I know I'm a bit late to the party but, IF apple is looking to increase market share and IF they are trying to get them from windows users, they don't have enough product offerings IMO. Many PC users are used to going to Dell or Gateway website and being able to configure a system to their needs and tastes. Right now apple doesn't give many of them enough options. I'm not sure the best way to fill the gaps, but there needs to be a configurable system between iMac and Powermac. With the switch to intel this is easily possible. Why not look at Pent Ds to fill this need? I know that they are not the best technology available but it is familiar to many pc users and intel is aggressively dropping prices. A pent d 820 is now $165. I think Apple is boxing themselves in unnecessarily by only using intel's core chips. I wouldn't buy it but that's me. It may be appropriate for others.
I know I'm a bit late to the party but, IF apple is looking to increase market share and IF they are trying to get them from windows users, they don't have enough product offerings IMO. Many PC users are used to going to Dell or Gateway website and being able to configure a system to their needs and tastes. Right now apple doesn't give many of them enough options. I'm not sure the best way to fill the gaps, but there needs to be a configurable system between iMac and Powermac. With the switch to intel this is easily possible. Why not look at Pent Ds to fill this need? I know that they are not the best technology available but it is familiar to many pc users and intel is aggressively dropping prices. A pent d 820 is now $165. I think Apple is boxing themselves in unnecessarily by only using intel's core chips. I wouldn't buy it but that's me. It may be appropriate for others.
This is one of the biggest complaints PC users who are interested in Macs have. Apple doesn't seem to care.
This is one of the biggest complaints PC users who are interested in Macs have. Apple doesn't seem to care.
Biggest complaint from a very tiny minority.
It's not worth it right now for Apple to change their model to accomodate maybe 5% of users. Maybe they'll care when they've got 15-20% of the market share...disappointing, maybe...a bad move by Apple, absolutely not.
. Maybe they'll care when they've got 15-20% of the market share...disappointing, maybe...a bad move by Apple, absolutely not.
You miss my point. I doubt they will get 15 or 20% market share with their current products. Their current products are geared towards a niche market. That's ok for the mac faithful, but with boot camp they really seem to be going after market share. They need more product offerings to entice windows users than what they currently have, IMO. With the switch to intel and the help they are supposedly giving Apple in product developement, is it that hard or that expensive?
It's not worth it right now for Apple to change their model to accomodate maybe 5% of users. Maybe they'll care when they've got 15-20% of the market share...disappointing, maybe...a bad move by Apple, absolutely not.
They can't get to anything like that with the selection they have now.
It isn't a tiny minority either. It's a fair amount of people. Quite a few people don't want to have to go from a Mini, to an iMac, to a Powermac.
You miss my point. I doubt they will get 15 or 20% market share with their current products. Their current products are geared towards a niche market. That's ok for the mac faithful, but with boot camp they really seem to be going after market share. They need more product offerings to entice windows users than what they currently have, IMO. With the switch to intel and the help they are supposedly giving Apple in product developement, is it that hard or that expensive?
I conquer.
Going back to the situation of the first half of the nineties with tons of different overlapping productlines, makes things unnecessary complicated for consumers.
Keep it simple.
People need clarity to make their choices.
Adding new categories won't help.
Apple could ad products to existing productlines to fill those gaps.
Bootcamp is not the troyanhorse you're hoping for.
I don't really believe people will pay another $199 for a copy of windows XP above the "Mactax".
Going back to the situation of the first half of the nineties with tons of different overlapping productlines, makes things unnecessary complicated for consumers.
Keep it simple.
People need clarity to make their choices.
Adding new categories won't help.
Apple could ad products to existing productlines to fill those gaps.
Bootcamp is not the troyanhorse you're hoping for.
I don't really believe people will pay another $199 for a copy of windows XP above the "Mactax".
I think it's debateable the impact that boot camp will have on market share. I think there is growing dissatisfaction with the windows os, but that's just my impression, not supported by data. My point is that boot camp is a bold attempt to lure windows users to the mac platform. The software bait is there but the hardware isn't. Again, for mac users the current offerings are by in large adequate for the niche market it serves. Inadequate for going after switchers.
It's not worth it right now for Apple to change their model to accomodate maybe 5% of users. Maybe they'll care when they've got 15-20% of the market share...disappointing, maybe...a bad move by Apple, absolutely not.
