The end of the VIAO Towers suprised the heck out of me so I went looking for other "premium brand" towers.
Um...who makes any? Toshiba dropped out in 2001. I guess Lenovo. There are some gaming rig companies but nothing like Sony was. Lenovo's offerings suck.
I don't think branding would help Apple sell overpriced towers if Sony couldn't. With 31% margins they'd be overpriced and I don't think that will help convince folks to switch. At least with the AIO and SFF form factors that premium is offset by style. OSX is what you're trying to convince folks to try and being the odd kid on the block has both pros and cons even with BootCamp.
And with the desktop market revenues "compressing" even more there's not a chance Apple is going tower except a lower end Mac Pro to compete at the lower end workstation market around $1699.
I am also not denying that there is risk in lowering profits by introducing an xMac, but again if Apple truly wishes to increase market share, which by the way they have stated on at least two occasions during quarterly reports, they probably need to offer something beyond the current product matrix. And based on the extraordinary sales in their laptop lines, I have to believe the risk right now, or even in the previous couple of years, is limited.
And they just said that since their current growth rate exceeds that of the industry they have no reason to lower their prices to gain share. That likely includes changing their lineup to include towers.
So you can't use their desire to gain share to argue for towers at this juncture if they aren't even willing to lower their ASP down from 31% margins which is the most painless way to gain sales (in comparison to introducing a whole new product line).
Desktop units were down 4 percent year-over-year while revenue rose 5 percent. Sequentially, desktops rose 2 percent in units and 10 percent in revenue.
This says Apple desktop sales were down 4 percent from the previous year. You are claiming sales of desktops were up.
The fact that sales rose 2 percent from the quarter before is meaningless unless we know what they rose sequentially the year before. The latest quarter is likely a better quarter historically, year after year, and who know what they rose sequentially last year? It was likely much more than 2 percent.
Another point. Just saying how much sales rose is not useful if sales of PC desktops rose. Did Apple's MARKET SHARE of desktops rise or fall sequentially this last quarter?
Another point. Just saying how much sales rose is not useful if sales of PC desktops rose. Did Apple's MARKET SHARE of desktops rise or fall sequentially this last quarter?
\
Exactly. Talking about unit numbers and whether they've gone up or down year-over-year or sequentially is pointless in the context of this discussion. Most "xMac advocates" believe that Apple cannot capture additional desktop market share without one.
Others believe that whilst the xMac would attract more customers, it would probably not be enough to offset cannibalisation within the installed user-base.
Then there is the additional question as to whether capturing more market share of a shrinking market segment is really worth bothering with. If the market is shrinking fast enough, there's no point for Apple.
This says Apple desktop sales were down 4 percent from the previous year. You are claiming sales of desktops were up.
You're not following what I was saying, I was comparing Dell, HP, and Apple's quarterly's. I did say Apple yearly was down 4%.
Quote:
Another point. Just saying how much sales rose is not useful if sales of PC desktops rose. Did Apple's MARKET SHARE of desktops rise or fall sequentially this last quarter?
Dell and HP desktops only rose by a very slight amount. Mostly because of their price war. In which Dell and HP grow meager market share at the cost of profit. Over the entire industry desktop sales are down 3% from 2005 to 2006. Even more over all computer sales are expected to only grow 8% in 2007, versus 15% in previous years.
Quote:
Exactly. Talking about unit numbers and whether they've gone up or down year-over-year or sequentially is pointless in the context of this discussion.
It does have a point when people proclaim that every other OEM is doing well in desktops except for Apple because of the iMac. This just isn't true.
Quote:
Then there is the additional question as to whether capturing more market share of a shrinking market segment is really worth bothering with. If the market is shrinking fast enough, there's no point for Apple.
Its not that difficult to understand people just don't want to acknowledge. Laptops grew 35% across the entire industry and 65% specifically for Apple. While desktops declined across the industry declined 5%.
The desktop downturn is only one of many obvious signs of where this is all going.
- The entire computer industry is selling less machines as the years go on.
