That's interesting and sad. I was recently helping my wife's friend and her family get a new computer. They knew I have a Mac but weren't interested enough to look at one and I make it a rule not to encourge it unless people are interested. Anyway they were trying to replace their old Dell with a new one and wanted me to advice them which configuration to go with. They had one Intel and one AMD and both were selling for about $1,800. They thought the price was too high and they were wondering if they were getting a good deal. I tried to configre one myself online and I was hard pressed to get the price below $1,800 which surprised me. Granted they were starting from scratch but Dell didn't seem to be offering anything more than Apple at that price. The other thing I noticed was how confusing Dell's site is and the range of options added to the confusion. Too many options are as bad as too few. I guess my point is this. I agree that Apple should offer headless machine but I think the upgrade paths should be well thought out and not their just to take up space and look impressive. Personally I'd rather have one great application that works (or hardware) rather than 10 kinds that are all crap.
Apple is taking this route with the Mac Pro, allowing, for the first time, in a long time, the option to buy the machine in any config you want. It's a start.
But, they should have the base machine as the lowest, rather than one in the middle. I'd rather see a machine stripped, as you can buy it anyway, as the base price listed. It would seem to be more inviting, and Apple does sell the config, so it's not asking for them to sometging they aren't already doing, on price.
The other machines they sell don't have nearly as mant options to begin with.
But, consumers really don't need such complex machines, whether from Apple, or Dell.
Apple isn't representative of users that want a cheap tower...aka the "industry". Because prosumers are that all powerful market segment that makes or breaks a computer company.
Vinea
The AIO market is tiny, maybe 1% of computers sold, but huge for Apple. When you're sitting at 5% of the market, it's nice wise to turn people away. I also wouldn't refer to companies such as velocity micro as cheap. Well, compared to $2150 for Mac Pro their cheap. I don't won't something earth shattering, I just want something to replace the old PowerMac I had that doesn't cost more than it did in '99.
The AIO market is tiny, maybe 1% of computers sold, but huge for Apple. When you're sitting at 5% of the market, it's nice wise to turn people away. I also wouldn't refer to companies such as velocity micro as cheap. Well, compared to $2150 for Mac Pro their cheap. I don't won't something earth shattering, I just want something to replace the old PowerMac I had that doesn't cost more than it did in '99.
And we both agree that a $1699 C2D Extreme Mac Pro would be a nice addition to the lineup.
I believe we part ways anywhere south of $1500. Partially on likelyhood of it ever happening under Jobs (somewhat greater than zero...but not much) and partially because Apple is winning.
And we both agree that a $1699 C2D Extreme Mac Pro would be a nice addition to the lineup.
I believe we part ways anywhere south of $1500. Partially on likelyhood of it ever happening under Jobs (somewhat greater than zero...but not much) and partially because Apple is winning.
Why screw with a winning formula?
Vinea
The 'players' that are producing that 'winning formula' aren't the desk tops. They aren't pulling their weight. The more I think about it, I think Apple should just dump the iMac and replace it with a new line up of consumer mini towers. The consumer has spoken and he likes towers over AIOs. He shouldn't but he does.
The 'players' that are producing that 'winning formula' aren't the desk tops. They aren't pulling their weight. The more I think about it, I think Apple should just dump the iMac and replace it with a new line up of consumer mini towers. The consumer has spoken and he likes towers over AIOs. He shouldn't but he does.
You want Apple to ditch their most successful desktop ever and go back to Performa style towers?
This is what happened to Apple's desktop sales when they introduced the iMac G5 (the blue line)...
The consumer has spoken and he likes the current format iMac.
You want Apple to ditch their most successful desktop ever and go back to Performa style towers?
This is what happened to Apple's desktop sales when they introduced the iMac G5 (the blue line)...
The consumer has spoken and he likes the current format iMac.
Well I,m assuming you refer to the spike in q4 04. Yes it is definitely there and I won't deny it. But look at the blue line since. Pretty much flat line. Not much growth since. The imac certainly appeals to some users but it's limited IMO. While a agree with much of your arguments in support of AIO design, it just doesn't have 'legs' from a sales standpoint.
Here are computer industry numbers from Computerworld. From 2005 to 2006 laptop sales are up 35%, desktop sales are down 5%. Laptops are outselling declining desktops across the entire computer industry.
A year ago in Computerworld we examined the reasons why laptops were taking over in business. This year laptops aren't just on a roll with business users - consumers are scooping them up in droves as well. According to an NPD Group study cited in Business Week sales of desktop computers are down 5% while notebook sales rose 35% over a 12-month period ending in October, 2006. For the week after Thanksgiving, laptop sales were up 25% over the same week in 2005, while desktop sales fell 2%, according to sales tracking numbers from Current Analysis.
