Although, when Apple did 12 and 14" iBooks, the 12" was the bigger seller since the screen resolution was the same on both. I can't imagine they'd stick a 1440x900 screen on a MacBook from the Pro so I'd guess 1280x800 like the 13" MacBook and most other cheap Windows 15" laptops.
So, we're back to the same situation as before except for the fact lots of people find the 13" MacBook too big already.
Maybe not. Dell now offers cheap 15" notebooks (sub-$1000) that do 1680x1050. Apple would have to frak things up pretty extensively to not offer an equivalent res what is likely to be a considerably more expensive product.
That said, I, like you, have seen them be arrogant/complacent before on matters such as this.
of course it will come with integrated graphics. otherwise, who would buy MBP? remember that MB is for consumers and MBP is for prosumers.
Maybe they could use a lower performing discrete video chip than the MBP uses w/ smaller video memory? MBP has several other selling points for pro/prosumer use that it doesn't need to rely on just screen size and graphics chip to sell.
Apple needs BOTH- a 15" MB, and a 'subnotebook' as they're called. You're right, it is an increasingly popular segment of the market.
.
They also need a normal desktop... thats a very popular market... but they dont, just an all-in-one, a very low end machine, and a workstation. I dont see them caring about covering most of the laptop market either.
They also need a normal desktop... thats a very popular market... but they dont, just an all-in-one, a very low end machine, and a workstation. I dont see them caring about covering most of the laptop market either.
If they want more sales, they'll start to care.
Seriously, its not rocket science or huge strain on resources for them to release a 15" MB or a subnotebook. The one thing that would keep them from doing so would be Apple's fear of cannibalizing sales from a more profitable product (which is what has kept them from releasing a minitower desktop, btw).
But at some point you are just losing so many potential Windows switchers (who can get 15" PC notebooks with 1680x1050 res for under $1000 these days, btw) and somewhat-fed up established Mac users that you have to start thinking about doing the product anyway.
Because a business truism, if there ever was one, is that if you refuse to ever cannibalize your own products, someone else will do it for you.
Because a business truism, if there ever was one, is that if you refuse to ever cannibalize your own products, someone else will do it for you.
.
Exactly so!
And with a 3% market share, Apple should be focusing on appealing to the 97% of customers who don't buy Apple - by having a range of Notebooks & Desktops that appeal to a wide range of tastes & budgets. This means having a sub-notebook or two, a range of consumer models, a range of pro-sumer models, a desktop between the iMac & Mac Pro (i.e. a Mac) etc
of course it will come with integrated graphics. otherwise, who would buy MBP? remember that MB is for consumers and MBP is for prosumers.
So what you're saying is that this is the reason people buy a MBP instead of an MB! That' just ridiculous!! Whatever..One just need to check the specs to know the difference between them, plus what the "revised" MBP still might get (like led-lcd), there will be enough to separate the 15" prosumers from the 15" consumers8)
And with a 3% market share, Apple should be focusing on appealing to the 97% of customers who don't buy Apple - by having a range of Notebooks & Desktops that appeal to a wide range of tastes & budgets. This means having a sub-notebook or two, a range of consumer models, a range of pro-sumer models, a desktop between the iMac & Mac Pro (i.e. a Mac) etc
Well, you don't want Apple's line-up to get TOO sprawling and TOO confusing, because then you a Dell-type situation where you're going WTH do I buy? Also, Apple, unlike Dell, has to worry about things like inventory issues, since unlike Dell they have physical stores.
That said, Apple could easily fill its major product line holes without going over-the-top complex with the release of just three products: 15" MB, subnotebook, expandable midrange minitower.
Of course, you do have purists who think that doing even that much is Apple 'trying to be all things to all people', lol. For those folks, I imagine heaven is walking into an Apple store and seeing Apple's entire Mac lineup on one table- there'd be exactly two products, one generically marked 'desktop', and the other, 'laptop'. The end, lol. And no BTO either.
(Or actually, there'd just be one product, 'laptop', and next to it a sign reading, "Whaddya need a desktop for anyway?")