- IBM selling its entire PC division
- As Vinea pointed out premium companies such as Toshiba and Sony leaving the desktop market to the price war between Dell, Gateway, HP. The fact that these divisions can survive and profit only selling laptops says a lot.
- Retailers such as Best Buy/ Circuit City giving prominent shelf space to laptops while desktops are being pushed to the back and slowly diminishing. The same thing happened when DVD's began to gain prominent shelf space and eventually pushed VHS out of the stores.
The only thing Premium about the VAIO desktops was the price. Other that that, they were the same cheap MATX stuff that HP, Dell, and Gateway sold. Also, if the computer industry is shrinking, how could Apple loose w full precentage point while selling more computers?
The only thing Premium about the VAIO desktops was the price. Other that that, they were the same cheap MATX stuff that HP, Dell, and Gateway sold.
And a Lexus is a Camry with different badges.
The VAIOs were built for looks (as much as towers can be), home media and integration with other Sony products.
Quote:
Also, if the computer industry is shrinking, how could Apple loose w full precentage point while selling more computers?
Computer industry is growing but only at 8% and that's over a year. These numbers are quarterly.
You can sell more computers in a quarter and lose share if another quarter is your strong quarter (relative to the market). In other words you gain a lot of share in your strong quarter relative to the market even if total units are moderate. You can sell even more units the next quarter but still lose some (or all) the share gained because the other manufacturers sell even more because this is their stronger season.
In any case we have 2 scenarios:
Company A sold 4% fewer units of a certain type year-over-year but gained 5% in revenue.
Company D sold 4% more units of a certain type year-over-year but lost 3% in revenue.
Company A is a premium brand company. Company D is a volume brand company.
I think this thread definitely taught me one thing. And that is there is too many variables involved with releasing this 'xMac'. I'm just going to break down and buy a Mac Pro when the Rev B's are released.
The SKY IS FALLING. The desktop computer market is shrinking, and we will all use nothing but laptops 10 years from now. BULL.
We don't have enough information to figure out what the market is doing. What is the installed base of desktops and what is it for laptops? We are seeing some adjustment for sure, but we cannot simply state that the desktop market is drying up. There are many, many possible scenarios.
My gut feeling is that we are seeing more and more multi-computer homes, and for many it is the opportunity to get their first laptop. The desktop market is not going away. It is being supplemented with more first time laptop owners. Does anyone know the installed base? Desktops may still outnumber laptops two to one, or more. Rather than buying a new desktop for their one and only computer, many people are getting a laptop for their second computer. Just wait. Further down the road it will be time to upgrade the desktop, rather than the laptop.
Okay. The above is pure speculation, but it has as good a chance of being right as some of the other theories being put forward. Also, the current trend may represent more computers in the hands of youth. Our son has his friends over to play games, and most of them bring laptops now, not desktops. (His room stays cooler that way too.)
The CURRENT trend is for higher laptop sales, but desktop computers are here to stay, my friends.
OK you took that line out of its full context so I got confused as to what you were talking about. But it says nothing about people waiting for Vista.
According to MS earnings no significant number of people are holding out waiting for Vista.
Microsoft sales unharmed by Vista delays: With holiday PC sales apparently unscathed by the lack of Windows Vista, Microsoft reported quarterly earnings Thursday that topped expectations and its own forecast.
And Microsoft just announced that their quarterly earnings did not meet expectations because of the delays introducing Vista and updated software. Yes, people are waiting on Vista.
Appleinsider[/url] article, the notebooks actually were down 2% quarter to quarter.
Desktop units were down 4 percent year-over-year while revenue rose 5 percent. Sequentially, desktops rose 2 percent in units and 10 percent in revenue.
Also in the Appleinsider article:
"Mac sales grew at about 3 times IDC's published growth rate for the PC market during the quarter." (this is overall growth correct, including desktops and laptops?)
Desktop sales have been flat, the '3 times the published growth rate for the PC market' is due exclusively to laptop sales. Which means that Apple's laptop sales as a % market share has been beyond remarkable it has been borderline miraculous. My math may be a bit fuzzy, but that would indicate that Apple's laptop sales has been about 6 times the PC laptop market rate.