Is the desktop dead? Perhaps not, but for the average consumer it's on life support. One analyst quoted in the Business Week story predicts that the desktop will soon be marginalized to the very high end and low end of the market.
Well I,m assuming you refer to the spike in q4 04. Yes it is definitely there and I won't deny it. But look at the blue line since. Pretty much flat line. Not much growth since. The imac certainly appeals to some users but it's limited IMO. While a agree with much of your arguments in support of AIO design, it just doesn't have 'legs' from a sales standpoint.
Nope. No desktop has. However, the introduction of the G5 iMac as shown in that graph proves that Apple has got their AIO right. I really can't think of another AIO that is as nice as the iMac. Even the Sony AIOs are pretty terrible and also way more expensive.
Nope. No desktop has. However, the introduction of the G5 iMac as shown in that graph proves that Apple has got their AIO right. I really can't think of another AIO that is as nice as the iMac. Even the Sony AIOs are pretty terrible and also way more expensive.
I like the iMac, I agree that the design is unmatched and it is actually far more powerful than the typical user who buys it needs. I want one. There isn't enough people who think like you and I.
There isn't enough people who think like you and I
You make quite a leap in logic with assumptions.
That all of the statistics and evidence before us all culminates to people don't want the iMac. Its just as possible if Apple offered another desktop it would have made little difference in Apple's current desktop sales, because people don't really want desktops.
That all of the statistics and evidence before us all culminates to people don't want the iMac. Its just as possible if Apple offered another desktop it would have made little difference in Apple's current desktop sales, because people don't really want desktops.
You have to ask looking at the fact that desktop sales are down, if Apple sold a Conroe mid tower for around the same price as the iMac, would it really have made a big difference?
Nope. No desktop has. However, the introduction of the G5 iMac as shown in that graph proves that Apple has got their AIO right. I really can't think of another AIO that is as nice as the iMac. Even the Sony AIOs are pretty terrible and also way more expensive.
Once again you assume that Mac users represent the computer industry as a whole. They don't. Mac users, at least the hard core ones, are a different breed with different wants and tastes than the average computer user.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign
Nope. No desktop has. However, the introduction of the G5 iMac as shown in that graph proves that Apple has got their AIO right. I really can't think of another AIO that is as nice as the iMac. Even the Sony AIOs are pretty terrible and also way more expensive.
If they had gotten it right, we'd be a little higher than 5.1% markershare wouldn't we?
Its just as possible if Apple offered another desktop it would have made little difference in Apple's current desktop sales, because people don't really want desktops.
That would be my conclusion, especially consumers, not so much office workers, who don't buy Macs anyway for the most part.
The iMac G5 was popular because of it's looks and finally a decent desktop CPU in a Mac at a decent price but all it's seemed to have done is bumped the number of people who'd buy a desktop up and unusually, keep it there, when most other manufacturers are seeing desktop sales declining. There's a couple of software factors there too I guess - Vista not shipping, Adobe not doing Universal apps. So, flatline.
At the same time, laptops got a huge kick in the pants with the Core Duo such that most people are buying them instead of desktops and not really suffering any downside. I only really ended up with an iMac because Apple's laptops at the time were pretty terrible.
I went from laptop to iMac G5 and it'll probably be laptop again although I do really like the iMac form factor. It's just nice to look at all day.
You have to ask looking at the fact that desktop sales are down, if Apple sold a Conroe mid tower for around the same price as the iMac, would it really have made a big difference?
I really don't know.
But, while I would like to buy a 24" iMac for my wife, and we're just waiting to see what Apple is doing with it, since the expected info didn't come out of Macworld as expected, for my daughter, the art student, I would rather have been able to buy a less expensive tower, rather than a Mac Pro, which I'll end up doing.
Is Apple winning with me by limiting my choices? You bet. But not everyone can afford to do that.
Once again you assume that Mac users represent the computer industry as a whole. They don't. Mac users, at least the hard core ones, are a different breed with different wants and tastes than the average computer user.
If they had gotten it right, we'd be a little higher than 5.1% markershare wouldn't we?
I haven't assumed that at all. It's been my point all along that they aren't representative and that market share is therefore pointless.
But, while I would like to buy a 24" iMac for my wife, and we're just waiting to see what Apple is doing with it, since the expected info didn't come out of Macworld as expected, for my daughter, the art student, I would rather have been able to buy a less expensive tower, rather than a Mac Pro, which I'll end up doing.