So what you're saying is that this is the reason people buy a MBP instead of an MB! That' just ridiculous!! Whatever..One just need to check the specs to know the difference between them, plus what the "revised" MBP still might get (like led-lcd), there will be enough to separate the 15" prosumers from the 15" consumers8)
What differences are there? size and case material? backlit keyboard? most of the differences other than the video are more like 'extras' to sell the deal, not the main specs.
Although I doubt anything from Digitimes is even 1% accurate regarding Apple, it makes sense for Apple to go after the mainstream Windows laptop buyer who typically buys a 15" unit. The Asian market is quite different and a 15" MacBook isn't targetting customers there.
The key will be not repeating the mistakes made with the 14" iBook. That beast was seriously lame because the screen, although much bigger, did not offer any more pixels than the 12" model and it was ridiculously heavy, weighing significantly more than the larger 15" PowerBook of the day.
At the small pro end of things, should Apple choose to compete there again, they need to avoid all the mistakes made with the 12" PowerBook, namely the fact that it was essentially an iBook with an aluminum shell and 50% price increase. Sure the graphics were marginally better as was the HD, but it was a seriously crippled PowerBook and anyone with the ability to read specs could see that.
I use public transit. My current company supplied Mac is a 17" PowerBook. It's not too heavy when carried in a backpack and I really enjoy the large screen. I know other transit users in the company who've opted for MacBooks, but I don't think I could handle anything smaller than a 15" screen.
So what you're saying is that this is the reason people buy a MBP instead of an MB! That' just ridiculous!! Whatever..One just need to check the specs to know the difference between them, plus what the "revised" MBP still might get (like led-lcd), there will be enough to separate the 15" prosumers from the 15" consumers8)
Y'know, is it just me, or is the whole 'MacBook' vs 'MacBook Pro' thing is getting a tad old? \
If Apple increased its BTO flexibility, perhaps the needs of both consumers and pros could be met with one line of laptops? You'd basically buy a screen size, and then dress it up how you wished. Though there'd be 'Good', 'Better', 'Best' suggested configs for those who don't want to hassle with the details.
Apple Stores would simply carry the 'recommended' mainstream/midrange config for each screen size, but if you didn't like 'off-the-rack' you order online, or go over your options with an Apple Store rep, who then places your order.
What differences are there? size and case material? backlit keyboard? most of the differences other than the video are more like 'extras' to sell the deal, not the main specs.
The "pro" market is more likely also going to want to have the extra Firewire port (FW800), extra USB port and the add-in card slot. No one is saying that it has to be the exact same screen and video chip either.
Well, you don't want Apple's line-up to get TOO sprawling and TOO confusing, because then you a Dell-type situation where you're going WTH do I buy? Also, Apple, unlike Dell, has to worry about things like inventory issues, since unlike Dell they have physical stores.
.
Yeah, I agree, keep the sprawl to a minimum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins
That said, Apple could easily fill its major product line holes without going over-the-top complex with the release of just three products: 15" MB, subnotebook, expandable midrange minitower.
.
Yes, that's about it
- plus revamp the existing lines, give 'em a new coat of paint, update the iMac, etc
- don't dilute the brand too much
- add a tablet (UMPC?)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins
Of course, you do have purists who think that doing even that much is Apple 'trying to be all things to all people', lol. For those folks, I imagine heaven is walking into an Apple store and seeing Apple's entire Mac lineup on one table- there'd be exactly two products, one generically marked 'desktop', and the other, 'laptop'. The end, lol. And no BTO either.
(Or actually, there'd just be one product, 'laptop', and next to it a sign reading, "Whaddya need a desktop for anyway?")
.
I don't think Apple ever wanted to only appeal to 'purists'
- they/it used to want to take over the world and bury the competition!
- those days are probably passed, but I don't see why they/it shouldn't be able to hit 10-20% of the market with the right product mix
Y'know, is it just me, or is the whole 'MacBook' vs 'MacBook Pro' thing is getting a tad old? \
If Apple increased its BTO flexibility, perhaps the needs of both consumers and pros could be met with one line of laptops? You'd basically buy a screen size, and then dress it up how you wished. Though there'd be 'Good', 'Better', 'Best' suggested configs for those who don't want to hassle with the details.