"3 times" Yet, still desktop gains in market share are pathetic, dismal, disappointing. Why? Oh, yes, it's because everyone is switching to laptops and desktops don't represent any chance for Apple to make additional profit nor increase it's desktop market share. I disagree, completely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
Because Apple does not sell millions of unprofitable $600 POS machines to business.
Yet Dell and presumably HP sell millions of $800 - $1600 computers that have higher profit margins. They have to, to offset the razor thin margins on those $300 - $400 bargain basement sales. We know this because M. Dell has admitted as much in quarterly statements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
That's way too late. They need to see the industry change and adjust now. Which is what Apple is doing and why Apple is flush with profit.
Too late? I don't know the exact figures but don't desktops still account for ~ 40 to 50% of total sales? Even at 30% we'd be talking millions upon millions of computers overall for the what the next 10 - 15 years.
And what's to adjust? Just exactly how hard would it be for Apple to design an elegant xMac, 3 months, 6 months? Apple is now using industry standard parts, no exotic PPC and controller chips to deal with.
The desktop downturn is only one of many obvious signs of where this is all going.
... The fact that these divisions can survive and profit only selling laptops says a lot.
..
They can or may make this decision because they are selling to 95% of the market with identical software, Microsoft. And if enough companies do this, then I predict that the remaining competitors will have less competition and profit margins rise for desktops.
So, not saying you would but, would you propose that Apple could survive in the computer industry only selling laptops?
The SKY IS FALLING. The desktop computer market is shrinking, and we will all use nothing but laptops 10 years from now. BULL.
We don't have enough information to figure out what the market is doing. What is the installed base of desktops and what is it for laptops? We are seeing some adjustment for sure, but we cannot simply state that the desktop market is drying up. There are many, many possible scenarios.
My gut feeling is that we are seeing more and more multi-computer homes, and for many it is the opportunity to get their first laptop. The desktop market is not going away. It is being supplemented with more first time laptop owners. Does anyone know the installed base? Desktops may still outnumber laptops two to one, or more. Rather than buying a new desktop for their one and only computer, many people are getting a laptop for their second computer. Just wait. Further down the road it will be time to upgrade the desktop, rather than the laptop.
Okay. The above is pure speculation, but it has as good a chance of being right as some of the other theories being put forward. Also, the current trend may represent more computers in the hands of youth. Our son has his friends over to play games, and most of them bring laptops now, not desktops. (His room stays cooler that way too.)
The CURRENT trend is for higher laptop sales, but desktop computers are here to stay, my friends.
The Ironic point is that the "xMac" crowd is less likely to transition to a laptop for their main computer than the potential iMac buyers. Let's face it, the iMac is non-portable Laptop without a expresscard slot. It doesn't offer much the MBP does not. A tower on the other hand is not crippled by a single half speed laptop optical drives, slower hard drives, lack of max memory, and upgradeable graphics.
I think this thread definitely taught me one thing. And that is there is too many variables involved with releasing this 'xMac'. I'm just going to break down and buy a Mac Pro when the Rev B's are released.
Celerons 520/530/540 now makes sense for Ben's suggestion of an upgrade path and price cut for the Mac mini: only 533FSB, but with speeds of 1.6, 1.73 and 1.86GHz.
U7600/7500 fuels possibilities of lighter Pro notebooks/tablets (or whatever they may be called).
The surprise in this article is the X7800 for Santa Rosa, Core 2 Extreme for notebooks?
X suggests a higher TDP, 7 is for Merom/Santa Rosa and the 800 a speed of 2.6GHz.
Could be a nice upgrade for the 24" iMac that has room enough to keep it cool or for the 17" MacBook Pro or, wildly suggested, an all new 20" MBP?
This is a little OT, but I thought I share it with you as it is eventually relevant to future Apple computers.
