But Apple's computers ARE price competitive. Really.
Go price up another small form factor computer as small as the Mac Mini, or AIO as well designed as the iMac or even a workstation like the MacPro.
Their laptop prices are ok too. Go price Core Duo laptops from decent manufactuers not the Packard Bell end of the market. They're pretty competitive.
What they don't do is produce cheap crap with low margins and generic design and that seems to be what you're asking them to do.
It depends on what you want in a computer. If you want the whole kit and are willing to live with the notebook optical drive, what Apple has is very good for the money. If you already have a display you like, want dedicated graphics, full size optical drives, or any kind of expansion, the price starts to skyrocket.
You didn't even try to respond to that. If you don't have something remotely coherent to say, why bother? Did you think this was a gibberish board? It's an English one.
Here is your direct quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat
"People that upgrade graphics cards fall into three categories:"
You left out an entire group of consumers that orginally purchased computers with integrated graphics. For whatever reason, they decide they need to purchase a graphics card. Well, anyone that purchases a Mac mini is not provided this option - ever. Hope that clears up my gibberish.
Don't need to talk about these specifically. The costs are spread out across Apple's product line. It is sufficient to aim for Apple's usual 28% margins.
People who buy desktop (not all-in-one) computers that cost around $999.
Pretty big given that all of Apple's competition have models that thoroughly cover this price bracket.
Everyone else who makes computers. Just like all of Apple's other line-ups.
It's an x86 Mac, what do you expect?
Of course.
That should be obvious from the number of PCIe slots (1 free), optical drive slots (1, filled by default), HDD bays (2, 1 filled by default), and 4 RAM slots. Prices for the upgrades would be Apple's standard prices. People could always upgrade the machine themselves after-market.
These are all supplied with the Mac Mini and iMac, both of which have high margins.
Let's start with the current 20" iMac, which has the following specs:
2.16 GHz Merom
1 GB laptop RAM
250 GB desktop HDD
8 x dual-layer DVD burning laptop optical drive
128 MB X1600 graphics
Built-in iSight
Front Row
Airport and Bluetooth
Price: $1499
The 20" Cinema Display costs $699.
Let's say the iMac has a margin of 29% and the Cinema Display a margin of 35%
This means that the component + assembly + shipping costs of the iMac are $1065.
The component + assembly + shipping costs of the Cinema Display are $454
Assuming the assembly and shipping costs of the Cinema Display and 20" iMac are equal, that means the component costs of the iMac without display are $611.
going over the $799 tower component by component:
1.86 GHz E6300 Conroe (-$120. Intel's latest price list doesn't have Merom prices, but I believe they cost the same as the Yonahs. The price list is here. Based upon those prices, the difference would be $240. I halved that to account for the fact that Apple buy 100's of thousands of CPUs rather than thousands)
No iSight (-$5)
512 MB Desktop RAM (-$25)
160 GB HDD (-$6)
Draw-loading Combo Drive (-$40)
ATI-X1600 (+$0)
A $799 tower with 28% margin has component+assembly+shipping costs of $575.28, so that leaves $160 (575 - (611 - 120 - 5 - 25 - 6 - 40)) for a case, assembly and shipping. Which is plenty.
I'd like to say once again that it is quite possible that the desktop market is shrinking fast enough to not make it worth Apple developing this machine.
Good break down. One thing. I believe the market share for desktops decreased, but total sales increased somewhere around 2%. I am getting old and my memory may be fading, but I believe that number is close, so no the desktop market isn't shrinking in absolute sales only as a percent of sales, I think.
Good break down. One thing. I believe the market share for desktops decreased, but total sales increased somewhere around 2%. I am getting old and my memory may be fading, but I believe that number is close, so no the desktop market isn't shrinking in absolute sales only as a percent of sales, I think.
Except that the desktop market isn't shrinking all that fast.
Laptop numbers are going up faster, but desktop numbers are going up as well.
The price catagory is what matters for Apple. If the fastest area of growth for desktops, as I think it is from what I've read, is in the $500 to $600 area, that would leave Apple out of it no matter what. Because that could very well mean that higher priced desktops are shrinking in marketshare, which is not what Apple might want to move into.
Except that the desktop market isn't shrinking all that fast.
Laptop numbers are going up faster, but desktop numbers are going up as well.
