we're also talking a company that isn't even in the top ten. Sony is known for making good laptops. They were also known for charging boutique prices for run of the mill PCs
And Apple doesn't charge boutique prices?
Exactly how much better is a Mac tower than any other PC? And how much cheaper would it be compared to a VAIO tower which Sony had positioned to offer the same thing as Apple does: better productivity tools (VAIO Media, Click to DVD, DVgate, PictureGear Studio, SonicStage, VAIO Web Phone, Network Smart Capture, MSS Works, Photoshop Elements, Premiere LE, PowerDVD, etc), sylish looks and integration with Sony products like cameras. It came with Firewire built in for a long while (just like Macs).
The competitive advantage of these things are somewhat weaker than iLife but the strategy was similar. Sony also had a huge halo effect from their consumer electronics with a loyal following (somewhat less loyal than in previous decades).
The description of Sony VAIO towers holds true for Apple towers: over priced, weak stock graphics card for gaming, nice styling, good multimedia bundle, nice integration with other Apple products. Loser.
The difference is that Apple has the OSX operating system...which is so grand an advantage that by your argument you can't convince folks to switch without moving them to a big boxy computer with expansion capabilities the majority will never use and a performance advantage only hard core gamers and upper end users would likely notice (ie not the web surfing, general computing masses that might play web games and WoW). OSX might make it somewhat less of a loser than a VAIO tower. But not by much...its too easy to compare a Dell Tower and a VAIO Tower and a Mac Tower.
Same C2D processor, same components, same form factor, 31% margins. Apple Tax obvious for anyone to see. iMac...notebook parts, thin, stylish, AIO. Hard to make 1-1 comparisons and say "The iMac is hideously overpriced for a run of the mill PC who's only advantage is OSX but which you'll need to buy Vista to play any games anyway." Its not a run of the mill PC.
Folks are switching but its not the no brainer tower proponents make it out to be.
I think we can conclude that desk tops are a mature area with little growth. Still if people replace their desk tops with another desk top that still would mean a lot of sales if not growth in sales. But are they replacing them with lap tops? Hmm...
Only hard core gamers get hurt moving to a laptop IMHO. Most other users could live with a cheaper laptop as a desktop replacement. Laptops have gotten to the affordable stage at $800 for a C2D laptop and cheaper still for a AMD Turion 64 or Sempron laptop.
There really isn't anything I can't do with my MBP than my Mac Pro and I'm above average in my computer needs as a .Net/MDX dev. The primary difference is speed which is quite large but hey...the Mac Pro is a workstation class machine and much more expensive.
Exactly how much better is a Mac tower than any other PC? And how much cheaper would it be compared to a VAIO tower which Sony had positioned to offer the same thing as Apple does: better productivity tools (VAIO Media, Click to DVD, DVgate, PictureGear Studio, SonicStage, VAIO Web Phone, Network Smart Capture, MSS Works, Photoshop Elements, Premiere LE, PowerDVD, etc), sylish looks and integration with Sony products like cameras. It came with Firewire built in for a long while (just like Macs).
The competitive advantage of these things are somewhat weaker than iLife but the strategy was similar. Sony also had a huge halo effect from their consumer electronics with a loyal following (somewhat less loyal than in previous decades).
The description of Sony VAIO towers holds true for Apple towers: over priced, weak stock graphics card for gaming, nice styling, good multimedia bundle, nice integration with other Apple products. Loser.
The difference is that Apple has the OSX operating system...which is so grand an advantage that by your argument you can't convince folks to switch without moving them to a big boxy computer with expansion capabilities the majority will never use and a performance advantage only hard core gamers and upper end users would likely notice (ie not the web surfing, general computing masses that might play web games and WoW). OSX might make it somewhat less of a loser than a VAIO tower. But not by much...its too easy to compare a Dell Tower and a VAIO Tower and a Mac Tower.
Same C2D processor, same components, same form factor, 31% margins. Apple Tax obvious for anyone to see. iMac...notebook parts, thin, stylish, AIO. Hard to make 1-1 comparisons and say "The iMac is hideously overpriced for a run of the mill PC who's only advantage is OSX but which you'll need to buy Vista to play any games anyway." Its not a run of the mill PC.
Folks are switching but its not the no brainer tower proponents make it out to be.
