Apple could do a lot better with the desk top segment if it stopped playing the all in one games and offered a consumer tower. You want a pci slot you have to get a MacPro. This runs off folks.
Patently wrong. You are coming from the biased position of being a computer enthusiast. 99% of the buying public are not. 99% of consumers who purchase a computer will never 1) add memory, 2) add a PCI card, 3) update their OS, 4) change anything. They will live with what they have because they don't want to deal with upgrading. An Apple "consumer tower" would have very limited appeal to the vast majority of potential buyers. The only reason the average customer buys a tower now is because that's all they have to choose from at Best Buy, Circuit City. They buy the tower and never add anything to it, EVER.
Agreed. A minimum $2500 entry fee to get a truly expandable desktop Mac is a tad ridiculous. And no doubt it is keeping some folks from switching.
Jesus H, is a resonably priced mini-tower too much to ask?
Yeah, it'd cannibalize sales of other desktops some, but it'd also bring in new buyers and increase Apple's marketshare.
.
Wrong. The market for an expandable consumer tower is incredibly minute. 99% of consumers never add anything to their systems after buying. They buy a tower because nothing else is available in the PC sections of Best Buy and Circuit City. We computer enthusiasts with more time on our hands than we should have (hence we post here) think the market revolves around us. It does not. Our idea of the perfect machine is not at all the same as the average consumer. It's like the audiophiles who look down on 128 Kb/s encoding but which the average consumer finds perfectly acceptable. As a consumer product the iMac is perfect for the average user as they don't need or want to expand their systems. "We" do. "They" don't.
I thought I heard him say that they are excited about the new lineup of iPods for 1st quarter and holiday season. There are no new iPods unless he is hinting about a new iPod before Christmas
Or possibly he is speaking from a financial standpoint, that he cannot wait to see how the new (and already released) iPods do for the first quarter which happens to be the holiday buying season?
They know what they're doing, but they're not putting enough of a premium on marketshare during a time when its there for the taking.
Growth can be good in genera but not all growth is equal. Some types of growth are much better than other types of growth.
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 4% of the US market, it holds the most desirable 4% 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 is actively pursuing.
Quote:
It would still be nice to have a sub-1000 notebook. Maybe like an Intel Core Solo 1.6GHz and a normal screen
I can agree it would be nice psychologically if the lowest price MacBook was $999. But if they continue to upgrade the processor that may not happen.
The problem with sub-$1000 notebooks is the fact you have to put in a slower processor and slash features to maintain profit.
It seems Apple wants its current line to have minimum functionality which is above the sub-$1000 category. Apple is likely protecting its low end so that current hardware will be able to run future software.
Quote:
Jesus H, is a resonably priced mini-tower too much to ask?
I agree the MacPro is way beyond what most people can afford on need. Apple should give us a lower end expandable desktop.
Its timing with these sort of things though. It would not have been smart for Apple to introduce a brand new redesigned MacPro and a cheaper desktop option.
Right now for expandability there is no choice but to buy the MacPro. So people will buy it. After a couple of quarters as sales slow, to continue to spur growth you then introduce the new cheaper tower.
Wrong. The market for an expandable consumer tower is incredibly minute. 99% of consumers never add anything to their systems after buying.
Oh. You mean like gamers, video guys, sound guys, etc.? \
Hate to break it to ya, but that's definitely more than 1% of the market. Or it could be, for Apple, if only they offered a product for them that was less than $2.5K.
It's a missed opportunity for Apple. We can debate about the size of it, but its a missed opportunity.
Oh. You mean like gamers, video guys, sound guys, etc.
I would not put gaming in the same category as professional industries. Gaming is not a job.
Generally people who are in video, sound, photography as a business that makes money are willing to pay money for the best gear. They don't shop for bargains.
Oh. You mean like gamers, video guys, sound guys, etc.? \
Gamers - they buy PCs.
Video Guys - they buy MacPros and MacBook Pros if they need it portable.
Sound guys - they buy MacPros.
The desktops sold pretty well already, just not as stellar as the laptops. Many desktop users are waiting on software arriving still - ie. Adobe / Macromedia. When that ships, you'll see sales pick up on the desktops and in particular the MacPros. In the meantime many Pros are happier with G5s and by the time Adobe is ready, there'll be faster Intel chips too.
Sure. Because Apple doesn't have hardware that meets their needs/budget. Kind of makes my point for me.
Yes, software is a big part of it too- the PC side gets more games, and often gets them sooner. But Macs get most of the hit games, and you'd be suprised... there is a small but fervent Mac gamer community out there. And it could easily become bigger, if only Apple would make it easier on them.
Quote:
Video Guys - they buy MacPros and MacBook Pros if they need it portable.