The price catagory is what matters for Apple. If the fastest area of growth for desktops, as I think it is from what I've read, is in the $500 to $600 area, that would leave Apple out of it no matter what. Because that could very well mean that higher priced desktops are shrinking in marketshare, which is not what Apple might want to move into.
Exactly. Laptops are on the up and desktops on the down in the wealthy world, but in places like India and China and South America, it's still (cheap) desktops all the way, and i think if apple wants to get in on those markets, even if it's just to get their brand happening there for the future, they might really try some sort of budget desktop line.
Exactly. Laptops are on the up and desktops on the down in the wealthy world, but in places like India and China and South America, it's still (cheap) desktops all the way, and i think if apple wants to get in on those markets, even if it's just to get their brand happening there for the future, they might really try some sort of budget desktop line.
It's even happening here as lower income people are buying into the computer field as well, in increasing numbers.
That's why GTW is still around, and Dell and Hp have lower priced models.
But Apple has to have a machine that exudes the "Mac Experience". I believe that jobs said something to that effect.
They likely don't think that they can do that in certain price ranges.
Laptops are on the up and desktops on the down in the wealthy world, but in places like India and China and South America, it's still (cheap) desktops all the way, and i think if apple wants to get in on those markets, even if it's just to get their brand happening there for the future, they might really try some sort of budget desktop line.
This goes back to my earlier post about how educated/affluent consumers support Apple market share and prices.
Quote:
Because Apple is an alternative instead of the norm. Apple customers are generally educated about and actively choose to buy an Apple computer. Apple only charges premium prices which means Apple customers are generally doing well for themselves. Even though Apple has only 6% of the US market, it holds the most desirable 6% of the market.
The better educated more affluent portion of the market is more likely to pay more money for a computer. More likely to buy expensive professional software. More likely to buy a new computer within 3 years. More likely to update their expensive professional software. And less likely to need extensive customer service.
The less educated or less affluent portion of the computer market is more likely to buy bargain priced computers. More likely to steal software or only use the software that originally came with the computer. More likely to use a computer until it no longer functions before buying a new computer. And more likely to need extensive customer service, which can raise the cost and lower the quality of a companies customer service.
Even with Apple's small marketshare Apple accounts for a large portion of professional media software. As much as 50% of Avid sales are to Mac users. 60% of ProTools sales are to Mac users. 40% of Adobe professional software sales are to Mac users.
From all signs this is the market Apple actively depends on.
This goes back to my earlier post about how educated/affluent consumers support Apple market share and prices.
So do the brainless monkeys who buy it just because it looks nice, and have the money to do so... Macbooks have become real accessories even though a lot of their owners only use them to search the net for Paris Hilton gossip...
So do the brainless monkeys who buy it just because it looks nice, and have the money to do so... Macbooks have become real accessories even though a lot of their owners only use them to search the net for Paris Hilton gossip...
It depends on what you want in a computer. If you want the whole kit and are willing to live with the notebook optical drive, what Apple has is very good for the money. If you already have a display you like, want dedicated graphics, full size optical drives, or any kind of expansion, the price starts to skyrocket.
No.
If you don't want a cheap mini PC, a reasonably priced mid-high range laptop, an AIO or a workstation then Apple don't do a computer for you. Yes, they have a hole in their range. The prices don't skyrocket, they just don't do the midrange desktop you're after.
We know all this already. I'm sure they do too.
The question is, how big a hole is it and can it be filled by marketing?
Personally, I think the hole is tiny but you have to convince people that having slots in a box you never upgrade is not something they actually want and that an iMac is the answer. IMHO it is but you've got to convince PC switchers that computing has moved on since the 90s.
I am drooling over a Macbook. But I really need connectivity on the road and Apple doesn't support many data cards except for some 3G network providers in the US. Someone convince them or Falcom to develop a driver for the Samba 75 please. http://www.falcom.de/index.php?id=198
Back on topic. Apple's new laptop line is very attractive. Their Mac Pro lines are still pricey imo.
I am drooling over a Macbook. But I really need connectivity on the road and Apple doesn't support many data cards except for some 3G network providers in the US. Someone convince them or Falcom to develop a driver for the Samba 75 please. http://www.falcom.de/index.php?id=198
Back on topic. Apple's new laptop line is very attractive. Their Mac Pro lines are still pricey imo.
Why don't you just use your phone?