Vinea
Sony assembles parts that are send to them by the OEMs. All they have to do is design what they want the tower to look like. Everything else is predetermined by the mATX form factor. Apple makes innovations, they engineer every part. I could definitely tell the difference between the thought that went into the construction of my G3 and the assembling of parts that was the HP that replaced it. The current Mac Pro design is what an ATX tower should be, well minus the prohibitively expensive workstation parts.
Same C2D processor, same components, same form factor, 31% margins. Apple Tax obvious for anyone to see. iMac...notebook parts, thin, stylish, AIO. Hard to make 1-1 comparisons and say "The iMac is hideously overpriced for a run of the mill PC who's only advantage is OSX but which you'll need to buy Vista to play any games anyway." Its not a run of the mill PC.
After the DVD drive, CPU and consequently the FSB speed, the rest of the iMac is desktop parts though. SATA 3.5" 7200 drives, desktop GPUs make a world of difference when a faster FSB doesn't really.
The way talk is going here, it seems as though people think desktops will go the way of the Dodo.
We may be surprised yet.
I don't think so. They have their market. What's clear though is that currently, there's no real downside to getting a laptop instead of a desktop for most people bearing in mind near parity in performance and marginal cost increase.
What might change it of course is laptop chips stuck at 2 cores and 2.33Ghz as the roadmaps currently show, and desktop chips all going 4 core and 3Ghz+ for no extra money.
Sony assembles parts that are send to them by the OEMs. All they have to do is design what they want the tower to look like. Everything else is predetermined by the mATX form factor. Apple makes innovations, they engineer every part. I could definitely tell the difference between the thought that went into the construction of my G3 and the assembling of parts that was the HP that replaced it. The current Mac Pro design is what an ATX tower should be, well minus the prohibitively expensive workstation parts.
So? And no...as much as I like my Mac Pro its not the ultimate in design for ATX towers. Its still a couple inches too big to be rackable. The build quality is very high but so what? Build quality of the Sony's I've seen were high. And they didn't look bad...just Sony like. If THAT mattered HP and Dell wouldn't have the lion's share of the market.
The only reason that Apple doesn't use stock parts is because of the desire to keep OSX off standard PCs by using EFI. That's not some compelling advantage for the consumer.
There wasn't much wrong with Sony's VAIO line. The market apparently doesn't support boutique desktops which is what a Conroe Mac would be given Apple's margins. A boutique tower running a boutique OS for a few folks willing to fork over high margins for OSX.
The way talk is going here, it seems as though people think desktops will go the way of the Dodo.
We may be surprised yet.
My point about desktops is future growth and market share. Desktops are being outpaced and will become a much smaller market than laptops and mobile communications devices.
No I don't think the desktop will ever go away. I will always want a desktop at home. The larger screen, larger/faster hard drive. I can plug peripherals into it and not need to unplug them.
After the DVD drive, CPU and consequently the FSB speed, the rest of the iMac is desktop parts though. SATA 3.5" 7200 drives, desktop GPUs make a world of difference when a faster FSB doesn't really.
With the 17 and 20 inch models, the only desktop part is the hard drive. The graphics chip is the mobility radeon 1600. The 24 inch model uses desktop GPUs on a mobile connection standard.
With the 17 and 20 inch models, the only desktop part is the hard drive. The graphics chip is the mobility radeon 1600. The 24 inch model uses desktop GPUs on a mobile connection standard.
My point about desktops is future growth and market share. Desktops are being outpaced and will become a much smaller market than laptops and mobile communications devices.
No I don't think the desktop will ever go away. I will always want a desktop at home. The larger screen, larger/faster hard drive. I can plug peripherals into it and not need to unplug them.
I think we look at this in too predictable a fashion.
I'm pretty sure that both desktop, and portable lines, will morph into something we aren't using now.
Whatever trends are presently occurring, could easily enough reverse, if the machines undergo a strong enough transition.
The 45 nm chips are considered to be a significant enough advance, now that leakage seems to have been stalled, to make big changes in both desktop, and portable use.
For many people, usage might change enough so that current categories of machines might disappear, other than for specialized purposes.
Something more like a meld between the iPhone, and the Origami machines might be the medium term future of portable computing. If prices are low enough, people might find that they want both a portable, and a fixed model again. Or that portable device might become the front-end to a much more powerful unit in the home, with massive storage, and extreme computational ability, and wall sized screens.