Apple Stores would simply carry the 'recommended' mainstream/midrange config for each screen size, but if you didn't like 'off-the-rack' you order online, or go over your options with an Apple Store rep, who then places your order.
.
Now that would be a f-ing good idea!! I think that is one of the coolest things you can do when you buy an Apple computer (me being an boring ex-Windows user), is the possibility to build (yes i know Dell etc. does it too) the machine(s) you want. So i want a white 13.3" MBP in white, i thank you very much!!
Sounds cool to me. It will likely be using GMA X3000. Apple could have done this last year. I'm sure this is all a strategy to keep new products in the pipeline to keep sales energized.
Having or not having a 15" MacBook isn't what keeping Apple from having 10% of the market. Not having Windows plays much more part in that.
Sounds cool to me. It will likely be using GMA X3000. Apple could have done this last year. I'm sure this is all a strategy to keep new products in the pipeline to keep sales energized.
Having or not having a 15" MacBook isn't what keeping Apple from having 10% of the market. Not having Windows plays much more part in that.
But they do have Windows now, thanks to the Intel switch.
Some of things that actually are hurting them aren't readily changeable, such as market inertia or the fact that Apple will never compete at the low-end (which is just as well actually). But there are some things they could do to help themselves, such as filling product line holes, increasing BTO flexibility, and more aggressive pricing.
No Mac ships with Windows you have to buy a copy and install it. Something no one has to do when they buy a Dell.
I don't think any of these things are necessarily hurting Apple. There are advantages to not having to support a huge user base.
The strategy Apple seems to understand is to continue to introduce new and exciting products that people desire.
Quote:
I don't think its that simple. Dell's entire focus and business model is different.
A business model that is predicated on people buying a lot of computers. But what happens when the market becomes saturated, your business model runs out of steam.
No Mac ships with Windows you have to buy a copy and install it. Something no one has to do when they buy a Dell.
Yep, but the point is, you can run Windows software on a Mac. And well, too (no emulation slowdown). No more crossing Macs off your list solely on the basis of that must-have Windows-only app.
Quote:
I don't think any of these things are necessarily hurting Apple. There are advantages to not having to support a huge user base.
I would tend to disagree with the first statement. Even with Vista out, now is still a good environment for Apple to grab a lot of switchers. Better pricing, more BTO flexibility, and filling the major (not all) product line gaps would be good for that.
Who knows, a year or so down the line when Vista is at SP2 and running smoothly, perhaps it may be harder to attract switchers. Apple has been growing its revenues tremendously in the consumer electronics space, why not hit the computer space as hard? The old 'sell to your longtime fixed base' mentality seems quaint and out of date at this juncture, what with half of Mac sales going to folks new to the platform. But Apple could be doing even better here, easily. It feels like the Mac is becoming a bit of an afterthought to Steve and Co.
Quote:
The strategy Apple seems to understand is to continue to introduce new and exciting products that people desire.
In consumer electronics, yes. But aside from Leopard, what is particularly new and exciting in the Mac space? MagSafe power connectors? Even Leopard, when released, should be more evolutionary than revolutionary.
Quote:
A business model (Dell's) that is predicated on people buying a lot of computers. But what happens when the market becomes saturated, your business model runs out of steam.
Dells sells a commodity in a commodity market (PCs). Apple avoids much of Dell's downside by trying to avoid said commodization through their design, OS, Apple Stores, branding/image/marketing, etc.
But beyond a certain point you can't support much higher prices. I think even Jobs stated that Macs should be within 10 to 20 percent of equivalent PC prices in an interview once. And leaving major product line holes open doesn't really help you be the 'un-Dell', since we're not talking about having 8 zillion combinations, just filling obvious needs, and increasing Apple's appeal to potential switchers.
There are things that are great about Apple's business model and execution, but even Apple's execution/strategy can be improved upon. I think we forget that part of what makes Apple look so good even in the Mac space (where it has arguably executed less spectacularly than in consumer electronics) is that all its major competitors are basically unimaginative dullards who have nothing interesting to sell and sell said nothing in uninteresting ways.