I don't know about the release of an xMac anymore, in fact the launch of the iPhone made me wonder if we haven't just witnessed a preview of the next "plain old Macintosh", tablet-like, multi-touch, wireless, full-OSX, just like MOSR described the alleged "T-7" project from Apple. (no need to link, it's from MOSR).
With widescreen displays in the 10-20" sizes, this could replace the Mac mini, most iMacs and most MacBooks (Pro included). Almost everything in the $499-2499 range.
Anyway, an xMac is what I would want/need right NOW. Call it Mac Pro Jr., XServe mini or Home Server, whatever. Use Conroe/Kentsfield or Xeon versions (3000 series) with the appropriate chipset, make room for RAM, HDDs and PCIe expansion, and put that in a slim tower, component, cube or rackable enclosure, in the $999-1999 price range, and it will make my day. Offer it with the standard Mac OS X software (for regular users, content creators), Mac OS X Server (for small businesses) or Mac OS X Home Server (TBA). Keyboard & Mouse optional like for the Mac mini. I've just realize that, well designed, the same enclosure could be used vertically (xMac), horizontally (Home Server) and could receive rack adapters on each side (XServe mini). Same product, multiple software bundles, multiple usages, maybe enough sales to make it viable.
It depends on what is released. If the price simply drops 400 and there is no difference between the Rev A and Rev B for dual 2.66... then I may grab a rev a. I'm hoping for a new default graphics card. I think it's extremely silly to have a 90 dollar graphics card in a 2.5k dollar machine. I eye the refurbed machines every day on apple's store. I think they have some great deals there and they come with a year warranty. So why not?
Anyway, an xMac is what I would want/need right NOW. Call it Mac Pro Jr., XServe mini or Home Server, whatever. Use Conroe/Kentsfield or Xeon versions (3000 series) with the appropriate chipset, make room for RAM, HDDs and PCIe expansion, and put that in a slim tower, component, cube or rackable enclosure, in the $999-1999 price range, and it will make my day. Offer it with the standard Mac OS X software (for regular users, content creators), Mac OS X Server (for small businesses) or Mac OS X Home Server (TBA). Keyboard & Mouse optional like for the Mac mini. I've just realize that, well designed, the same enclosure could be used vertically (xMac), horizontally (Home Server) and could receive rack adapters on each side (XServe mini). Same product, multiple software bundles, multiple usages, maybe enough sales to make it viable.
I think you may be onto something. A desktop machine that can be used in multiple scenarios. I like it. Long as it's upgradeable, I'm all for it!
Also, if the computer industry is shrinking, how could Apple loose w full precentage point while selling more computers?
Look at Dell their desktop sales are up 4% and laptops sales up 36% but they are still loosing market share to HP.
Quote:
And Microsoft just announced that their quarterly earnings did not meet expectations because of the delays introducing Vista and updated software. Yes, people are waiting on Vista.
The article I linked said the exact opposite. Can you show me anything different
Quote:
Yet, still desktop gains in market share are pathetic, dismal, disappointing. Why? Oh, yes, it's because everyone is switching to laptops and desktops don't represent any chance for Apple to make additional profit nor increase it's desktop market share. I disagree, completely.
Look at it this way. We all talk about there being little difference between the Mac Book and the iMac. The MBP is no replacement for the Mac Pro if that is what you really need. If there isn't much difference between the two and the laptop is good enough for their needs. Why not buy the iMac if you really want a desktop? To me this says people really want the laptop.
Quote:
Yet Dell and presumably HP sell millions of $800 - $1600 computers that have higher profit margins. They have to, to offset the razor thin margins on those $300 - $400 bargain basement sales. We know this because M. Dell has admitted as much in quarterly statements.
Dells desktop revenue was down 3% and HP desktop revenue was flat. They both sold more desktops but Dell lost money and HP made no more than they did before. Which shows they are selling more sub $1000 desktops than they sell over $1000 desktops.
If you segregated their sales of over $1000 desktop, their desktop quarter would likely be about the same as Apples if not worse.
Quote:
Too late? I don't know the exact figures but don't desktops still account for ~ 40 to 50% of total sales? Even at 30% we'd be talking millions upon millions of computers overall for the what the next 10 - 15 years.