Of course, I'm considering a longer range situation. Over the next two or three years, most will remain basically the same.
So? And no...as much as I like my Mac Pro its not the ultimate in design for ATX towers. Its still a couple inches too big to be rackable. The build quality is very high but so what? Build quality of the Sony's I've seen were high. And they didn't look bad...just Sony like. If THAT mattered HP and Dell wouldn't have the lion's share of the market.
The only reason that Apple doesn't use stock parts is because of the desire to keep OSX off standard PCs by using EFI. That's not some compelling advantage for the consumer.
There wasn't much wrong with Sony's VAIO line. The market apparently doesn't support boutique desktops which is what a Conroe Mac would be given Apple's margins. A boutique tower running a boutique OS for a few folks willing to fork over high margins for OSX.
Vinea
While I agree with most of what you said, I think that the PC market does support boutique brands. Sony's problem is that they are too big to have just a boutique brand. After all, both Alien, and VooDoo were boutique brands (and there are others), and did quite well. But their sales numbers wouldn't support a Sony. As parts of far larger corporations now, they should continue to thrive, while giving (they hope) some pazazz to the new mother companies. We'll see.
But, Apple can sell more expensive machines because they are not Windows. People buy the OS, mostly, and the snazzy machines come with it. If Apple were just another Windows licensee, I doubt they could get away with it on the scale they can now.
Not that I'm saying that their machines are over priced. I don't believe they are. But, I have always thought that Apple should go a bit lower as well.
Apple will never make a reasonably priced desktop which has decent storage options.
Well some of us live in hope....
!!!Sheeebang!!!
If you buy a mini/ a mac pro or a/ portable I say you should earn the right to the special $249 Mac OS X CD for your core duo(2) PC (with limited video card support). It's the same price as Vista premium upgrade and approx 2.5 X what they charged for the clone licensing...
More hackers yes.. But as before more hackers don't = lost cash...
Same no of AIO buyers will 'put-out' for the iMac because it's a niche market. They don't want anything else. LOL!!!!.
+ plus special protection to secure the all important portable mac market from all but the hard core hackers.
Something more like a meld between the iPhone, and the Origami machines might be the medium term future of portable computing. If prices are low enough, people might find that they want both a portable, and a fixed model again. Or that portable device might become the front-end to a much more powerful unit in the home, with massive storage, and extreme computational ability, and wall sized screens.
The latter seems more likely than the two former options. I've looked at Sony UMPC and its very nice but the contstraint for mobility computing is input mechanisms (keyboard) and output (screensize). Even with multi touch interfaces there's a minimum size for what is comfortable beyond surfing and light chat/email work.
Once you reach this and you can add compute power connected to wireless data sources (including disks) a laptop becomes a viable desktop replacement.
The latter seems more likely than the two former options. I've looked at Sony UMPC and its very nice but the contstraint for mobility computing is input mechanisms (keyboard) and output (screensize). Even with multi touch interfaces there's a minimum size for what is comfortable beyond surfing and light chat/email work.
Once you reach this and you can add compute power connected to wireless data sources (including disks) a laptop becomes a viable desktop replacement.
Vinea
Of course, it depends on what we mean by "desktop".
I have a feeling that "desktop" will become an obsolete term.
A "house" computer of some kind would be the replacement.
The only people who would need a laptop with a "real" keyboard and screen would be those who have actual need of one, who do a lot of typing, or technical work of some kind.
But, the vast majority of the population doesn't need that, not really. But, I do think that their "personal" mobile device, whatever it becomes, will be able to sync almost anywhere, to the home system, passing data, and messages, back and forth, keeping the user advised of whatever events is of importance to them. At the same time, allowing them to get whatever they need to have ready for them when they do get home.
I don't really see a laptop as being a real product, except for, as I said, those who really need to do work with them, in the future.
Touch interfaces, and voice interfacing will become far more advanced as computing power is upgraded.
Comments
we're also talking a company that isn't even in the top ten. Sony is known for making good laptops. They were also known for charging boutique prices for run of the mill PCs
And Apple doesn't charge boutique prices?
