Yes, it's a lower model, but more of a direct competitor to the MacBook 13". The XPS, whetever PR spin you want to give it, is a more high-end notebook that is offerred with dedicated gfx as an option. The Inspiron 13" is integrated only, as is the MacBook.
PS: the Inspiron even has an ExpressCard slot and a SD card reader. I need those! I hope the next MacBook has them built-in!\
Yes, the ExpressCard slot would be an awesome addition to the MacBook. I'm thinking they wont though.
The next MB will not be any cheaper but is likely to be made of aluminium, faster for the same price and based on the old inspirons we have will have a higher build quality.
Even now the current base macbook is $1009 after rebate on Amazon vs $973 for the Inspiron 13 (w/BT, camera, 802.11N, 56Whr batter). Yes, there's an annoying rebate and the drive is smaller but it's not 50% more expensive either. It is $36 more expensive. Likewise the 2.4 Ghz MacBook is $1,203.98 (after rebate) vs $1,073. $130 more expensive.
The clearance on the M1330 is a better deal than either and red is a nice color.
That you can even compare Apple pricing to Dell like this indicates that there is no real Apple tax. Just that Dell does closeout sales and Apple doesn't. Don't buy Apple products when they get near replacement and do buy Dell products when they offer them for $500+ off list.
Or wait a couple months and get the new versions of both lineups for about the same price. Except one runs OSX and the other runs Windows.
Some ppl should just go buy PC laptops if the specs appeal to them more. For me, OSX in itself is enough to more than justify any real or perceived price difference between mb/mbp's and pc's. Flowing on from that then is the ability to use Apple's pro-Apps, which combined with their hardware makes a stable, reliable working environment that can't be matched elsewhere, imo.
Always the loser's argument when a fellow Mac fan says anything sensical.
IF apple decides to price more aggressively, then of course they will be seen to be more accessible. but i don't think that their hardware is over-priced, all things (such as engineering, design, software development etc) considered.
I think they are overpriced. Updating once a year when incremental price drops are passed on by all other vendors is hair pullingly annoying.
Mac Pro? Insane £1450 approx. Quad core. Stingy ram. Out of date/sucky gpu? OVerclockers.co.uk? Quad cores, with Sli/crossfire gpus? £600-£1200.
Macbook? £799. Geeze. There's a boat load of laptops that offer the same or more for much less.
Yeesh. I think Corey has bitch-slapped enough people with logic and links. But most Apple users on this board are just in denial at even basic facts.
Heck, even when Apple IS user older chipsets, they don't lower the price. They're very rigid. The Mac Mini is a £400 computer with old cpu/chipset and crap inte graphics. No k/b. No monitor. You can get a 'decent' laptop for that.
Be within 10-20% of a given PC market equivalent. That covers the OS and the design.
Ram. HD. GPU. These things are dirt cheap these days.
iMac. Quad cores are out there in abundance in desktops. Get with the consumer tower already.
Bah. These are old arguments. But if Apple wants to get past the consumer slow down and credit crunch they've got to wake up, start focusing on Macs again. After the iPhone and iPod stuff. I'm bored. There 'core business' looks what it is. Stale. Overpriced.
At least Corey can see it. He's clearly of sound mind and body.
I think they are overpriced. Updating once a year when incremental price drops are passed on by all other vendors is hair pullingly annoying.
Mac Pro? Insane £1450 approx. Quad core. Stingy ram. Out of date/sucky gpu? OVerclockers.co.uk? Quad cores, with Sli/crossfire gpus? £600-£1200.
Macbook? £799. Geeze. There's a boat load of laptops that offer the same or more for much less.
Yeesh. I think Corey has bitch-slapped enough people with logic and links. But most Apple users on this board are just in denial at even basic facts.
Heck, even when Apple IS user older chipsets, they don't lower the price. They're very rigid. The Mac Mini is a £400 computer with old cpu/chipset and crap inte graphics. No k/b. No monitor. You can get a 'decent' laptop for that.
Be within 10-20% of a given PC market equivalent. That covers the OS and the design.