Right now Apple's market share is the "tiny minority". I doubt very seriously that Apple could come anywhere near 15 - 20% market share with their current line-up.
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
They can't get to anything like that with the selection they have now.
It isn't a tiny minority either. It's a fair amount of people. Quite a few people don't want to have to go from a Mini, to an iMac, to a Powermac.
They need catagories between these three.
I agree, but for one small addendum; For many the iMac AIO isn't even considered an option, so, your quote becomes, "Quite a few people don't want to have to go from a Mini to a Powermac." Then you're looking at a gapping $1200 hole in the line-up.
Don't get me wrong, I like my iMac, but it isn't what I wanted. I bought it because it was the best solution Apple offered me, but I am addicted to OS X.
However, potential switchers aren't addicted to OS X. Most potential switchers find Windows serviceable, if not somewhat a pain. NOTE that I said potential switchers, which in all probability is a minority of Windows users, most Windows users are content with Windows. Apple must lower the barriers as much as possible to attract potential switchers.
Intel helped, Bootcamp helped, combined I fully expect Apple's market share to climb somewhat, but not to 15 - 20%. IMHO that is a pipe dream, unless Apple offers an additional model(s).
Then again I could be wrong, I hope so, because I really don't think Apple will ever offer what is the most recurring, perpetual topic on Mac centric bulletin boards and quite frankly I don't think Apple cares one whit.
since the games are immersive and in a game you aren't really using the total windows operating system (not explorer, not bundled software etc.) I wonder if it would be possible to just boot into a partial windows system seemlessly. Maybe Parrallels could sell some sort sort of partial windows driver system so that PC games would run on a Mac. Instead of paying $199 for the whole operating system maybe Parrallels could sell some sort of $100 PC gaming loader. Who would know about this?
My 15-20% market share comment was nothing more than to show you guys that it's not gonna happen. I'm glad you all figured it out.
Apple's never gonna reach 20% market share (at least not in the next 10 years)...so it's totally unnecessary to cater to a very select few people that would like to have very specific hardware in their machine.
Complain, cry, whine all you want...it's not gonna happen.
I think the real reason Apple refuses on going back in history to get processors is because there will be no new games playable on a Pentium D with a mediocre graphics chip in a year. Your computers will be so far behind in a year if you buy that junk you'll be disgusted with your self for being such an idiot.
Intel is ready to start moving all their processors to 4 cores in the spring of next year with the kentsfield leading the way. And your talking about buying Machines to last you a few years that are not using the core architecture? The Core Solo is the last single core processor your probably ever going to see, and it spanks a Pentium D doesn't it?
Some of these requests seem absolutely ridiculous to me I am sorry.
My 15-20% market share comment was nothing more than to show you guys that it's not gonna happen. I'm glad you all figured it out.
Apple's never gonna reach 20% market share (at least not in the next 10 years)...so it's totally unnecessary to cater to a very select few people that would like to have very specific hardware in their machine.
Complain, cry, whine all you want...it's not gonna happen.
I agree that it's unlikely, but look at the damage AMD did to intel. Still 10% may be doable and would keep developers in the platform.
I think the real reason Apple refuses on going backwards on processors is because there will be no new games playable on a Pentium D with a mediocre graphics chip in a year. YOur computers will be so far behind in a year f you buy that junk you'll be disgusted with your self for being such an idiot. Intel is ready to start moving all their processors to 4 cores in the spring of next year with the kentsfield leading the way. And your talking about buying Machines to last you a few years that are not using the core architecture? The Core Solo is the last single core processor your probably ever going to see, and it spanks a Pentium D doesn't it?
Some of these requests seem absolutely ridiculous to me I am sorry.
I don't know how a core solo stacks up against a Pent D. The Pent D 820 is a dual core chip. Anandtech had a review on it recently and felt it was a nice bargain at $165. Again I wouldn't be buying any of Intels netburst chips but for switchers it may be attractive at the right price. Again, if apple is serious about attracting switchers, and boot camp suggests they are, they need to increase their product offerings. Below is link to anandtech article.
I believe apple could absolutely use a "dull little box" in their product line.
It's what most people expect/want when switching because it's all they know.
Apple just needs to find a way to give it a nice deisgn and not much of a premium.
