the mini resembles the g4 transition of the imac.
and we all know how well that machine was doing...
Originally posted by macshark
Neither do people who shop at Walmart - which is most people...
Everybody needs a 5 qt bottle of pickles and the 30-Roll Pack of Bounty! Pick up a Bag of Mac Minis at the checkout counter!