Ram. HD. GPU. These things are dirt cheap these days.
iMac. Quad cores are out there in abundance in desktops. Get with the consumer tower already.
Bah. These are old arguments. But if Apple wants to get past the consumer slow down and credit crunch they've got to wake up, start focusing on Macs again. After the iPhone and iPod stuff. I'm bored. There 'core business' looks what it is. Stale. Overpriced.
At least Corey can see it. He's clearly of sound mind and body.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I suspect the "sound mind and body" of Apple bashers that spend their time on Apple forums.
I think they are overpriced. Updating once a year when incremental price drops are passed on by all other vendors is hair pullingly annoying.
Apple has been at the forefront of significant improvements in Intel chips and chipsets. Often getting the best chips first. Over the past few months things haven't changed all that much. Montevina doesn't offer a huge boost in performance. The next big update will really come with Core i7 and Nelehem.
Given time the other OEM balance performance and cost. I imagine Apple will push beyond again with its next update. If history is followed Apple may be the first OEM with Core i7 technology.
Actually, the only thing that Corey has done is make up numbers and figures. I still don't know where I can get laptops with the MacBook's specs for $500 less (without looking at ridiculous clearance, blow-out sales).
Is anyone claiming that Apple specs are always top of the line and competitive with PCs? No, the extra few hundred that you pay for a Mac is in the software. You don't buy a Mac just for its hardware.
Actually, the only thing that Corey has done is make up numbers and figures. I still don't know where I can get laptops with the MacBook's specs for $500 less (without looking at ridiculous clearance, blow-out sales).
Is anyone claiming that Apple specs are always top of the line and competitive with PCs? No, the extra few hundred that you pay for a Mac is in the software. You don't buy a Mac just for its hardware.
And for the l33tness
(but actually, lower total sales will make for increased margins)
I think they are overpriced. Updating once a year when incremental price drops are passed on by all other vendors is hair pullingly annoying.
....
At least Corey can see it. He's clearly of sound mind and body.
Lemon Bon Bon.
You are entitled to your opinion. I'm not sure that someone pulling figures out of thin air is 'of sound mind and body' either. vinea showed that the price/spec difference is nowhere near as great as what CB claims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen
Some ppl should just go buy PC laptops if the specs appeal to them more. For me, OSX in itself is enough to more than justify any real or perceived price difference between mb/mbp's and pc's. Flowing on from that then is the ability to use Apple's pro-Apps, which combined with their hardware makes a stable, reliable working environment that can't be matched elsewhere, imo.
The parts in bold are things that unfortunately doesn't have price tags, but - for example - working in video these things matter. As a previous poster said, no-one ever claimed that apple offered to top of the line spec across every component - but I won't find as reliable an environment to work in (nor with as good a UI) for the same price in the pc world.
You are entitled to your opinion. I'm not sure that someone pulling figures out of thin air is 'of sound mind and body' either. vinea showed that the price/spec difference is nowhere near as great as what CB claims.
The parts in bold are things that unfortunately doesn't have price tags, but - for example - working in video these things matter. As a previous poster said, no-one ever claimed that apple offered to top of the line spec across every component - but I won't find as reliable an environment to work in (nor with as good a UI) for the same price in the pc world.
first of all, apples prices are higher because they sell less computers and in order to compete must make enough money to come up with new and innovative technology. they are not ripping you off. they are what is called a "boutique" manufacturer. you pay the premium so they can stay in the forefront of the technology race. if more people switched, the prices would drop, and everyone would be happy with their supierior well priced products.
secondly, i for one actually LIKE the fact that apple doesnt revise thier product lines every quarter. when i buy a new mac, i am comfortable with the feeling that for at least the next year, my computer will not become obsolete. as a biochemist, i use macs at work because they are better. at home, they make organizing my massive porn collection a breeze!
I suspect the "sound mind and body" of Apple bashers that spend their time on Apple forums.
Well, there is that.
No. There's a few things wrong with Apple's approach. I can't say many people on these boards would deny Apple's 'good things'. (And you'd need more fingers on hands and toes on feet to count them all...)
However, there are things that Apple could fix.