Exactly how much better is a Mac tower than any other PC? And how much cheaper would it be compared to a VAIO tower which Sony had positioned to offer the same thing as Apple does: better productivity tools (VAIO Media, Click to DVD, DVgate, PictureGear Studio, SonicStage, VAIO Web Phone, Network Smart Capture, MSS Works, Photoshop Elements, Premiere LE, PowerDVD, etc), sylish looks and integration with Sony products like cameras. It came with Firewire built in for a long while (just like Macs).
The competitive advantage of these things are somewhat weaker than iLife but the strategy was similar. Sony also had a huge halo effect from their consumer electronics with a loyal following (somewhat less loyal than in previous decades).
The description of Sony VAIO towers holds true for Apple towers: over priced, weak stock graphics card for gaming, nice styling, good multimedia bundle, nice integration with other Apple products. Loser.
The difference is that Apple has the OSX operating system...which is so grand an advantage that by your argument you can't convince folks to switch without moving them to a big boxy computer with expansion capabilities the majority will never use and a performance advantage only hard core gamers and upper end users would likely notice (ie not the web surfing, general computing masses that might play web games and WoW). OSX might make it somewhat less of a loser than a VAIO tower. But not by much...its too easy to compare a Dell Tower and a VAIO Tower and a Mac Tower.
Same C2D processor, same components, same form factor, 31% margins. Apple Tax obvious for anyone to see. iMac...notebook parts, thin, stylish, AIO. Hard to make 1-1 comparisons and say "The iMac is hideously overpriced for a run of the mill PC who's only advantage is OSX but which you'll need to buy Vista to play any games anyway." Its not a run of the mill PC.
Folks are switching but its not the no brainer tower proponents make it out to be.
Vinea
I think we can conclude that desk tops are a mature area with little growth. Still if people replace their desk tops with another desk top that still would mean a lot of sales if not growth in sales. But are they replacing them with lap tops? Hmm...
Only hard core gamers get hurt moving to a laptop IMHO. Most other users could live with a cheaper laptop as a desktop replacement. Laptops have gotten to the affordable stage at $800 for a C2D laptop and cheaper still for a AMD Turion 64 or Sempron laptop.
There really isn't anything I can't do with my MBP than my Mac Pro and I'm above average in my computer needs as a .Net/MDX dev. The primary difference is speed which is quite large but hey...the Mac Pro is a workstation class machine and much more expensive.
Vinea
We may be surprised yet.
And Apple doesn't charge boutique prices?
Exactly how much better is a Mac tower than any other PC? And how much cheaper would it be compared to a VAIO tower which Sony had positioned to offer the same thing as Apple does: better productivity tools (VAIO Media, Click to DVD, DVgate, PictureGear Studio, SonicStage, VAIO Web Phone, Network Smart Capture, MSS Works, Photoshop Elements, Premiere LE, PowerDVD, etc), sylish looks and integration with Sony products like cameras. It came with Firewire built in for a long while (just like Macs).
The competitive advantage of these things are somewhat weaker than iLife but the strategy was similar. Sony also had a huge halo effect from their consumer electronics with a loyal following (somewhat less loyal than in previous decades).
The description of Sony VAIO towers holds true for Apple towers: over priced, weak stock graphics card for gaming, nice styling, good multimedia bundle, nice integration with other Apple products. Loser.
The difference is that Apple has the OSX operating system...which is so grand an advantage that by your argument you can't convince folks to switch without moving them to a big boxy computer with expansion capabilities the majority will never use and a performance advantage only hard core gamers and upper end users would likely notice (ie not the web surfing, general computing masses that might play web games and WoW). OSX might make it somewhat less of a loser than a VAIO tower. But not by much...its too easy to compare a Dell Tower and a VAIO Tower and a Mac Tower.
Same C2D processor, same components, same form factor, 31% margins. Apple Tax obvious for anyone to see. iMac...notebook parts, thin, stylish, AIO. Hard to make 1-1 comparisons and say "The iMac is hideously overpriced for a run of the mill PC who's only advantage is OSX but which you'll need to buy Vista to play any games anyway." Its not a run of the mill PC.
Folks are switching but its not the no brainer tower proponents make it out to be.
Vinea
Sony assembles parts that are send to them by the OEMs. All they have to do is design what they want the tower to look like. Everything else is predetermined by the mATX form factor. Apple makes innovations, they engineer every part. I could definitely tell the difference between the thought that went into the construction of my G3 and the assembling of parts that was the HP that replaced it. The current Mac Pro design is what an ATX tower should be, well minus the prohibitively expensive workstation parts.