Have you used one?
I find them a bit freaky coming from a 17" iMac. They're huge. It's like being used to Minis (the car) and then seeing the newer BMW MINI which is in the same proportion as the real Mini but huge relatively. You expect it to be nearer but it's further away! Really strange perspective going on.
I suspect I could get used to it though, unlike the BMW MINIs.
I find them a bit freaky coming from a 17" iMac. They're huge. It's like being used to Minis (the car) and then seeing the newer BMW MINI which is in the same proportion as the real Mini but huge relatively. You expect it to be nearer but it's further away! Really strange perspective going on.
I suspect I could get used to it though, unlike the BMW MINIs.
I got to play with one in an Orlando, FL Apple Store, that 24" screen is something else!
While I was on it, I opened Excel, made a column of sequential numbers from 0 to 2047, did an FFT, and then a line chart of that (log y-axis), and left it that way!
The 'players' that are producing that 'winning formula' aren't the desk tops. They aren't pulling their weight. The more I think about it, I think Apple should just dump the iMac and replace it with a new line up of consumer mini towers. The consumer has spoken and he likes towers over AIOs. He shouldn't but he does.
The "desktops" are likely pulling their weight. Their meager half million+ unit sales help Apple stay competitive in the mobile arena. Dell sells twice the laptops (if not more) as Apple but but in terms of volume purchases the ratio is closer to 3-2 instead of 2-1. Meroms, 945PM, 945GM, memory, drives, etc.
Commonly used in the Apple desktop lines as well with all the attendant performance hits.
Moving the desktop lines to Conroe towers kills that synergy. Apple purchases 500K fewer meroms and 945GM chipsets from Intel. All discounts are based on volume (according to intel) so that will either raise MB/MBP prices or cut margins on the notebooks.
No, I have no clue what the discount for an extra half million parts are.
And the desktop lines are flush in margins because of their niche form factors which also contribute to their pricepoints. There are likely few non-workstation towers that claim 31% gross margins. Their niche form factor also helps keep the pricepoint high.
So if you want OSX you buy Apple's hardware. Just like if you want iTunes integration you buy an iPod. How much did software bring in this qtr? I didn't see that number.
Comments
That's interesting and sad. I was recently helping my wife's friend and her family get a new computer. They knew I have a Mac but weren't interested enough to look at one and I make it a rule not to encourge it unless people are interested. Anyway they were trying to replace their old Dell with a new one and wanted me to advice them which configuration to go with. They had one Intel and one AMD and both were selling for about $1,800. They thought the price was too high and they were wondering if they were getting a good deal. I tried to configre one myself online and I was hard pressed to get the price below $1,800 which surprised me. Granted they were starting from scratch but Dell didn't seem to be offering anything more than Apple at that price. The other thing I noticed was how confusing Dell's site is and the range of options added to the confusion. Too many options are as bad as too few. I guess my point is this. I agree that Apple should offer headless machine but I think the upgrade paths should be well thought out and not their just to take up space and look impressive. Personally I'd rather have one great application that works (or hardware) rather than 10 kinds that are all crap.
Apple is taking this route with the Mac Pro, allowing, for the first time, in a long time, the option to buy the machine in any config you want. It's a start.
But, they should have the base machine as the lowest, rather than one in the middle. I'd rather see a machine stripped, as you can buy it anyway, as the base price listed. It would seem to be more inviting, and Apple does sell the config, so it's not asking for them to sometging they aren't already doing, on price.
The other machines they sell don't have nearly as mant options to begin with.
But, consumers really don't need such complex machines, whether from Apple, or Dell.
Apple isn't representative of users that want a cheap tower...aka the "industry". Because prosumers are that all powerful market segment that makes or breaks a computer company.
Vinea
The AIO market is tiny, maybe 1% of computers sold, but huge for Apple. When you're sitting at 5% of the market, it's nice wise to turn people away. I also wouldn't refer to companies such as velocity micro as cheap. Well, compared to $2150 for Mac Pro their cheap. I don't won't something earth shattering, I just want something to replace the old PowerMac I had that doesn't cost more than it did in '99.
The AIO market is tiny, maybe 1% of computers sold, but huge for Apple. When you're sitting at 5% of the market, it's nice wise to turn people away. I also wouldn't refer to companies such as velocity micro as cheap. Well, compared to $2150 for Mac Pro their cheap. I don't won't something earth shattering, I just want something to replace the old PowerMac I had that doesn't cost more than it did in '99.
And we both agree that a $1699 C2D Extreme Mac Pro would be a nice addition to the lineup.