For example. 'WHEN' they come out. Apple's kit is near enough within a certain % competitive. Eg the Mac Pro's with all Octo line up. Cheaper than the nearest Dell equivalent by a mile.
But here's the rub. Apple waits for nearly a year for an update...or longer(!) And then the tower (or anything else in its line up...) ends up looking ridiculously overpriced. The Octo line up? Great. Xeons. But the GPU is now ridiculous! 2600 XT. Compare that to www.overclockers.com where you can get a x2 dual GPU Radeon chip with 2 GIGS of RAM! on the card...in a rig costing £1000 with 4 gigs of ram. Heh. You can get a PC rig with as much ram on the gpu as Apple's 'workstation' has system ram! Apple does this great big thing...and sits on it...too long patting themselves on the back...but PC land to its credit doesn't sit still.
www.overclockers.com If Apple offered the quad mid-tower with 4 gigs of ram and a 4800 x2 with 2 gigs of ram for a £1000? I'd be all over it.
Plain and simple. Apple doesn't offer incremental updates. And how difficult is that for something like the Mac Pro? The 7600GT stuck like sh*T with the Mac Pro for ages. As did the Radeon 1900. That was poor! It shouldn't be like this with a system starting at £1450 for a quad version. And you get stingy ram, hd drive and crap gpu.
In short, Apple takes the p*ss over ram prices, standard gpus always being underpowered for the supposed 'Pro' systems...and add insult to injury you have to pay EVEN more to get a decent one.
You can get PC laptops with far cheaper and with bigger screens. It's about time we had a 'Mac book Pro' breaking the £1000 barrier. And a Mid-tower for between £799 and £1200 with a decent gpu. It's brain gawkingly obvious. Again. I can't see any reason why we can't have a Mac Book starting at £500. I can't see why we can't have the Mac Mini at £199 inc Vat. It's far too pricey. No kb, no monitor, no mouse. And whither an iMac for a couple of hundred cheaper. Yeesh.
There's a bright spot. Apple's iMac does well compared to any PC all-in-one...but the lack of mid-tower only serves to make the Mac Pro look more ridiculous than it is towards the end of it's product cycle.
I can't understand why Apple doesn't bump the ram/hd or the GPU. Where are the 4800 series GPUs? Do they have to wait ages to update the tower 'skin'? Do they have to offer out of date monitors with outrageous prices when you can get non-Apple brand monitors with higher size and spec for less money? The five year up date cycle for monitors just about sums up the 'bad' side of Apple.
No. I guess they aren't perfect, eh?
Point is. For me, leastways. Apple aren't going to get a much better window of opportunity to 'do' Microsoft. Vista is getting hammered in the press. They have Balmer leading them for now. Aging monopolies. Their browsers are getting basted on all sides. Apple are hammering Windows Mobile with iPhone OS X and Apple's 'cool' ads have got Bill Gates storming out of tv studios. Clearly. Microsoft are concerned now. Apple are at 10% plus US marketshare. Now is the time to execute the doomsday machine. Get more aggressive. Really aggressive. If Apple can do in Mac market what they did in the iPod, iPhone markets then it's game on for 'critical' mass for Mac computers.
They've moved to Intel CPUs. They have a pretty good line-up of computer. They've got iPod and iPhone leading traffic for hands on experience of Macs in Apple stores, they have mountains of good press, OS X is miles ahead of Vista and importantly allowed people to protect their software investment with Boot Camp. What's left?
The 'price' for the 'rest of us' Mac computer. AND to fill the 'one or two' holes in their desktop and laptop computer range.
This means. (For me, I guess...) A cheaper £1000 mid-tower (With Radeon 4800!) to restore sanity (puh-lease, prices starting at £1700 and you don't even get the out of date GT as standard...2 piffals of ram and a diabetic hd...) and an upsale, jaw dropping entry level Macbook starting at £500 to really give switchers no more excuses.