Apple right now is making far more money than others. Apples desktop revenue was up 5% year over year while Dell lost money and HP was flat. Who is the one making the best choices of three?
Comments
Um...who makes any? Toshiba dropped out in 2001. I guess Lenovo. There are some gaming rig companies but nothing like Sony was. Lenovo's offerings suck.
I don't think branding would help Apple sell overpriced towers if Sony couldn't. With 31% margins they'd be overpriced and I don't think that will help convince folks to switch. At least with the AIO and SFF form factors that premium is offset by style. OSX is what you're trying to convince folks to try and being the odd kid on the block has both pros and cons even with BootCamp.
And with the desktop market revenues "compressing" even more there's not a chance Apple is going tower except a lower end Mac Pro to compete at the lower end workstation market around $1699.
Vinea
I am also not denying that there is risk in lowering profits by introducing an xMac, but again if Apple truly wishes to increase market share, which by the way they have stated on at least two occasions during quarterly reports, they probably need to offer something beyond the current product matrix. And based on the extraordinary sales in their laptop lines, I have to believe the risk right now, or even in the previous couple of years, is limited.
And they just said that since their current growth rate exceeds that of the industry they have no reason to lower their prices to gain share. That likely includes changing their lineup to include towers.
So you can't use their desire to gain share to argue for towers at this juncture if they aren't even willing to lower their ASP down from 31% margins which is the most painless way to gain sales (in comparison to introducing a whole new product line).
Vinea
Desktop units were down 4 percent year-over-year while revenue rose 5 percent. Sequentially, desktops rose 2 percent in units and 10 percent in revenue.
This says Apple desktop sales were down 4 percent from the previous year. You are claiming sales of desktops were up.
The fact that sales rose 2 percent from the quarter before is meaningless unless we know what they rose sequentially the year before. The latest quarter is likely a better quarter historically, year after year, and who know what they rose sequentially last year? It was likely much more than 2 percent.
Another point. Just saying how much sales rose is not useful if sales of PC desktops rose. Did Apple's MARKET SHARE of desktops rise or fall sequentially this last quarter?
Another point. Just saying how much sales rose is not useful if sales of PC desktops rose. Did Apple's MARKET SHARE of desktops rise or fall sequentially this last quarter?
Exactly. Talking about unit numbers and whether they've gone up or down year-over-year or sequentially is pointless in the context of this discussion. Most "xMac advocates" believe that Apple cannot capture additional desktop market share without one.
Others believe that whilst the xMac would attract more customers, it would probably not be enough to offset cannibalisation within the installed user-base.
Then there is the additional question as to whether capturing more market share of a shrinking market segment is really worth bothering with. If the market is shrinking fast enough, there's no point for Apple.
This says Apple desktop sales were down 4 percent from the previous year. You are claiming sales of desktops were up.
You're not following what I was saying, I was comparing Dell, HP, and Apple's quarterly's. I did say Apple yearly was down 4%.
Another point. Just saying how much sales rose is not useful if sales of PC desktops rose. Did Apple's MARKET SHARE of desktops rise or fall sequentially this last quarter?
Dell and HP desktops only rose by a very slight amount. Mostly because of their price war. In which Dell and HP grow meager market share at the cost of profit. Over the entire industry desktop sales are down 3% from 2005 to 2006. Even more over all computer sales are expected to only grow 8% in 2007, versus 15% in previous years.
Exactly. Talking about unit numbers and whether they've gone up or down year-over-year or sequentially is pointless in the context of this discussion.
It does have a point when people proclaim that every other OEM is doing well in desktops except for Apple because of the iMac. This just isn't true.
Then there is the additional question as to whether capturing more market share of a shrinking market segment is really worth bothering with. If the market is shrinking fast enough, there's no point for Apple.
Its not that difficult to understand people just don't want to acknowledge. Laptops grew 35% across the entire industry and 65% specifically for Apple. While desktops declined across the industry declined 5%.
While desktops declined across the industry declined 5%.