And no, the Cube was not it. It's not the same thing when it comes to customization, servicability, look and especially price.
They need for once to make a REGULAR computer, but with an apple design.
If it was just a regular shaped pc tower that way it would have the upgradability that people THINK they need but with nice apple styling switchers would appreciate that.
Obviously to accomidate that the product line would need to change a bit (the mini would have to cheaper like 699 MAX) but it could fit.
I'm talking:
1.66GHz Intel Core Duo
512MB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Trayloading SuperDrive
128MB ATI Graphics
AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth
In a tower for $999 but with nice apple case design.
That would kill switchers, most don't want more than a basic computer and get confused or afriad of different sizes or everything built in.
Most people aren't computer savy at ALL.
They just want a computer that works, and that looks like a computer.
I've seen a lot people think the PM G5 was it. They ooh and ahh and leave once they see the price tag. To them this is the closest thing to a "normal computer" that apple offers.
I believe apple could absolutely use a "dull little box" in their product line.
It's what most people expect/want when switching because it's all they know.
Apple just needs to find a way to give it a nice deisgn and not much of a premium.
And no, the Cube was not it. It's not the same thing when it comes to customization, servicability, look and especially price.
They need for once to make a REGULAR computer, but with an apple design.
If it was just a regular shaped pc tower that way it would have the upgradability that people THINK they need but with nice apple styling switchers would appreciate that.
Obviously to accomidate that the product line would need to change a bit (the mini would have to cheaper like 699 MAX) but it could fit.
I'm talking:
1.66GHz Intel Core Duo
512MB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Trayloading SuperDrive
128MB ATI Graphics
AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth
In a tower for $999 but with nice apple case design.
That would kill switchers, most don't want more than a basic computer and get confused or afriad of different sizes or everything built in.
Most people aren't computer savy at ALL.
They just want a computer that works, and that looks like a computer.
I've seen a lot people think the PM G5 was it. They ooh and ahh and leave once they see the price tag. To them this is the closest thing to a "normal computer" that apple offers.
If Apple built it, they would come.
Why put in the ICD? Most PC switchers would be happier with a cheaper Pent D. IMO. Throw in a Pent D 820 or a Pent D 805, cheaper still at $130.
Comments
Originally posted by backtomac
I know I'm a bit late to the party but, IF apple is looking to increase market share and IF they are trying to get them from windows users, they don't have enough product offerings IMO. Many PC users are used to going to Dell or Gateway website and being able to configure a system to their needs and tastes. Right now apple doesn't give many of them enough options. I'm not sure the best way to fill the gaps, but there needs to be a configurable system between iMac and Powermac. With the switch to intel this is easily possible. Why not look at Pent Ds to fill this need? I know that they are not the best technology available but it is familiar to many pc users and intel is aggressively dropping prices. A pent d 820 is now $165. I think Apple is boxing themselves in unnecessarily by only using intel's core chips. I wouldn't buy it but that's me. It may be appropriate for others.
This is one of the biggest complaints PC users who are interested in Macs have. Apple doesn't seem to care.
Originally posted by melgross
This is one of the biggest complaints PC users who are interested in Macs have. Apple doesn't seem to care.
And with good reason.
Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch
And with good reason.
And what might that reason be? Since so many of us long time Mac users are complaining as well, as you may have noticed.
Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch
And with good reason.
Such as?
Originally posted by melgross
This is one of the biggest complaints PC users who are interested in Macs have. Apple doesn't seem to care.
Biggest complaint from a very tiny minority.
It's not worth it right now for Apple to change their model to accomodate maybe 5% of users. Maybe they'll care when they've got 15-20% of the market share...disappointing, maybe...a bad move by Apple, absolutely not.
is a good reason not to use them.
[edit]
Anyway there isn't much space pricewise between the iMac and the "PowerMac".
There is space for a 23"iMac though
and there is space for another $1,499 stripped down Conroe "Powermac/Mac Pro"
Like the november 2004 1.8Ghz PowerMac G5.
(But than without the hardware bugs)
[/edit]
Originally posted by kim kap sol
. Maybe they'll care when they've got 15-20% of the market share...disappointing, maybe...a bad move by Apple, absolutely not.