Apple have a chance to reach more people, drive down quality into the 'lower' markets like they did when they brought out an 'iPod Mini' to compliment the more expensive iPod of the time. But they haven't quite executed that strategy in their Mac market. This doesn't have to mean cheapest but perhaps 'cheaper'. But they definitely could squeeze their margins to put pressure on HP and Dell who probably have much lower margins and have to do much more volume to match Apple's profits. Which would leave many PC vendors with no place to go but out of business. This period is Apple's best opportunity to chase some marketshare as ever more Apple stores are opened. And they need to introduce some 'ticket' price Macs for skinflints and it produces benefits of upsale. Apple have 3 times market growth momentum. But with the credit crunch and other factors...how long until this momentum slows? A really aggressively priced entry level laptop and mid-tower could only bolster that momentum. Yes. prices trimmed across the board. The PPC days are over. Apple has to compete these days. They're doing pretty good. But there are areas which infuriate me and others.
Score card? B. Good. But no A grade yet...
Lemon Bon Bon.
PS. Apple are on for a historic 3 million sales this quarter. At 3 times growth, next year that could turn into a 4.5 million Mac sale quarter. Think about the numbers they could do if they got REALLY aggressive on price...AND when iPhone 'Halos' and Snow Leopard opens Macs into Business with the Exchange move. Personally. I can see a tipping point as a bright light now. At the end of the tunnel.
The nay sayers can sod off; I think Lemon Bon Bon paints a succinct picture of where Apple is and where they should be headed…
really?
He's right on one point for sure though: now is as good a time as any to really try to attack Microsoft with all the negative press that will eventually wash away, and with their dumping of money around, their image will turn around and their products will improve.
So aggressive pricing and better included specs would attend to that, as well as possibly account for the cryptic "lower margins" talk.
So much typing, yet no relevant or accurate content.
You're nearly at 6000 posts. With no relevant or accurate content you'll soon blitz that and be on your way to 10,000 posts. Your succinct approach is a clear winner.
You're nearly at 6000 posts. With no relevant or accurate content you'll soon blitz that and be on your way to 10,000 posts. Your succinct approach is a clear winner.
No. There's a few things wrong with Apple's approach. I can't say many people on these boards would deny Apple's 'good things'. (And you'd need more fingers on hands and toes on feet to count them all...)
However, there are things that Apple could fix.
Ultimately the problem with your screed is its limited point of view. You are looking at Apple strictly from the view of techie spec sheets and benchmarks. A business is run from the point of view of sales, revenues, and profits.
You miss that connection. How would these incremental updates improve sales, revenues, and profits. In light of Apples stellar year over year growth. Its difficult to prove incremental updates would have made much difference.
How would incremental updates offer much overall improvement to OS X or the Mac itself. How has these updates helped Vista?
Comments
Yes, it's a lower model, but more of a direct competitor to the MacBook 13". The XPS, whetever PR spin you want to give it, is a more high-end notebook that is offerred with dedicated gfx as an option. The Inspiron 13" is integrated only, as is the MacBook.
PS: the Inspiron even has an ExpressCard slot and a SD card reader. I need those! I hope the next MacBook has them built-in!
Yes, the ExpressCard slot would be an awesome addition to the MacBook. I'm thinking they wont though.
The next MB will not be any cheaper but is likely to be made of aluminium, faster for the same price and based on the old inspirons we have will have a higher build quality.
Even now the current base macbook is $1009 after rebate on Amazon vs $973 for the Inspiron 13 (w/BT, camera, 802.11N, 56Whr batter). Yes, there's an annoying rebate and the drive is smaller but it's not 50% more expensive either. It is $36 more expensive. Likewise the 2.4 Ghz MacBook is $1,203.98 (after rebate) vs $1,073. $130 more expensive.
The clearance on the M1330 is a better deal than either and red is a nice color.
That you can even compare Apple pricing to Dell like this indicates that there is no real Apple tax. Just that Dell does closeout sales and Apple doesn't. Don't buy Apple products when they get near replacement and do buy Dell products when they offer them for $500+ off list.
Or wait a couple months and get the new versions of both lineups for about the same price. Except one runs OSX and the other runs Windows.