That's what I've done since about 2001. Bluetooth on both Mac and Phone. What more do you need? Or do you have a provider that blocks bluetooth so they can sell you more expensive data cards?
That's what I've done since about 2001. Bluetooth on both Mac and Phone. What more do you need? Or do you have a provider that blocks bluetooth so they can sell you more expensive data cards?
Transfer documents that usually run to 10-30MB while I am commuting and check emails, etc. How fast is Bluetooth for the data volume that I am looking at? I haven't explored this option.
If you don't want a cheap mini PC, a reasonably priced mid-high range laptop, an AIO or a workstation then Apple don't do a computer for you. Yes, they have a hole in their range. The prices don't skyrocket, they just don't do the midrange desktop you're after.
We know all this already. I'm sure they do too.
The question is, how big a hole is it and can it be filled by marketing?
Personally, I think the hole is tiny but you have to convince people that having slots in a box you never upgrade is not something they actually want and that an iMac is the answer. IMHO it is but you've got to convince PC switchers that computing has moved on since the 90s.
I used to be just like you. I thought Apple could do no wrong, that they always had the perfect solution. As I got older, I began to think for myself and several inconstancies popped up. What it comes down to is this, you think you are representative of all home computer users. As such anyone with a brain should want exactly what you want. If not, there must be some kind of outside influence effecting those who do not see the light and buy a Mac right?
The all in one is not some giant leap forward in computer design, it is a separate path for a different kind of user. In fact, it's been around since the beginning. My first home computer was an all in one Performa 5200 all the way back in mid 1995. The iMac may be the computer of tomorrow, but it is hampered by current technology. The Notebook optical drive is significantly slower than desktop models. You can't fit a 18x burner in an iMac with what we have available. In fact, burning a dual layer disc is so slow its almost useless. You can't fit a card reader in the case, so you're stuck with downloading all your pictures instead of picking and choosing. These make the iMac LESS functional, not more. Of course, you can add these devices through external ports, but that defeats the whole purpose of an all in one, doesn't it? The iMac is for those who want power and simplicity. That amounts to at most 5% of desktop buyers.
Okay, found it. Using a program to do what should show up in the GUI? What is this windows? This is one of the few software areas that I am very disappointed in Apple.
Comments
But Apple's computers ARE price competitive. Really.
Go price up another small form factor computer as small as the Mac Mini, or AIO as well designed as the iMac or even a workstation like the MacPro.
Their laptop prices are ok too. Go price Core Duo laptops from decent manufactuers not the Packard Bell end of the market. They're pretty competitive.
What they don't do is produce cheap crap with low margins and generic design and that seems to be what you're asking them to do.
It depends on what you want in a computer. If you want the whole kit and are willing to live with the notebook optical drive, what Apple has is very good for the money. If you already have a display you like, want dedicated graphics, full size optical drives, or any kind of expansion, the price starts to skyrocket.
You didn't even try to respond to that. If you don't have something remotely coherent to say, why bother? Did you think this was a gibberish board? It's an English one.
Here is your direct quote:
"People that upgrade graphics cards fall into three categories:"
You left out an entire group of consumers that orginally purchased computers with integrated graphics. For whatever reason, they decide they need to purchase a graphics card. Well, anyone that purchases a Mac mini is not provided this option - ever. Hope that clears up my gibberish.
O.K. This is done at the bottom.
Don't need to talk about these specifically. The costs are spread out across Apple's product line. It is sufficient to aim for Apple's usual 28% margins.
People who buy desktop (not all-in-one) computers that cost around $999.
Pretty big given that all of Apple's competition have models that thoroughly cover this price bracket.
Everyone else who makes computers. Just like all of Apple's other line-ups.
Of course.
That should be obvious from the number of PCIe slots (1 free), optical drive slots (1, filled by default), HDD bays (2, 1 filled by default), and 4 RAM slots. Prices for the upgrades would be Apple's standard prices. People could always upgrade the machine themselves after-market.
These are all supplied with the Mac Mini and iMac, both of which have high margins.
Let's start with the current 20" iMac, which has the following specs:
2.16 GHz Merom
1 GB laptop RAM
250 GB desktop HDD
8 x dual-layer DVD burning laptop optical drive
128 MB X1600 graphics
Built-in iSight
Front Row
Airport and Bluetooth
Price: $1499
The 20" Cinema Display costs $699.