If they've got $2500 burning a hole in their pocket, they do. Otherwise, they go PC. Trust me, I've seen it, and I feel bad for 'em.
I would not put gaming in the same category as professional industries. Gaming is not a job.
Who cares, so long as they buy computers? Its a distinction without a difference as far as Apple is concerned... or should be. 8) ATI and NVidia sure haven't gone broke catering to that market, now have they?
And actually, I know some folks for whom gaming IS a job... they work in the industry.
Sure. Because Apple doesn't have hardware that meets their needs/budget. Kind of makes my point for me.
Yep it does. So?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins
Yes, software is a big part of it too- the PC side gets more games, and often gets them sooner. But Macs get most of the hit games, and you'd be suprised... there is a small but fervent Mac gamer community out there. And it could easily become bigger, if only Apple would make it easier on them.
It's a small percentage of a small percentage of consumers in an ever smaller market as more and more gamers buy consoles instead of PCs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins
If they've got $2500 burning a hole in their pocket, they do. Otherwise, they go PC. Trust me, I've seen it, and I feel bad for 'em.
As above.
.
I'm an extremely cheap web designer. We get paid a fraction of video and sound pros. $2500 is a week or two's work and a Mac is worth much more than that in saved time later. I would suggest your pros aren't very pro.
Who cares, so long as they buy computers? Its a distinction without a difference as far as Apple is concerned... or should be. 8) ATI and NVidia sure haven't gone broke catering to that market, now have they?
Most of ATI and Nvidias market is to OEMs not gamers.
Sorry, but I'm trying to work at the same time as I post. Guess which is more important?
Quote:
Video and sound people who are successful and prosperous at their profession would see the $2500 as an investment in their business.
Amateurs would sweat the price.
And it doesn't matter a whit, or shouldn't... gamers money is just as green as professionals', even if there's less of it per user. Its not like gamers are spendthrifts either... they do buy high-end vid cards and good, even high-end, systems. But asking them to spend a minimum of $2500 isn't forward-thinking.
Who cares, so long as they buy computers? Its a distinction without a difference as far as Apple is concerned... or should be. ATI and NVidia sure haven't gone broke catering to that market, now have they?
And actually, I know some folks for whom gaming IS a job... they work in the industry.
ATI and Nvidia make the far bulk of their money from their consumer GPU's. The gaming GPU's are mostly bragging rights.
You said gamers not people who design and code games. People who design games would need an expensive computer for their work.
What makes the difference is that media professionals actually make money that can pay for computers and software. If Appleinsider Forums is any indication. Gamers are people who whine that Apple does not put $500 graphic cards in $1000 computers because they cannot afford a $2500 computer.
Yah, but a disproportionate amount of their high-end stuff is to gamers. And that's where the big profits are
I cannot find the exact numbers right now. The market and profit of computer gaming hit its height in the late 90's and has been going down ever since.
The market and profits for console gaming is three time larger.
It's a small percentage of a small percentage of consumers in an ever smaller market as more and more gamers buy consoles instead of PCs.
That's been the theory. But suprisingly, PC gaming refuses to go away. Guess what's the most profitable game out there right now? Yep, World of Warcraft, a PC/Mac game. They've hit 7 million users playing, each shelling out $15/month to play. That works out to $105 million a month, or over $1.2 BILLION dollars a year, all from ONE game.
Don't fool yourself... computer gaming isn't going away. I say this as someone who knows folks who work in console gaming... they say the same thing.
Quote:
I'm an extremely cheap web designer. We get paid a fraction of video and sound pros. $2500 is a week or two's work and a Mac is worth much more than that in saved time later. I would suggest your pros aren't very pro.
They make do with what they can afford, like ANY pro... better that they can get in the game than not play at all.
Doesn't change the fact that they would've loved to have gone Mac, but were scared off by the price. \
Re-read the bolded sentence from your own post, and you'll see why Apple needs a sub-$1K notebook ASAP.
They know what they're doing, but they're not putting enough of a premium on marketshare during a time when its there for the taking. Apple's currently doing a good job of gaining share, but they could be doing GREAT.
And now's the opportunity to do so, laid out on a golden carpet. 8)
.
While it doesn't seem to be much more, it's 3% of the world market. That's 50% greater.
From these increases, we will see US marketshare up as well, possibly at 5%.
Comments
Apple could do a lot better with the desk top segment if it stopped playing the all in one games and offered a consumer tower. You want a pci slot you have to get a MacPro. This runs off folks.
Patently wrong. You are coming from the biased position of being a computer enthusiast. 99% of the buying public are not. 99% of consumers who purchase a computer will never 1) add memory, 2) add a PCI card, 3) update their OS, 4) change anything. They will live with what they have because they don't want to deal with upgrading. An Apple "consumer tower" would have very limited appeal to the vast majority of potential buyers. The only reason the average customer buys a tower now is because that's all they have to choose from at Best Buy, Circuit City. They buy the tower and never add anything to it, EVER.