Some ppl should just go buy PC laptops if the specs appeal to them more. For me, OSX in itself is enough to more than justify any real or perceived price difference between mb/mbp's and pc's. Flowing on from that then is the ability to use Apple's pro-Apps, which combined with their hardware makes a stable, reliable working environment that can't be matched elsewhere, imo.
Always the loser's argument when a fellow Mac fan says anything sensical.
IF apple decides to price more aggressively, then of course they will be seen to be more accessible. but i don't think that their hardware is over-priced, all things (such as engineering, design, software development etc) considered.
I think they are overpriced. Updating once a year when incremental price drops are passed on by all other vendors is hair pullingly annoying.
Mac Pro? Insane £1450 approx. Quad core. Stingy ram. Out of date/sucky gpu? OVerclockers.co.uk? Quad cores, with Sli/crossfire gpus? £600-£1200.
Macbook? £799. Geeze. There's a boat load of laptops that offer the same or more for much less.
Yeesh. I think Corey has bitch-slapped enough people with logic and links. But most Apple users on this board are just in denial at even basic facts.
Heck, even when Apple IS user older chipsets, they don't lower the price. They're very rigid. The Mac Mini is a £400 computer with old cpu/chipset and crap inte graphics. No k/b. No monitor. You can get a 'decent' laptop for that.
Be within 10-20% of a given PC market equivalent. That covers the OS and the design.
Ram. HD. GPU. These things are dirt cheap these days.
iMac. Quad cores are out there in abundance in desktops. Get with the consumer tower already.
Bah. These are old arguments. But if Apple wants to get past the consumer slow down and credit crunch they've got to wake up, start focusing on Macs again. After the iPhone and iPod stuff. I'm bored. There 'core business' looks what it is. Stale. Overpriced.
At least Corey can see it. He's clearly of sound mind and body.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I think they are overpriced. Updating once a year when incremental price drops are passed on by all other vendors is hair pullingly annoying.
Mac Pro? Insane £1450 approx. Quad core. Stingy ram. Out of date/sucky gpu? OVerclockers.co.uk? Quad cores, with Sli/crossfire gpus? £600-£1200.
Macbook? £799. Geeze. There's a boat load of laptops that offer the same or more for much less.
Yeesh. I think Corey has bitch-slapped enough people with logic and links. But most Apple users on this board are just in denial at even basic facts.
Heck, even when Apple IS user older chipsets, they don't lower the price. They're very rigid. The Mac Mini is a £400 computer with old cpu/chipset and crap inte graphics. No k/b. No monitor. You can get a 'decent' laptop for that.
Be within 10-20% of a given PC market equivalent. That covers the OS and the design.
Ram. HD. GPU. These things are dirt cheap these days.
iMac. Quad cores are out there in abundance in desktops. Get with the consumer tower already.
Bah. These are old arguments. But if Apple wants to get past the consumer slow down and credit crunch they've got to wake up, start focusing on Macs again. After the iPhone and iPod stuff. I'm bored. There 'core business' looks what it is. Stale. Overpriced.
At least Corey can see it. He's clearly of sound mind and body.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I suspect the "sound mind and body" of Apple bashers that spend their time on Apple forums.
I think they are overpriced. Updating once a year when incremental price drops are passed on by all other vendors is hair pullingly annoying.
Apple has been at the forefront of significant improvements in Intel chips and chipsets. Often getting the best chips first. Over the past few months things haven't changed all that much. Montevina doesn't offer a huge boost in performance. The next big update will really come with Core i7 and Nelehem.
Given time the other OEM balance performance and cost. I imagine Apple will push beyond again with its next update. If history is followed Apple may be the first OEM with Core i7 technology.
Is anyone claiming that Apple specs are always top of the line and competitive with PCs? No, the extra few hundred that you pay for a Mac is in the software. You don't buy a Mac just for its hardware.
Actually, the only thing that Corey has done is make up numbers and figures. I still don't know where I can get laptops with the MacBook's specs for $500 less (without looking at ridiculous clearance, blow-out sales).
Is anyone claiming that Apple specs are always top of the line and competitive with PCs? No, the extra few hundred that you pay for a Mac is in the software. You don't buy a Mac just for its hardware.