Let's say the iMac has a margin of 29% and the Cinema Display a margin of 35%
This means that the component + assembly + shipping costs of the iMac are $1065.
The component + assembly + shipping costs of the Cinema Display are $454
Assuming the assembly and shipping costs of the Cinema Display and 20" iMac are equal, that means the component costs of the iMac without display are $611.
going over the $799 tower component by component:
1.86 GHz E6300 Conroe (-$120. Intel's latest price list doesn't have Merom prices, but I believe they cost the same as the Yonahs. The price list is here. Based upon those prices, the difference would be $240. I halved that to account for the fact that Apple buy 100's of thousands of CPUs rather than thousands)
No iSight (-$5)
512 MB Desktop RAM (-$25)
160 GB HDD (-$6)
Draw-loading Combo Drive (-$40)
ATI-X1600 (+$0)
A $799 tower with 28% margin has component+assembly+shipping costs of $575.28, so that leaves $160 (575 - (611 - 120 - 5 - 25 - 6 - 40)) for a case, assembly and shipping. Which is plenty.
I'd like to say once again that it is quite possible that the desktop market is shrinking fast enough to not make it worth Apple developing this machine.
Good break down. One thing. I believe the market share for desktops decreased, but total sales increased somewhere around 2%. I am getting old and my memory may be fading, but I believe that number is close, so no the desktop market isn't shrinking in absolute sales only as a percent of sales, I think.
Good break down. One thing. I believe the market share for desktops decreased, but total sales increased somewhere around 2%. I am getting old and my memory may be fading, but I believe that number is close, so no the desktop market isn't shrinking in absolute sales only as a percent of sales, I think.
Except that the desktop market isn't shrinking all that fast.
Laptop numbers are going up faster, but desktop numbers are going up as well.
The price catagory is what matters for Apple. If the fastest area of growth for desktops, as I think it is from what I've read, is in the $500 to $600 area, that would leave Apple out of it no matter what. Because that could very well mean that higher priced desktops are shrinking in marketshare, which is not what Apple might want to move into.
Except that the desktop market isn't shrinking all that fast.
Laptop numbers are going up faster, but desktop numbers are going up as well.
The price catagory is what matters for Apple. If the fastest area of growth for desktops, as I think it is from what I've read, is in the $500 to $600 area, that would leave Apple out of it no matter what. Because that could very well mean that higher priced desktops are shrinking in marketshare, which is not what Apple might want to move into.
Exactly. Laptops are on the up and desktops on the down in the wealthy world, but in places like India and China and South America, it's still (cheap) desktops all the way, and i think if apple wants to get in on those markets, even if it's just to get their brand happening there for the future, they might really try some sort of budget desktop line.
Exactly. Laptops are on the up and desktops on the down in the wealthy world, but in places like India and China and South America, it's still (cheap) desktops all the way, and i think if apple wants to get in on those markets, even if it's just to get their brand happening there for the future, they might really try some sort of budget desktop line.
It's even happening here as lower income people are buying into the computer field as well, in increasing numbers.
That's why GTW is still around, and Dell and Hp have lower priced models.
But Apple has to have a machine that exudes the "Mac Experience". I believe that jobs said something to that effect.
They likely don't think that they can do that in certain price ranges.
Laptops are on the up and desktops on the down in the wealthy world, but in places like India and China and South America, it's still (cheap) desktops all the way, and i think if apple wants to get in on those markets, even if it's just to get their brand happening there for the future, they might really try some sort of budget desktop line.
This goes back to my earlier post about how educated/affluent consumers support Apple market share and prices.
Because Apple is an alternative instead of the norm. Apple customers are generally educated about and actively choose to buy an Apple computer. Apple only charges premium prices which means Apple customers are generally doing well for themselves. Even though Apple has only 6% of the US market, it holds the most desirable 6% of the market.
The better educated more affluent portion of the market is more likely to pay more money for a computer. More likely to buy expensive professional software. More likely to buy a new computer within 3 years. More likely to update their expensive professional software. And less likely to need extensive customer service.
The less educated or less affluent portion of the computer market is more likely to buy bargain priced computers. More likely to steal software or only use the software that originally came with the computer. More likely to use a computer until it no longer functions before buying a new computer. And more likely to need extensive customer service, which can raise the cost and lower the quality of a companies customer service.