I believe we part ways anywhere south of $1500. Partially on likelyhood of it ever happening under Jobs (somewhat greater than zero...but not much) and partially because Apple is winning.
Why screw with a winning formula?
Vinea
And we both agree that a $1699 C2D Extreme Mac Pro would be a nice addition to the lineup.
I believe we part ways anywhere south of $1500. Partially on likelyhood of it ever happening under Jobs (somewhat greater than zero...but not much) and partially because Apple is winning.
Why screw with a winning formula?
Vinea
The 'players' that are producing that 'winning formula' aren't the desk tops. They aren't pulling their weight. The more I think about it, I think Apple should just dump the iMac and replace it with a new line up of consumer mini towers. The consumer has spoken and he likes towers over AIOs. He shouldn't but he does.
The 'players' that are producing that 'winning formula' aren't the desk tops. They aren't pulling their weight. The more I think about it, I think Apple should just dump the iMac and replace it with a new line up of consumer mini towers. The consumer has spoken and he likes towers over AIOs. He shouldn't but he does.
You want Apple to ditch their most successful desktop ever and go back to Performa style towers?
This is what happened to Apple's desktop sales when they introduced the iMac G5 (the blue line)...
The consumer has spoken and he likes the current format iMac.
You want Apple to ditch their most successful desktop ever and go back to Performa style towers?
This is what happened to Apple's desktop sales when they introduced the iMac G5 (the blue line)...
The consumer has spoken and he likes the current format iMac.
Well I,m assuming you refer to the spike in q4 04. Yes it is definitely there and I won't deny it. But look at the blue line since. Pretty much flat line. Not much growth since. The imac certainly appeals to some users but it's limited IMO. While a agree with much of your arguments in support of AIO design, it just doesn't have 'legs' from a sales standpoint.
A year ago in Computerworld we examined the reasons why laptops were taking over in business. This year laptops aren't just on a roll with business users - consumers are scooping them up in droves as well. According to an NPD Group study cited in Business Week sales of desktop computers are down 5% while notebook sales rose 35% over a 12-month period ending in October, 2006. For the week after Thanksgiving, laptop sales were up 25% over the same week in 2005, while desktop sales fell 2%, according to sales tracking numbers from Current Analysis.
Is the desktop dead? Perhaps not, but for the average consumer it's on life support. One analyst quoted in the Business Week story predicts that the desktop will soon be marginalized to the very high end and low end of the market.
Well I,m assuming you refer to the spike in q4 04. Yes it is definitely there and I won't deny it. But look at the blue line since. Pretty much flat line. Not much growth since. The imac certainly appeals to some users but it's limited IMO. While a agree with much of your arguments in support of AIO design, it just doesn't have 'legs' from a sales standpoint.
Nope. No desktop has. However, the introduction of the G5 iMac as shown in that graph proves that Apple has got their AIO right. I really can't think of another AIO that is as nice as the iMac. Even the Sony AIOs are pretty terrible and also way more expensive.
Nope. No desktop has. However, the introduction of the G5 iMac as shown in that graph proves that Apple has got their AIO right. I really can't think of another AIO that is as nice as the iMac. Even the Sony AIOs are pretty terrible and also way more expensive.
I like the iMac, I agree that the design is unmatched and it is actually far more powerful than the typical user who buys it needs. I want one. There isn't enough people who think like you and I.
There isn't enough people who think like you and I
You make quite a leap in logic with assumptions.
That all of the statistics and evidence before us all culminates to people don't want the iMac. Its just as possible if Apple offered another desktop it would have made little difference in Apple's current desktop sales, because people don't really want desktops.
You make quite a leap in logic with assumptions.
That all of the statistics and evidence before us all culminates to people don't want the iMac. Its just as possible if Apple offered another desktop it would have made little difference in Apple's current desktop sales, because people don't really want desktops.
But, we'll never know, will we?
You make quite a leap in logic with assumptions.
You say assumption, I say conclusion.
Let's call the whole thing off...
But, we'll never know, will we?
That is pretty much my point.
You have to ask looking at the fact that desktop sales are down, if Apple sold a Conroe mid tower for around the same price as the iMac, would it really have made a big difference?
Nope. No desktop has. However, the introduction of the G5 iMac as shown in that graph proves that Apple has got their AIO right. I really can't think of another AIO that is as nice as the iMac. Even the Sony AIOs are pretty terrible and also way more expensive.
Once again you assume that Mac users represent the computer industry as a whole. They don't. Mac users, at least the hard core ones, are a different breed with different wants and tastes than the average computer user.