And for the l33tness
(but actually, lower total sales will make for increased margins)
I think they are overpriced. Updating once a year when incremental price drops are passed on by all other vendors is hair pullingly annoying.
....
At least Corey can see it. He's clearly of sound mind and body.
Lemon Bon Bon.
You are entitled to your opinion. I'm not sure that someone pulling figures out of thin air is 'of sound mind and body' either. vinea showed that the price/spec difference is nowhere near as great as what CB claims.
Some ppl should just go buy PC laptops if the specs appeal to them more. For me, OSX in itself is enough to more than justify any real or perceived price difference between mb/mbp's and pc's. Flowing on from that then is the ability to use Apple's pro-Apps, which combined with their hardware makes a stable, reliable working environment that can't be matched elsewhere, imo.
The parts in bold are things that unfortunately doesn't have price tags, but - for example - working in video these things matter. As a previous poster said, no-one ever claimed that apple offered to top of the line spec across every component - but I won't find as reliable an environment to work in (nor with as good a UI) for the same price in the pc world.
You are entitled to your opinion. I'm not sure that someone pulling figures out of thin air is 'of sound mind and body' either. vinea showed that the price/spec difference is nowhere near as great as what CB claims.
The parts in bold are things that unfortunately doesn't have price tags, but - for example - working in video these things matter. As a previous poster said, no-one ever claimed that apple offered to top of the line spec across every component - but I won't find as reliable an environment to work in (nor with as good a UI) for the same price in the pc world.
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB...mco=MTUzMzk5Nw
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB...mco=MTUzMzk5Nw
Are you going to make a point with that link?
secondly, i for one actually LIKE the fact that apple doesnt revise thier product lines every quarter. when i buy a new mac, i am comfortable with the feeling that for at least the next year, my computer will not become obsolete. as a biochemist, i use macs at work because they are better. at home, they make organizing my massive porn collection a breeze!
I suspect the "sound mind and body" of Apple bashers that spend their time on Apple forums.
Well, there is that.
No. There's a few things wrong with Apple's approach. I can't say many people on these boards would deny Apple's 'good things'. (And you'd need more fingers on hands and toes on feet to count them all...)
However, there are things that Apple could fix.
For example. 'WHEN' they come out. Apple's kit is near enough within a certain % competitive. Eg the Mac Pro's with all Octo line up. Cheaper than the nearest Dell equivalent by a mile.
But here's the rub. Apple waits for nearly a year for an update...or longer(!) And then the tower (or anything else in its line up...) ends up looking ridiculously overpriced. The Octo line up? Great. Xeons. But the GPU is now ridiculous! 2600 XT. Compare that to www.overclockers.com where you can get a x2 dual GPU Radeon chip with 2 GIGS of RAM! on the card...in a rig costing £1000 with 4 gigs of ram. Heh. You can get a PC rig with as much ram on the gpu as Apple's 'workstation' has system ram!
www.overclockers.com If Apple offered the quad mid-tower with 4 gigs of ram and a 4800 x2 with 2 gigs of ram for a £1000? I'd be all over it.
Plain and simple. Apple doesn't offer incremental updates. And how difficult is that for something like the Mac Pro? The 7600GT stuck like sh*T with the Mac Pro for ages. As did the Radeon 1900. That was poor! It shouldn't be like this with a system starting at £1450 for a quad version. And you get stingy ram, hd drive and crap gpu.
In short, Apple takes the p*ss over ram prices, standard gpus always being underpowered for the supposed 'Pro' systems...and add insult to injury you have to pay EVEN more to get a decent one.
You can get PC laptops with far cheaper and with bigger screens. It's about time we had a 'Mac book Pro' breaking the £1000 barrier. And a Mid-tower for between £799 and £1200 with a decent gpu. It's brain gawkingly obvious. Again. I can't see any reason why we can't have a Mac Book starting at £500. I can't see why we can't have the Mac Mini at £199 inc Vat. It's far too pricey. No kb, no monitor, no mouse. And whither an iMac for a couple of hundred cheaper. Yeesh.