I wouldn't consider 5% a year reduction to be too fast to bother with. It's still a huge market. But, the shrinkage may well accelerate.
- The entire computer industry is selling less machines as the years go on.
- IBM selling its entire PC division
- As Vinea pointed out premium companies such as Toshiba and Sony leaving the desktop market to the price war between Dell, Gateway, HP. The fact that these divisions can survive and profit only selling laptops says a lot.
- Retailers such as Best Buy/ Circuit City giving prominent shelf space to laptops while desktops are being pushed to the back and slowly diminishing. The same thing happened when DVD's began to gain prominent shelf space and eventually pushed VHS out of the stores.
The only thing Premium about the VAIO desktops was the price. Other that that, they were the same cheap MATX stuff that HP, Dell, and Gateway sold.
And a Lexus is a Camry with different badges.
The VAIOs were built for looks (as much as towers can be), home media and integration with other Sony products.
Also, if the computer industry is shrinking, how could Apple loose w full precentage point while selling more computers?
Computer industry is growing but only at 8% and that's over a year. These numbers are quarterly.
You can sell more computers in a quarter and lose share if another quarter is your strong quarter (relative to the market). In other words you gain a lot of share in your strong quarter relative to the market even if total units are moderate. You can sell even more units the next quarter but still lose some (or all) the share gained because the other manufacturers sell even more because this is their stronger season.
In any case we have 2 scenarios:
Company A sold 4% fewer units of a certain type year-over-year but gained 5% in revenue.
Company D sold 4% more units of a certain type year-over-year but lost 3% in revenue.
Company A is a premium brand company. Company D is a volume brand company.
Which company did better?
Vinea
We don't have enough information to figure out what the market is doing. What is the installed base of desktops and what is it for laptops? We are seeing some adjustment for sure, but we cannot simply state that the desktop market is drying up. There are many, many possible scenarios.
My gut feeling is that we are seeing more and more multi-computer homes, and for many it is the opportunity to get their first laptop. The desktop market is not going away. It is being supplemented with more first time laptop owners. Does anyone know the installed base? Desktops may still outnumber laptops two to one, or more. Rather than buying a new desktop for their one and only computer, many people are getting a laptop for their second computer. Just wait. Further down the road it will be time to upgrade the desktop, rather than the laptop.
Okay. The above is pure speculation, but it has as good a chance of being right as some of the other theories being put forward. Also, the current trend may represent more computers in the hands of youth. Our son has his friends over to play games, and most of them bring laptops now, not desktops. (His room stays cooler that way too.)
The CURRENT trend is for higher laptop sales, but desktop computers are here to stay, my friends.
see below
OK you took that line out of its full context so I got confused as to what you were talking about. But it says nothing about people waiting for Vista.
According to MS earnings no significant number of people are holding out waiting for Vista.
Microsoft sales unharmed by Vista delays: With holiday PC sales apparently unscathed by the lack of Windows Vista, Microsoft reported quarterly earnings Thursday that topped expectations and its own forecast.
And Microsoft just announced that their quarterly earnings did not meet expectations because of the delays introducing Vista and updated software. Yes, people are waiting on Vista.
From [url=http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2412
Appleinsider[/url] article, the notebooks actually were down 2% quarter to quarter.
Desktop units were down 4 percent year-over-year while revenue rose 5 percent. Sequentially, desktops rose 2 percent in units and 10 percent in revenue.
Also in the Appleinsider article:
"Mac sales grew at about 3 times IDC's published growth rate for the PC market during the quarter." (this is overall growth correct, including desktops and laptops?)
Desktop sales have been flat, the '3 times the published growth rate for the PC market' is due exclusively to laptop sales. Which means that Apple's laptop sales as a % market share has been beyond remarkable it has been borderline miraculous. My math may be a bit fuzzy, but that would indicate that Apple's laptop sales has been about 6 times the PC laptop market rate.
"3 times"
Because Apple does not sell millions of unprofitable $600 POS machines to business.