Same C2D processor, same components, same form factor, 31% margins. Apple Tax obvious for anyone to see. iMac...notebook parts, thin, stylish, AIO. Hard to make 1-1 comparisons and say "The iMac is hideously overpriced for a run of the mill PC who's only advantage is OSX but which you'll need to buy Vista to play any games anyway." Its not a run of the mill PC.
After the DVD drive, CPU and consequently the FSB speed, the rest of the iMac is desktop parts though. SATA 3.5" 7200 drives, desktop GPUs make a world of difference when a faster FSB doesn't really.
The way talk is going here, it seems as though people think desktops will go the way of the Dodo.
We may be surprised yet.
I don't think so. They have their market. What's clear though is that currently, there's no real downside to getting a laptop instead of a desktop for most people bearing in mind near parity in performance and marginal cost increase.
What might change it of course is laptop chips stuck at 2 cores and 2.33Ghz as the roadmaps currently show, and desktop chips all going 4 core and 3Ghz+ for no extra money.
Sony assembles parts that are send to them by the OEMs. All they have to do is design what they want the tower to look like. Everything else is predetermined by the mATX form factor. Apple makes innovations, they engineer every part. I could definitely tell the difference between the thought that went into the construction of my G3 and the assembling of parts that was the HP that replaced it. The current Mac Pro design is what an ATX tower should be, well minus the prohibitively expensive workstation parts.
So? And no...as much as I like my Mac Pro its not the ultimate in design for ATX towers. Its still a couple inches too big to be rackable. The build quality is very high but so what? Build quality of the Sony's I've seen were high. And they didn't look bad...just Sony like. If THAT mattered HP and Dell wouldn't have the lion's share of the market.
The only reason that Apple doesn't use stock parts is because of the desire to keep OSX off standard PCs by using EFI. That's not some compelling advantage for the consumer.
There wasn't much wrong with Sony's VAIO line. The market apparently doesn't support boutique desktops which is what a Conroe Mac would be given Apple's margins. A boutique tower running a boutique OS for a few folks willing to fork over high margins for OSX.
Vinea
The way talk is going here, it seems as though people think desktops will go the way of the Dodo.
We may be surprised yet.
My point about desktops is future growth and market share. Desktops are being outpaced and will become a much smaller market than laptops and mobile communications devices.
No I don't think the desktop will ever go away. I will always want a desktop at home. The larger screen, larger/faster hard drive. I can plug peripherals into it and not need to unplug them.
After the DVD drive, CPU and consequently the FSB speed, the rest of the iMac is desktop parts though. SATA 3.5" 7200 drives, desktop GPUs make a world of difference when a faster FSB doesn't really.
With the 17 and 20 inch models, the only desktop part is the hard drive. The graphics chip is the mobility radeon 1600. The 24 inch model uses desktop GPUs on a mobile connection standard.
With the 17 and 20 inch models, the only desktop part is the hard drive. The graphics chip is the mobility radeon 1600. The 24 inch model uses desktop GPUs on a mobile connection standard.
So??????
So??????
You pretty much said the iMacs were made mostly of desktop parts.
You pretty much said the iMacs were made mostly of desktop parts.
The mobility Radeon X1600 is identical to the desktop version just it runs at 400Mhz instead of around 500Mhz in the iMac. Does that bother you?
My point about desktops is future growth and market share. Desktops are being outpaced and will become a much smaller market than laptops and mobile communications devices.
No I don't think the desktop will ever go away. I will always want a desktop at home. The larger screen, larger/faster hard drive. I can plug peripherals into it and not need to unplug them.
I think we look at this in too predictable a fashion.
I'm pretty sure that both desktop, and portable lines, will morph into something we aren't using now.
Whatever trends are presently occurring, could easily enough reverse, if the machines undergo a strong enough transition.
The 45 nm chips are considered to be a significant enough advance, now that leakage seems to have been stalled, to make big changes in both desktop, and portable use.
For many people, usage might change enough so that current categories of machines might disappear, other than for specialized purposes.