Agreed. A minimum $2500 entry fee to get a truly expandable desktop Mac is a tad ridiculous. And no doubt it is keeping some folks from switching.
Jesus H, is a resonably priced mini-tower too much to ask?
Yeah, it'd cannibalize sales of other desktops some, but it'd also bring in new buyers and increase Apple's marketshare.
.
Wrong. The market for an expandable consumer tower is incredibly minute. 99% of consumers never add anything to their systems after buying. They buy a tower because nothing else is available in the PC sections of Best Buy and Circuit City. We computer enthusiasts with more time on our hands than we should have (hence we post here) think the market revolves around us. It does not. Our idea of the perfect machine is not at all the same as the average consumer. It's like the audiophiles who look down on 128 Kb/s encoding but which the average consumer finds perfectly acceptable. As a consumer product the iMac is perfect for the average user as they don't need or want to expand their systems. "We" do. "They" don't.
I thought I heard him say that they are excited about the new lineup of iPods for 1st quarter and holiday season. There are no new iPods unless he is hinting about a new iPod before Christmas
Or possibly he is speaking from a financial standpoint, that he cannot wait to see how the new (and already released) iPods do for the first quarter which happens to be the holiday buying season?
They know what they're doing, but they're not putting enough of a premium on marketshare during a time when its there for the taking.
Growth can be good in genera but not all growth is equal. Some types of growth are much better than other types of growth.
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 4% of the US market, it holds the most desirable 4% 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 is actively pursuing.
It would still be nice to have a sub-1000 notebook. Maybe like an Intel Core Solo 1.6GHz and a normal screen
I can agree it would be nice psychologically if the lowest price MacBook was $999. But if they continue to upgrade the processor that may not happen.
The problem with sub-$1000 notebooks is the fact you have to put in a slower processor and slash features to maintain profit.
It seems Apple wants its current line to have minimum functionality which is above the sub-$1000 category. Apple is likely protecting its low end so that current hardware will be able to run future software.
Jesus H, is a resonably priced mini-tower too much to ask?
I agree the MacPro is way beyond what most people can afford on need. Apple should give us a lower end expandable desktop.
Its timing with these sort of things though. It would not have been smart for Apple to introduce a brand new redesigned MacPro and a cheaper desktop option.
Right now for expandability there is no choice but to buy the MacPro. So people will buy it. After a couple of quarters as sales slow, to continue to spur growth you then introduce the new cheaper tower.
And what company do you run that has $10 billion dollars in the bank?
Yah, I'm sure Apple execs said something like that back in the early/mid '90s too. Right before Apple hit the iceberg.
Arrogance isn't helpful here. In fact, its a pretty good early predictor of a company's downfall.
Let's hope Jobs & Co. aren't that arrogant.
.
Wrong. The market for an expandable consumer tower is incredibly minute. 99% of consumers never add anything to their systems after buying.
Oh. You mean like gamers, video guys, sound guys, etc.?
Hate to break it to ya, but that's definitely more than 1% of the market. Or it could be, for Apple, if only they offered a product for them that was less than $2.5K.
It's a missed opportunity for Apple. We can debate about the size of it, but its a missed opportunity.
.
Oh. You mean like gamers, video guys, sound guys, etc.
I would not put gaming in the same category as professional industries. Gaming is not a job.
Generally people who are in video, sound, photography as a business that makes money are willing to pay money for the best gear. They don't shop for bargains.
Oh. You mean like gamers, video guys, sound guys, etc.?
Gamers - they buy PCs.
Video Guys - they buy MacPros and MacBook Pros if they need it portable.
Sound guys - they buy MacPros.
The desktops sold pretty well already, just not as stellar as the laptops. Many desktop users are waiting on software arriving still - ie. Adobe / Macromedia. When that ships, you'll see sales pick up on the desktops and in particular the MacPros. In the meantime many Pros are happier with G5s and by the time Adobe is ready, there'll be faster Intel chips too.
Gamers - they buy PCs.
Sure. Because Apple doesn't have hardware that meets their needs/budget. Kind of makes my point for me.
Yes, software is a big part of it too- the PC side gets more games, and often gets them sooner. But Macs get most of the hit games, and you'd be suprised... there is a small but fervent Mac gamer community out there. And it could easily become bigger, if only Apple would make it easier on them.
Video Guys - they buy MacPros and MacBook Pros if they need it portable.
If they've got $2500 burning a hole in their pocket, they do. Otherwise, they go PC. Trust me, I've seen it, and I feel bad for 'em.