Yet Dell and presumably HP sell millions of $800 - $1600 computers that have higher profit margins. They have to, to offset the razor thin margins on those $300 - $400 bargain basement sales. We know this because M. Dell has admitted as much in quarterly statements.
That's way too late. They need to see the industry change and adjust now. Which is what Apple is doing and why Apple is flush with profit.
Too late? I don't know the exact figures but don't desktops still account for ~ 40 to 50% of total sales? Even at 30% we'd be talking millions upon millions of computers overall for the what the next 10 - 15 years.
And what's to adjust? Just exactly how hard would it be for Apple to design an elegant xMac, 3 months, 6 months? Apple is now using industry standard parts, no exotic PPC and controller chips to deal with.
The desktop downturn is only one of many obvious signs of where this is all going.
... The fact that these divisions can survive and profit only selling laptops says a lot.
..
They can or may make this decision because they are selling to 95% of the market with identical software, Microsoft. And if enough companies do this, then I predict that the remaining competitors will have less competition and profit margins rise for desktops.
So, not saying you would but, would you propose that Apple could survive in the computer industry only selling laptops?
The SKY IS FALLING. The desktop computer market is shrinking, and we will all use nothing but laptops 10 years from now. BULL.
We don't have enough information to figure out what the market is doing. What is the installed base of desktops and what is it for laptops? We are seeing some adjustment for sure, but we cannot simply state that the desktop market is drying up. There are many, many possible scenarios.
My gut feeling is that we are seeing more and more multi-computer homes, and for many it is the opportunity to get their first laptop. The desktop market is not going away. It is being supplemented with more first time laptop owners. Does anyone know the installed base? Desktops may still outnumber laptops two to one, or more. Rather than buying a new desktop for their one and only computer, many people are getting a laptop for their second computer. Just wait. Further down the road it will be time to upgrade the desktop, rather than the laptop.
Okay. The above is pure speculation, but it has as good a chance of being right as some of the other theories being put forward. Also, the current trend may represent more computers in the hands of youth. Our son has his friends over to play games, and most of them bring laptops now, not desktops. (His room stays cooler that way too.)
The CURRENT trend is for higher laptop sales, but desktop computers are here to stay, my friends.
The Ironic point is that the "xMac" crowd is less likely to transition to a laptop for their main computer than the potential iMac buyers. Let's face it, the iMac is non-portable Laptop without a expresscard slot. It doesn't offer much the MBP does not. A tower on the other hand is not crippled by a single half speed laptop optical drives, slower hard drives, lack of max memory, and upgradeable graphics.
I think this thread definitely taught me one thing. And that is there is too many variables involved with releasing this 'xMac'. I'm just going to break down and buy a Mac Pro when the Rev B's are released.
New or Used?
This is the year of Santa Rosa. Intel will produce a Core 2 Extreme X7800, a Celeron 540, and Core 2 Duo U7600 and U7500 for this.
A Celeron 530 is expected at the end of March, while Intel also promises Core 2 Solo Napa refresh chips the U2200 and the U2100.
Fool article here.
Celerons 520/530/540 now makes sense for Ben's suggestion of an upgrade path and price cut for the Mac mini: only 533FSB, but with speeds of 1.6, 1.73 and 1.86GHz.
U7600/7500 fuels possibilities of lighter Pro notebooks/tablets (or whatever they may be called).
The surprise in this article is the X7800 for Santa Rosa, Core 2 Extreme for notebooks?
X suggests a higher TDP, 7 is for Merom/Santa Rosa and the 800 a speed of 2.6GHz.
Could be a nice upgrade for the 24" iMac that has room enough to keep it cool or for the 17" MacBook Pro or, wildly suggested, an all new 20" MBP?
This is a little OT, but I thought I share it with you as it is eventually relevant to future Apple computers.
I don't know about the release of an xMac anymore, in fact the launch of the iPhone made me wonder if we haven't just witnessed a preview of the next "plain old Macintosh", tablet-like, multi-touch, wireless, full-OSX, just like MOSR described the alleged "T-7" project from Apple. (no need to link, it's from MOSR).