Nope. No desktop has. However, the introduction of the G5 iMac as shown in that graph proves that Apple has got their AIO right. I really can't think of another AIO that is as nice as the iMac. Even the Sony AIOs are pretty terrible and also way more expensive.
If they had gotten it right, we'd be a little higher than 5.1% markershare wouldn't we?
Its just as possible if Apple offered another desktop it would have made little difference in Apple's current desktop sales, because people don't really want desktops.
That would be my conclusion, especially consumers, not so much office workers, who don't buy Macs anyway for the most part.
The iMac G5 was popular because of it's looks and finally a decent desktop CPU in a Mac at a decent price but all it's seemed to have done is bumped the number of people who'd buy a desktop up and unusually, keep it there, when most other manufacturers are seeing desktop sales declining. There's a couple of software factors there too I guess - Vista not shipping, Adobe not doing Universal apps. So, flatline.
At the same time, laptops got a huge kick in the pants with the Core Duo such that most people are buying them instead of desktops and not really suffering any downside. I only really ended up with an iMac because Apple's laptops at the time were pretty terrible.
I went from laptop to iMac G5 and it'll probably be laptop again although I do really like the iMac form factor. It's just nice to look at all day.
That is pretty much my point.
You have to ask looking at the fact that desktop sales are down, if Apple sold a Conroe mid tower for around the same price as the iMac, would it really have made a big difference?
I really don't know.
But, while I would like to buy a 24" iMac for my wife, and we're just waiting to see what Apple is doing with it, since the expected info didn't come out of Macworld as expected, for my daughter, the art student, I would rather have been able to buy a less expensive tower, rather than a Mac Pro, which I'll end up doing.
Is Apple winning with me by limiting my choices? You bet. But not everyone can afford to do that.
Once again you assume that Mac users represent the computer industry as a whole. They don't. Mac users, at least the hard core ones, are a different breed with different wants and tastes than the average computer user.
If they had gotten it right, we'd be a little higher than 5.1% markershare wouldn't we?
I haven't assumed that at all. It's been my point all along that they aren't representative and that market share is therefore pointless.
But, while I would like to buy a 24" iMac for my wife, and we're just waiting to see what Apple is doing with it, since the expected info didn't come out of Macworld as expected, for my daughter, the art student, I would rather have been able to buy a less expensive tower, rather than a Mac Pro, which I'll end up doing.
Have you used one?
I find them a bit freaky coming from a 17" iMac. They're huge. It's like being used to Minis (the car) and then seeing the newer BMW MINI which is in the same proportion as the real Mini but huge relatively. You expect it to be nearer but it's further away! Really strange perspective going on.
I suspect I could get used to it though, unlike the BMW MINIs.
Have you used one?
I find them a bit freaky coming from a 17" iMac. They're huge. It's like being used to Minis (the car) and then seeing the newer BMW MINI which is in the same proportion as the real Mini but huge relatively. You expect it to be nearer but it's further away! Really strange perspective going on.
I suspect I could get used to it though, unlike the BMW MINIs.
I got to play with one in an Orlando, FL Apple Store, that 24" screen is something else!
While I was on it, I opened Excel, made a column of sequential numbers from 0 to 2047, did an FFT, and then a line chart of that (log y-axis), and left it that way!
The 'players' that are producing that 'winning formula' aren't the desk tops. They aren't pulling their weight. The more I think about it, I think Apple should just dump the iMac and replace it with a new line up of consumer mini towers. The consumer has spoken and he likes towers over AIOs. He shouldn't but he does.
The "desktops" are likely pulling their weight. Their meager half million+ unit sales help Apple stay competitive in the mobile arena. Dell sells twice the laptops (if not more) as Apple but but in terms of volume purchases the ratio is closer to 3-2 instead of 2-1. Meroms, 945PM, 945GM, memory, drives, etc.
Commonly used in the Apple desktop lines as well with all the attendant performance hits.
Moving the desktop lines to Conroe towers kills that synergy. Apple purchases 500K fewer meroms and 945GM chipsets from Intel. All discounts are based on volume (according to intel) so that will either raise MB/MBP prices or cut margins on the notebooks.
No, I have no clue what the discount for an extra half million parts are.
And the desktop lines are flush in margins because of their niche form factors which also contribute to their pricepoints. There are likely few non-workstation towers that claim 31% gross margins. Their niche form factor also helps keep the pricepoint high.
So if you want OSX you buy Apple's hardware. Just like if you want iTunes integration you buy an iPod. How much did software bring in this qtr? I didn't see that number.
Vinea