Even with Apple's small marketshare Apple accounts for a large portion of professional media software. As much as 50% of Avid sales are to Mac users. 60% of ProTools sales are to Mac users. 40% of Adobe professional software sales are to Mac users.
From all signs this is the market Apple actively depends on.
This goes back to my earlier post about how educated/affluent consumers support Apple market share and prices.
So do the brainless monkeys who buy it just because it looks nice, and have the money to do so... Macbooks have become real accessories even though a lot of their owners only use them to search the net for Paris Hilton gossip...
So do the brainless monkeys who buy it just because it looks nice, and have the money to do so... Macbooks have become real accessories even though a lot of their owners only use them to search the net for Paris Hilton gossip...
Hey! You leave Paris alone!!!
It depends on what you want in a computer. If you want the whole kit and are willing to live with the notebook optical drive, what Apple has is very good for the money. If you already have a display you like, want dedicated graphics, full size optical drives, or any kind of expansion, the price starts to skyrocket.
No.
If you don't want a cheap mini PC, a reasonably priced mid-high range laptop, an AIO or a workstation then Apple don't do a computer for you. Yes, they have a hole in their range. The prices don't skyrocket, they just don't do the midrange desktop you're after.
We know all this already. I'm sure they do too.
The question is, how big a hole is it and can it be filled by marketing?
Personally, I think the hole is tiny but you have to convince people that having slots in a box you never upgrade is not something they actually want and that an iMac is the answer. IMHO it is but you've got to convince PC switchers that computing has moved on since the 90s.
Back on topic. Apple's new laptop line is very attractive. Their Mac Pro lines are still pricey imo.
I am drooling over a Macbook. But I really need connectivity on the road and Apple doesn't support many data cards except for some 3G network providers in the US. Someone convince them or Falcom to develop a driver for the Samba 75 please. http://www.falcom.de/index.php?id=198
Back on topic. Apple's new laptop line is very attractive. Their Mac Pro lines are still pricey imo.
Why don't you just use your phone?
That's what I've done since about 2001. Bluetooth on both Mac and Phone. What more do you need? Or do you have a provider that blocks bluetooth so they can sell you more expensive data cards?
Why don't you just use your phone?
That's what I've done since about 2001. Bluetooth on both Mac and Phone. What more do you need? Or do you have a provider that blocks bluetooth so they can sell you more expensive data cards?
Transfer documents that usually run to 10-30MB while I am commuting and check emails, etc. How fast is Bluetooth for the data volume that I am looking at? I haven't explored this option.
No.
If you don't want a cheap mini PC, a reasonably priced mid-high range laptop, an AIO or a workstation then Apple don't do a computer for you. Yes, they have a hole in their range. The prices don't skyrocket, they just don't do the midrange desktop you're after.
We know all this already. I'm sure they do too.
The question is, how big a hole is it and can it be filled by marketing?
Personally, I think the hole is tiny but you have to convince people that having slots in a box you never upgrade is not something they actually want and that an iMac is the answer. IMHO it is but you've got to convince PC switchers that computing has moved on since the 90s.
I used to be just like you. I thought Apple could do no wrong, that they always had the perfect solution. As I got older, I began to think for myself and several inconstancies popped up. What it comes down to is this, you think you are representative of all home computer users. As such anyone with a brain should want exactly what you want. If not, there must be some kind of outside influence effecting those who do not see the light and buy a Mac right?
The all in one is not some giant leap forward in computer design, it is a separate path for a different kind of user. In fact, it's been around since the beginning. My first home computer was an all in one Performa 5200 all the way back in mid 1995. The iMac may be the computer of tomorrow, but it is hampered by current technology. The Notebook optical drive is significantly slower than desktop models. You can't fit a 18x burner in an iMac with what we have available. In fact, burning a dual layer disc is so slow its almost useless. You can't fit a card reader in the case, so you're stuck with downloading all your pictures instead of picking and choosing. These make the iMac LESS functional, not more. Of course, you can add these devices through external ports, but that defeats the whole purpose of an all in one, doesn't it? The iMac is for those who want power and simplicity. That amounts to at most 5% of desktop buyers.
You can't fit a card reader in the case, so you're stuck with downloading all your pictures instead of picking and choosing.
What? What kind of weird camera do you have that doesn't allow you to choose pictures?
A kodak
So when you open Image Capture, you don't get a list of photos?
Okay, found it. Using a program to do what should show up in the GUI? What is this windows?
Now you're just trolling.