With widescreen displays in the 10-20" sizes, this could replace the Mac mini, most iMacs and most MacBooks (Pro included). Almost everything in the $499-2499 range.
Anyway, an xMac is what I would want/need right NOW. Call it Mac Pro Jr., XServe mini or Home Server, whatever. Use Conroe/Kentsfield or Xeon versions (3000 series) with the appropriate chipset, make room for RAM, HDDs and PCIe expansion, and put that in a slim tower, component, cube or rackable enclosure, in the $999-1999 price range, and it will make my day. Offer it with the standard Mac OS X software (for regular users, content creators), Mac OS X Server (for small businesses) or Mac OS X Home Server (TBA). Keyboard & Mouse optional like for the Mac mini. I've just realize that, well designed, the same enclosure could be used vertically (xMac), horizontally (Home Server) and could receive rack adapters on each side (XServe mini). Same product, multiple software bundles, multiple usages, maybe enough sales to make it viable.
New or Used?
It depends on what is released. If the price simply drops 400 and there is no difference between the Rev A and Rev B for dual 2.66... then I may grab a rev a. I'm hoping for a new default graphics card. I think it's extremely silly to have a 90 dollar graphics card in a 2.5k dollar machine. I eye the refurbed machines every day on apple's store. I think they have some great deals there and they come with a year warranty. So why not?
Anyway, an xMac is what I would want/need right NOW. Call it Mac Pro Jr., XServe mini or Home Server, whatever. Use Conroe/Kentsfield or Xeon versions (3000 series) with the appropriate chipset, make room for RAM, HDDs and PCIe expansion, and put that in a slim tower, component, cube or rackable enclosure, in the $999-1999 price range, and it will make my day. Offer it with the standard Mac OS X software (for regular users, content creators), Mac OS X Server (for small businesses) or Mac OS X Home Server (TBA). Keyboard & Mouse optional like for the Mac mini. I've just realize that, well designed, the same enclosure could be used vertically (xMac), horizontally (Home Server) and could receive rack adapters on each side (XServe mini). Same product, multiple software bundles, multiple usages, maybe enough sales to make it viable.
I think you may be onto something. A desktop machine that can be used in multiple scenarios. I like it. Long as it's upgradeable, I'm all for it!
Also, if the computer industry is shrinking, how could Apple loose w full precentage point while selling more computers?
Look at Dell their desktop sales are up 4% and laptops sales up 36% but they are still loosing market share to HP.
And Microsoft just announced that their quarterly earnings did not meet expectations because of the delays introducing Vista and updated software. Yes, people are waiting on Vista.
The article I linked said the exact opposite. Can you show me anything different
Yet, still desktop gains in market share are pathetic, dismal, disappointing. Why? Oh, yes, it's because everyone is switching to laptops and desktops don't represent any chance for Apple to make additional profit nor increase it's desktop market share. I disagree, completely.
Look at it this way. We all talk about there being little difference between the Mac Book and the iMac. The MBP is no replacement for the Mac Pro if that is what you really need. If there isn't much difference between the two and the laptop is good enough for their needs. Why not buy the iMac if you really want a desktop? To me this says people really want the laptop.
Yet Dell and presumably HP sell millions of $800 - $1600 computers that have higher profit margins. They have to, to offset the razor thin margins on those $300 - $400 bargain basement sales. We know this because M. Dell has admitted as much in quarterly statements.
Dells desktop revenue was down 3% and HP desktop revenue was flat. They both sold more desktops but Dell lost money and HP made no more than they did before. Which shows they are selling more sub $1000 desktops than they sell over $1000 desktops.
If you segregated their sales of over $1000 desktop, their desktop quarter would likely be about the same as Apples if not worse.
Too late? I don't know the exact figures but don't desktops still account for ~ 40 to 50% of total sales? Even at 30% we'd be talking millions upon millions of computers overall for the what the next 10 - 15 years.
Apple right now is making far more money than others. Apples desktop revenue was up 5% year over year while Dell lost money and HP was flat. Who is the one making the best choices of three?