The one exception is Dell's online-only massively-customizable BTO model, but even that has hit its limits of late.
Comments
Although, when Apple did 12 and 14" iBooks, the 12" was the bigger seller since the screen resolution was the same on both. I can't imagine they'd stick a 1440x900 screen on a MacBook from the Pro so I'd guess 1280x800 like the 13" MacBook and most other cheap Windows 15" laptops.
So, we're back to the same situation as before except for the fact lots of people find the 13" MacBook too big already.
Maybe not. Dell now offers cheap 15" notebooks (sub-$1000) that do 1680x1050. Apple would have to frak things up pretty extensively to not offer an equivalent res what is likely to be a considerably more expensive product.
That said, I, like you, have seen them be arrogant/complacent before on matters such as this.
.
of course it will come with integrated graphics. otherwise, who would buy MBP? remember that MB is for consumers and MBP is for prosumers.
Maybe they could use a lower performing discrete video chip than the MBP uses w/ smaller video memory? MBP has several other selling points for pro/prosumer use that it doesn't need to rely on just screen size and graphics chip to sell.
Apple needs BOTH- a 15" MB, and a 'subnotebook' as they're called. You're right, it is an increasingly popular segment of the market.
.
They also need a normal desktop... thats a very popular market... but they dont, just an all-in-one, a very low end machine, and a workstation. I dont see them caring about covering most of the laptop market either.
They also need a normal desktop... thats a very popular market... but they dont, just an all-in-one, a very low end machine, and a workstation. I dont see them caring about covering most of the laptop market either.
If they want more sales, they'll start to care.
Seriously, its not rocket science or huge strain on resources for them to release a 15" MB or a subnotebook. The one thing that would keep them from doing so would be Apple's fear of cannibalizing sales from a more profitable product (which is what has kept them from releasing a minitower desktop, btw).
But at some point you are just losing so many potential Windows switchers (who can get 15" PC notebooks with 1680x1050 res for under $1000 these days, btw) and somewhat-fed up established Mac users that you have to start thinking about doing the product anyway.
Because a business truism, if there ever was one, is that if you refuse to ever cannibalize your own products, someone else will do it for you.
.
of course it will come with integrated graphics. otherwise, who would buy MBP? remember that MB is for consumers and MBP is for prosumers.
They could put in something like a x1300 64mb + hypermemory GPU.. low power, cheap, and much faster and more capable than the GMA950
If they want more sales, they'll start to care.
Because a business truism, if there ever was one, is that if you refuse to ever cannibalize your own products, someone else will do it for you.
.
Exactly so!
And with a 3% market share, Apple should be focusing on appealing to the 97% of customers who don't buy Apple - by having a range of Notebooks & Desktops that appeal to a wide range of tastes & budgets. This means having a sub-notebook or two, a range of consumer models, a range of pro-sumer models, a desktop between the iMac & Mac Pro (i.e. a Mac) etc
... but what do I know?!
of course it will come with integrated graphics. otherwise, who would buy MBP? remember that MB is for consumers and MBP is for prosumers.
So what you're saying is that this is the reason people buy a MBP instead of an MB!
Exactly so!
And with a 3% market share, Apple should be focusing on appealing to the 97% of customers who don't buy Apple - by having a range of Notebooks & Desktops that appeal to a wide range of tastes & budgets. This means having a sub-notebook or two, a range of consumer models, a range of pro-sumer models, a desktop between the iMac & Mac Pro (i.e. a Mac) etc
Well, you don't want Apple's line-up to get TOO sprawling and TOO confusing, because then you a Dell-type situation where you're going WTH do I buy? Also, Apple, unlike Dell, has to worry about things like inventory issues, since unlike Dell they have physical stores.
That said, Apple could easily fill its major product line holes without going over-the-top complex with the release of just three products: 15" MB, subnotebook, expandable midrange minitower.