Something more like a meld between the iPhone, and the Origami machines might be the medium term future of portable computing. If prices are low enough, people might find that they want both a portable, and a fixed model again. Or that portable device might become the front-end to a much more powerful unit in the home, with massive storage, and extreme computational ability, and wall sized screens.
Of course, I'm considering a longer range situation. Over the next two or three years, most will remain basically the same.
So? And no...as much as I like my Mac Pro its not the ultimate in design for ATX towers. Its still a couple inches too big to be rackable. The build quality is very high but so what? Build quality of the Sony's I've seen were high. And they didn't look bad...just Sony like. If THAT mattered HP and Dell wouldn't have the lion's share of the market.
The only reason that Apple doesn't use stock parts is because of the desire to keep OSX off standard PCs by using EFI. That's not some compelling advantage for the consumer.
There wasn't much wrong with Sony's VAIO line. The market apparently doesn't support boutique desktops which is what a Conroe Mac would be given Apple's margins. A boutique tower running a boutique OS for a few folks willing to fork over high margins for OSX.
Vinea
While I agree with most of what you said, I think that the PC market does support boutique brands. Sony's problem is that they are too big to have just a boutique brand. After all, both Alien, and VooDoo were boutique brands (and there are others), and did quite well. But their sales numbers wouldn't support a Sony. As parts of far larger corporations now, they should continue to thrive, while giving (they hope) some pazazz to the new mother companies. We'll see.
But, Apple can sell more expensive machines because they are not Windows. People buy the OS, mostly, and the snazzy machines come with it. If Apple were just another Windows licensee, I doubt they could get away with it on the scale they can now.
Not that I'm saying that their machines are over priced. I don't believe they are. But, I have always thought that Apple should go a bit lower as well.
LOL!
Apple will never make a reasonably priced desktop which has decent storage options.
Well some of us live in hope....
!!!Sheeebang!!!
If you buy a mini/ a mac pro or a/ portable I say you should earn the right to the special $249 Mac OS X CD for your core duo(2) PC (with limited video card support). It's the same price as Vista premium upgrade and approx 2.5 X what they charged for the clone licensing...
More hackers yes.. But as before more hackers don't = lost cash...
Same no of AIO buyers will 'put-out' for the iMac because it's a niche market. They don't want anything else. LOL!!!!.
+ plus special protection to secure the all important portable mac market from all but the hard core hackers.
Something more like a meld between the iPhone, and the Origami machines might be the medium term future of portable computing. If prices are low enough, people might find that they want both a portable, and a fixed model again. Or that portable device might become the front-end to a much more powerful unit in the home, with massive storage, and extreme computational ability, and wall sized screens.
The latter seems more likely than the two former options. I've looked at Sony UMPC and its very nice but the contstraint for mobility computing is input mechanisms (keyboard) and output (screensize). Even with multi touch interfaces there's a minimum size for what is comfortable beyond surfing and light chat/email work.
Once you reach this and you can add compute power connected to wireless data sources (including disks) a laptop becomes a viable desktop replacement.
Vinea
Apple will never make a reasonably priced desktop which has decent storage options.
Well of all the arguments against the iMac I've always felt this was the weakest. This is what a NAS is for.
Vinea
The latter seems more likely than the two former options. I've looked at Sony UMPC and its very nice but the contstraint for mobility computing is input mechanisms (keyboard) and output (screensize). Even with multi touch interfaces there's a minimum size for what is comfortable beyond surfing and light chat/email work.
Once you reach this and you can add compute power connected to wireless data sources (including disks) a laptop becomes a viable desktop replacement.
Vinea
Of course, it depends on what we mean by "desktop".
I have a feeling that "desktop" will become an obsolete term.
A "house" computer of some kind would be the replacement.
The only people who would need a laptop with a "real" keyboard and screen would be those who have actual need of one, who do a lot of typing, or technical work of some kind.
But, the vast majority of the population doesn't need that, not really. But, I do think that their "personal" mobile device, whatever it becomes, will be able to sync almost anywhere, to the home system, passing data, and messages, back and forth, keeping the user advised of whatever events is of importance to them. At the same time, allowing them to get whatever they need to have ready for them when they do get home.
I don't really see a laptop as being a real product, except for, as I said, those who really need to do work with them, in the future.
Touch interfaces, and voice interfacing will become far more advanced as computing power is upgraded.
But, this is all further out.