Sound guys - they buy MacPros.
As above.
.
I would not put gaming in the same category as professional industries. Gaming is not a job.
Who cares, so long as they buy computers? Its a distinction without a difference as far as Apple is concerned... or should be. 8) ATI and NVidia sure haven't gone broke catering to that market, now have they?
And actually, I know some folks for whom gaming IS a job... they work in the industry.
.
Sure. Because Apple doesn't have hardware that meets their needs/budget. Kind of makes my point for me.
Yep it does. So?
Yes, software is a big part of it too- the PC side gets more games, and often gets them sooner. But Macs get most of the hit games, and you'd be suprised... there is a small but fervent Mac gamer community out there. And it could easily become bigger, if only Apple would make it easier on them.
It's a small percentage of a small percentage of consumers in an ever smaller market as more and more gamers buy consoles instead of PCs.
If they've got $2500 burning a hole in their pocket, they do. Otherwise, they go PC. Trust me, I've seen it, and I feel bad for 'em.
As above.
.
I'm an extremely cheap web designer. We get paid a fraction of video and sound pros. $2500 is a week or two's work and a Mac is worth much more than that in saved time later. I would suggest your pros aren't very pro.
If they've got $2500 burning a hole in their pocket, they do. Otherwise, they go PC. Trust me, I've seen it, and I feel bad for 'em.
I see you skipped over my response.
Video and sound people who are successful and prosperous at their profession would see the $2500 as an investment in their business.
Amateurs would sweat the price.
Who cares, so long as they buy computers? Its a distinction without a difference as far as Apple is concerned... or should be. 8) ATI and NVidia sure haven't gone broke catering to that market, now have they?
Most of ATI and Nvidias market is to OEMs not gamers.
I see you skipped over my response.
Sorry, but I'm trying to work at the same time as I post. Guess which is more important?
Video and sound people who are successful and prosperous at their profession would see the $2500 as an investment in their business.
Amateurs would sweat the price.
And it doesn't matter a whit, or shouldn't... gamers money is just as green as professionals', even if there's less of it per user. Its not like gamers are spendthrifts either... they do buy high-end vid cards and good, even high-end, systems. But asking them to spend a minimum of $2500 isn't forward-thinking.
.
Most of ATI and Nvidias market is to OEMs not gamers.
Yah, but a disproportionate amount of their high-end stuff is to gamers. And that's where the big profits are.
.
Who cares, so long as they buy computers? Its a distinction without a difference as far as Apple is concerned... or should be. ATI and NVidia sure haven't gone broke catering to that market, now have they?
And actually, I know some folks for whom gaming IS a job... they work in the industry.
ATI and Nvidia make the far bulk of their money from their consumer GPU's. The gaming GPU's are mostly bragging rights.
You said gamers not people who design and code games. People who design games would need an expensive computer for their work.
What makes the difference is that media professionals actually make money that can pay for computers and software. If Appleinsider Forums is any indication. Gamers are people who whine that Apple does not put $500 graphic cards in $1000 computers because they cannot afford a $2500 computer.
Yah, but a disproportionate amount of their high-end stuff is to gamers. And that's where the big profits are
I cannot find the exact numbers right now. The market and profit of computer gaming hit its height in the late 90's and has been going down ever since.
The market and profits for console gaming is three time larger.
Yep it does. So?
So, I'm right. Thanks for helping me out on that.
It's a small percentage of a small percentage of consumers in an ever smaller market as more and more gamers buy consoles instead of PCs.
That's been the theory. But suprisingly, PC gaming refuses to go away. Guess what's the most profitable game out there right now? Yep, World of Warcraft, a PC/Mac game. They've hit 7 million users playing, each shelling out $15/month to play. That works out to $105 million a month, or over $1.2 BILLION dollars a year, all from ONE game.
Don't fool yourself... computer gaming isn't going away. I say this as someone who knows folks who work in console gaming... they say the same thing.
I'm an extremely cheap web designer. We get paid a fraction of video and sound pros. $2500 is a week or two's work and a Mac is worth much more than that in saved time later. I would suggest your pros aren't very pro.
They make do with what they can afford, like ANY pro... better that they can get in the game than not play at all.
Doesn't change the fact that they would've loved to have gone Mac, but were scared off by the price.
.
Re-read the bolded sentence from your own post, and you'll see why Apple needs a sub-$1K notebook ASAP.
They know what they're doing, but they're not putting enough of a premium on marketshare during a time when its there for the taking. Apple's currently doing a good job of gaining share, but they could be doing GREAT.
And now's the opportunity to do so, laid out on a golden carpet. 8)
.
While it doesn't seem to be much more, it's 3% of the world market. That's 50% greater.
From these increases, we will see US marketshare up as well, possibly at 5%.