Of course, you do have purists who think that doing even that much is Apple 'trying to be all things to all people', lol. For those folks, I imagine heaven is walking into an Apple store and seeing Apple's entire Mac lineup on one table- there'd be exactly two products, one generically marked 'desktop', and the other, 'laptop'. The end, lol.
(Or actually, there'd just be one product, 'laptop', and next to it a sign reading, "Whaddya need a desktop for anyway?")
.
So what you're saying is that this is the reason people buy a MBP instead of an MB!
What differences are there? size and case material? backlit keyboard? most of the differences other than the video are more like 'extras' to sell the deal, not the main specs.
The key will be not repeating the mistakes made with the 14" iBook. That beast was seriously lame because the screen, although much bigger, did not offer any more pixels than the 12" model and it was ridiculously heavy, weighing significantly more than the larger 15" PowerBook of the day.
At the small pro end of things, should Apple choose to compete there again, they need to avoid all the mistakes made with the 12" PowerBook, namely the fact that it was essentially an iBook with an aluminum shell and 50% price increase. Sure the graphics were marginally better as was the HD, but it was a seriously crippled PowerBook and anyone with the ability to read specs could see that.
I use public transit. My current company supplied Mac is a 17" PowerBook. It's not too heavy when carried in a backpack and I really enjoy the large screen. I know other transit users in the company who've opted for MacBooks, but I don't think I could handle anything smaller than a 15" screen.
So what you're saying is that this is the reason people buy a MBP instead of an MB!
Y'know, is it just me, or is the whole 'MacBook' vs 'MacBook Pro' thing is getting a tad old?
If Apple increased its BTO flexibility, perhaps the needs of both consumers and pros could be met with one line of laptops? You'd basically buy a screen size, and then dress it up how you wished. Though there'd be 'Good', 'Better', 'Best' suggested configs for those who don't want to hassle with the details.
Apple Stores would simply carry the 'recommended' mainstream/midrange config for each screen size, but if you didn't like 'off-the-rack' you order online, or go over your options with an Apple Store rep, who then places your order.
.
What differences are there? size and case material? backlit keyboard? most of the differences other than the video are more like 'extras' to sell the deal, not the main specs.
The "pro" market is more likely also going to want to have the extra Firewire port (FW800), extra USB port and the add-in card slot. No one is saying that it has to be the exact same screen and video chip either.
Well, you don't want Apple's line-up to get TOO sprawling and TOO confusing, because then you a Dell-type situation where you're going WTH do I buy? Also, Apple, unlike Dell, has to worry about things like inventory issues, since unlike Dell they have physical stores.
.
Yeah, I agree, keep the sprawl to a minimum.
That said, Apple could easily fill its major product line holes without going over-the-top complex with the release of just three products: 15" MB, subnotebook, expandable midrange minitower.
.
Yes, that's about it
- plus revamp the existing lines, give 'em a new coat of paint, update the iMac, etc
- don't dilute the brand too much
- add a tablet (UMPC?)
Of course, you do have purists who think that doing even that much is Apple 'trying to be all things to all people', lol. For those folks, I imagine heaven is walking into an Apple store and seeing Apple's entire Mac lineup on one table- there'd be exactly two products, one generically marked 'desktop', and the other, 'laptop'. The end, lol.
(Or actually, there'd just be one product, 'laptop', and next to it a sign reading, "Whaddya need a desktop for anyway?")
.
I don't think Apple ever wanted to only appeal to 'purists'
- they/it used to want to take over the world and bury the competition!
- those days are probably passed, but I don't see why they/it shouldn't be able to hit 10-20% of the market with the right product mix
Y'know, is it just me, or is the whole 'MacBook' vs 'MacBook Pro' thing is getting a tad old?
If Apple increased its BTO flexibility, perhaps the needs of both consumers and pros could be met with one line of laptops? You'd basically buy a screen size, and then dress it up how you wished. Though there'd be 'Good', 'Better', 'Best' suggested configs for those who don't want to hassle with the details.
Apple Stores would simply carry the 'recommended' mainstream/midrange config for each screen size, but if you didn't like 'off-the-rack' you order online, or go over your options with an Apple Store rep, who then places your order.
.