You miss my point. I doubt they will get 15 or 20% market share with their current products. Their current products are geared towards a niche market. That's ok for the mac faithful, but with boot camp they really seem to be going after market share. They need more product offerings to entice windows users than what they currently have, IMO. With the switch to intel and the help they are supposedly giving Apple in product developement, is it that hard or that expensive?
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Biggest complaint from a very tiny minority.
It's not worth it right now for Apple to change their model to accomodate maybe 5% of users. Maybe they'll care when they've got 15-20% of the market share...disappointing, maybe...a bad move by Apple, absolutely not.
They can't get to anything like that with the selection they have now.
It isn't a tiny minority either. It's a fair amount of people. Quite a few people don't want to have to go from a Mini, to an iMac, to a Powermac.
They need catagories between these three.
Originally posted by backtomac
You miss my point. I doubt they will get 15 or 20% market share with their current products. Their current products are geared towards a niche market. That's ok for the mac faithful, but with boot camp they really seem to be going after market share. They need more product offerings to entice windows users than what they currently have, IMO. With the switch to intel and the help they are supposedly giving Apple in product developement, is it that hard or that expensive?
I conquer.
Going back to the situation of the first half of the nineties with tons of different overlapping productlines, makes things unnecessary complicated for consumers.
Keep it simple.
People need clarity to make their choices.
Adding new categories won't help.
Apple could ad products to existing productlines to fill those gaps.
Bootcamp is not the troyanhorse you're hoping for.
I don't really believe people will pay another $199 for a copy of windows XP above the "Mactax".
Originally posted by gar
I conquer.
Going back to the situation of the first half of the nineties with tons of different overlapping productlines, makes things unnecessary complicated for consumers.
Keep it simple.
People need clarity to make their choices.
Adding new categories won't help.
Apple could ad products to existing productlines to fill those gaps.
Bootcamp is not the troyanhorse you're hoping for.
I don't really believe people will pay another $199 for a copy of windows XP above the "Mactax".
I think it's debateable the impact that boot camp will have on market share. I think there is growing dissatisfaction with the windows os, but that's just my impression, not supported by data. My point is that boot camp is a bold attempt to lure windows users to the mac platform. The software bait is there but the hardware isn't. Again, for mac users the current offerings are by in large adequate for the niche market it serves. Inadequate for going after switchers.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Biggest complaint from a very tiny minority.
It's not worth it right now for Apple to change their model to accomodate maybe 5% of users. Maybe they'll care when they've got 15-20% of the market share...disappointing, maybe...a bad move by Apple, absolutely not.
Right now Apple's market share is the "tiny minority". I doubt very seriously that Apple could come anywhere near 15 - 20% market share with their current line-up.
Originally posted by melgross
They can't get to anything like that with the selection they have now.
It isn't a tiny minority either. It's a fair amount of people. Quite a few people don't want to have to go from a Mini, to an iMac, to a Powermac.
They need catagories between these three.
I agree, but for one small addendum; For many the iMac AIO isn't even considered an option, so, your quote becomes, "Quite a few people don't want to have to go from a Mini to a Powermac." Then you're looking at a gapping $1200 hole in the line-up.
Don't get me wrong, I like my iMac, but it isn't what I wanted. I bought it because it was the best solution Apple offered me, but I am addicted to OS X.
However, potential switchers aren't addicted to OS X. Most potential switchers find Windows serviceable, if not somewhat a pain. NOTE that I said potential switchers, which in all probability is a minority of Windows users, most Windows users are content with Windows. Apple must lower the barriers as much as possible to attract potential switchers.
Intel helped, Bootcamp helped, combined I fully expect Apple's market share to climb somewhat, but not to 15 - 20%. IMHO that is a pipe dream, unless Apple offers an additional model(s).
Then again I could be wrong, I hope so, because I really don't think Apple will ever offer what is the most recurring, perpetual topic on Mac centric bulletin boards and quite frankly I don't think Apple cares one whit.
since the games are immersive and in a game you aren't really using the total windows operating system (not explorer, not bundled software etc.) I wonder if it would be possible to just boot into a partial windows system seemlessly. Maybe Parrallels could sell some sort sort of partial windows driver system so that PC games would run on a Mac. Instead of paying $199 for the whole operating system maybe Parrallels could sell some sort of $100 PC gaming loader. Who would know about this?