Now that would be a f-ing good idea!! I think that is one of the coolest things you can do when you buy an Apple computer (me being an boring ex-Windows user), is the possibility to build (yes i know Dell etc. does it too) the machine(s) you want. So i want a white 13.3" MBP in white, i thank you very much!!
Having or not having a 15" MacBook isn't what keeping Apple from having 10% of the market. Not having Windows plays much more part in that.
Y'know, is it just me, or is the whole 'MacBook' vs 'MacBook Pro' thing is getting a tad old?
No its not, look at the difference between Apple and Dells revenues and profits. That tells the whole story of who is performing best.
People here are quick to point out what Dell does but ignore that Apple is executing much better than Dell.
Sounds cool to me. It will likely be using GMA X3000. Apple could have done this last year. I'm sure this is all a strategy to keep new products in the pipeline to keep sales energized.
Having or not having a 15" MacBook isn't what keeping Apple from having 10% of the market. Not having Windows plays much more part in that.
But they do have Windows now, thanks to the Intel switch.
Some of things that actually are hurting them aren't readily changeable, such as market inertia or the fact that Apple will never compete at the low-end (which is just as well actually). But there are some things they could do to help themselves, such as filling product line holes, increasing BTO flexibility, and more aggressive pricing.
.
No its not, look at the difference between Apple and Dells revenues and profits. That tells the whole story of who is performing best.
I don't think its that simple. Dell's entire focus and business model is different.
.
I don't think any of these things are necessarily hurting Apple. There are advantages to not having to support a huge user base.
The strategy Apple seems to understand is to continue to introduce new and exciting products that people desire.
I don't think its that simple. Dell's entire focus and business model is different.
A business model that is predicated on people buying a lot of computers. But what happens when the market becomes saturated, your business model runs out of steam.
No Mac ships with Windows you have to buy a copy and install it. Something no one has to do when they buy a Dell.
Yep, but the point is, you can run Windows software on a Mac. And well, too (no emulation slowdown). No more crossing Macs off your list solely on the basis of that must-have Windows-only app.
I don't think any of these things are necessarily hurting Apple. There are advantages to not having to support a huge user base.
I would tend to disagree with the first statement. Even with Vista out, now is still a good environment for Apple to grab a lot of switchers. Better pricing, more BTO flexibility, and filling the major (not all) product line gaps would be good for that.
Who knows, a year or so down the line when Vista is at SP2 and running smoothly, perhaps it may be harder to attract switchers. Apple has been growing its revenues tremendously in the consumer electronics space, why not hit the computer space as hard? The old 'sell to your longtime fixed base' mentality seems quaint and out of date at this juncture, what with half of Mac sales going to folks new to the platform. But Apple could be doing even better here, easily. It feels like the Mac is becoming a bit of an afterthought to Steve and Co.
The strategy Apple seems to understand is to continue to introduce new and exciting products that people desire.
In consumer electronics, yes. But aside from Leopard, what is particularly new and exciting in the Mac space? MagSafe power connectors? Even Leopard, when released, should be more evolutionary than revolutionary.
A business model (Dell's) that is predicated on people buying a lot of computers. But what happens when the market becomes saturated, your business model runs out of steam.
Dells sells a commodity in a commodity market (PCs). Apple avoids much of Dell's downside by trying to avoid said commodization through their design, OS, Apple Stores, branding/image/marketing, etc.
But beyond a certain point you can't support much higher prices. I think even Jobs stated that Macs should be within 10 to 20 percent of equivalent PC prices in an interview once. And leaving major product line holes open doesn't really help you be the 'un-Dell', since we're not talking about having 8 zillion combinations, just filling obvious needs, and increasing Apple's appeal to potential switchers.
There are things that are great about Apple's business model and execution, but even Apple's execution/strategy can be improved upon. I think we forget that part of what makes Apple look so good even in the Mac space (where it has arguably executed less spectacularly than in consumer electronics) is that all its major competitors are basically unimaginative dullards who have nothing interesting to sell and sell said nothing in uninteresting ways.
The one exception is Dell's online-only massively-customizable BTO model, but even that has hit its limits of late.
.