Apple's never gonna reach 20% market share (at least not in the next 10 years)...so it's totally unnecessary to cater to a very select few people that would like to have very specific hardware in their machine.
Complain, cry, whine all you want...it's not gonna happen.
Intel is ready to start moving all their processors to 4 cores in the spring of next year with the kentsfield leading the way. And your talking about buying Machines to last you a few years that are not using the core architecture? The Core Solo is the last single core processor your probably ever going to see, and it spanks a Pentium D doesn't it?
Some of these requests seem absolutely ridiculous to me I am sorry.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
My 15-20% market share comment was nothing more than to show you guys that it's not gonna happen. I'm glad you all figured it out.
Apple's never gonna reach 20% market share (at least not in the next 10 years)...so it's totally unnecessary to cater to a very select few people that would like to have very specific hardware in their machine.
Complain, cry, whine all you want...it's not gonna happen.
I agree that it's unlikely, but look at the damage AMD did to intel. Still 10% may be doable and would keep developers in the platform.
Originally posted by onlooker
I think the real reason Apple refuses on going backwards on processors is because there will be no new games playable on a Pentium D with a mediocre graphics chip in a year. YOur computers will be so far behind in a year f you buy that junk you'll be disgusted with your self for being such an idiot. Intel is ready to start moving all their processors to 4 cores in the spring of next year with the kentsfield leading the way. And your talking about buying Machines to last you a few years that are not using the core architecture? The Core Solo is the last single core processor your probably ever going to see, and it spanks a Pentium D doesn't it?
Some of these requests seem absolutely ridiculous to me I am sorry.
I don't know how a core solo stacks up against a Pent D. The Pent D 820 is a dual core chip. Anandtech had a review on it recently and felt it was a nice bargain at $165. Again I wouldn't be buying any of Intels netburst chips but for switchers it may be attractive at the right price. Again, if apple is serious about attracting switchers, and boot camp suggests they are, they need to increase their product offerings. Below is link to anandtech article.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=2736
It's what most people expect/want when switching because it's all they know.
Apple just needs to find a way to give it a nice deisgn and not much of a premium.
And no, the Cube was not it. It's not the same thing when it comes to customization, servicability, look and especially price.
They need for once to make a REGULAR computer, but with an apple design.
If it was just a regular shaped pc tower that way it would have the upgradability that people THINK they need but with nice apple styling switchers would appreciate that.
Obviously to accomidate that the product line would need to change a bit (the mini would have to cheaper like 699 MAX) but it could fit.
I'm talking:
1.66GHz Intel Core Duo
512MB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Trayloading SuperDrive
128MB ATI Graphics
AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth
In a tower for $999 but with nice apple case design.
That would kill switchers, most don't want more than a basic computer and get confused or afriad of different sizes or everything built in.
Most people aren't computer savy at ALL.
They just want a computer that works, and that looks like a computer.
I've seen a lot people think the PM G5 was it. They ooh and ahh and leave once they see the price tag. To them this is the closest thing to a "normal computer" that apple offers.
If Apple built it, they would come.
Originally posted by ecking
I believe apple could absolutely use a "dull little box" in their product line.
It's what most people expect/want when switching because it's all they know.
Apple just needs to find a way to give it a nice deisgn and not much of a premium.
And no, the Cube was not it. It's not the same thing when it comes to customization, servicability, look and especially price.
They need for once to make a REGULAR computer, but with an apple design.
If it was just a regular shaped pc tower that way it would have the upgradability that people THINK they need but with nice apple styling switchers would appreciate that.
Obviously to accomidate that the product line would need to change a bit (the mini would have to cheaper like 699 MAX) but it could fit.
I'm talking:
1.66GHz Intel Core Duo
512MB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Trayloading SuperDrive
128MB ATI Graphics
AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth
In a tower for $999 but with nice apple case design.
That would kill switchers, most don't want more than a basic computer and get confused or afriad of different sizes or everything built in.
Most people aren't computer savy at ALL.
They just want a computer that works, and that looks like a computer.
I've seen a lot people think the PM G5 was it. They ooh and ahh and leave once they see the price tag. To them this is the closest thing to a "normal computer" that apple offers.
If Apple built it, they would come.
Why put in the ICD? Most PC switchers would be happier with a cheaper Pent D. IMO. Throw in a Pent D 820 or a Pent D 805, cheaper still at $130.