There's a bright spot. Apple's iMac does well compared to any PC all-in-one...but the lack of mid-tower only serves to make the Mac Pro look more ridiculous than it is towards the end of it's product cycle.
I can't understand why Apple doesn't bump the ram/hd or the GPU. Where are the 4800 series GPUs? Do they have to wait ages to update the tower 'skin'? Do they have to offer out of date monitors with outrageous prices when you can get non-Apple brand monitors with higher size and spec for less money? The five year up date cycle for monitors just about sums up the 'bad' side of Apple.
No. I guess they aren't perfect, eh?
Point is. For me, leastways. Apple aren't going to get a much better window of opportunity to 'do' Microsoft. Vista is getting hammered in the press. They have Balmer leading them for now. Aging monopolies. Their browsers are getting basted on all sides. Apple are hammering Windows Mobile with iPhone OS X and Apple's 'cool' ads have got Bill Gates storming out of tv studios. Clearly. Microsoft are concerned now. Apple are at 10% plus US marketshare. Now is the time to execute the doomsday machine. Get more aggressive. Really aggressive. If Apple can do in Mac market what they did in the iPod, iPhone markets then it's game on for 'critical' mass for Mac computers.
They've moved to Intel CPUs. They have a pretty good line-up of computer. They've got iPod and iPhone leading traffic for hands on experience of Macs in Apple stores, they have mountains of good press, OS X is miles ahead of Vista and importantly allowed people to protect their software investment with Boot Camp. What's left?
The 'price' for the 'rest of us' Mac computer. AND to fill the 'one or two' holes in their desktop and laptop computer range.
This means. (For me, I guess...) A cheaper £1000 mid-tower (With Radeon 4800!) to restore sanity (puh-lease, prices starting at £1700 and you don't even get the out of date GT as standard...2 piffals of ram and a diabetic hd...) and an upsale, jaw dropping entry level Macbook starting at £500 to really give switchers no more excuses.
Apple have a chance to reach more people, drive down quality into the 'lower' markets like they did when they brought out an 'iPod Mini' to compliment the more expensive iPod of the time. But they haven't quite executed that strategy in their Mac market. This doesn't have to mean cheapest but perhaps 'cheaper'. But they definitely could squeeze their margins to put pressure on HP and Dell who probably have much lower margins and have to do much more volume to match Apple's profits. Which would leave many PC vendors with no place to go but out of business. This period is Apple's best opportunity to chase some marketshare as ever more Apple stores are opened. And they need to introduce some 'ticket' price Macs for skinflints and it produces benefits of upsale. Apple have 3 times market growth momentum. But with the credit crunch and other factors...how long until this momentum slows? A really aggressively priced entry level laptop and mid-tower could only bolster that momentum. Yes. prices trimmed across the board. The PPC days are over. Apple has to compete these days. They're doing pretty good. But there are areas which infuriate me and others.
Score card? B. Good. But no A grade yet...
Lemon Bon Bon.
PS. Apple are on for a historic 3 million sales this quarter. At 3 times growth, next year that could turn into a 4.5 million Mac sale quarter. Think about the numbers they could do if they got REALLY aggressive on price...AND when iPhone 'Halos' and Snow Leopard opens Macs into Business with the Exchange move. Personally. I can see a tipping point as a bright light now. At the end of the tunnel.
Well, there is that.
No. There's a few things wrong with Apple's approach...
So much typing, yet no relevant or accurate content.
So much typing, yet no relevant or accurate content.
Yep, Apple is running the way that he would like it too. I wonder if he knows that it isn't his company?
The nay sayers can sod off; I think Lemon Bon Bon paints a succinct picture of where Apple is and where they should be headed…
The nay sayers can sod off; I think Lemon Bon Bon paints a succinct picture of where Apple is and where they should be headed?
I agree.
The nay sayers can sod off; I think Lemon Bon Bon paints a succinct picture of where Apple is and where they should be headed…
really?
He's right on one point for sure though: now is as good a time as any to really try to attack Microsoft with all the negative press that will eventually wash away, and with their dumping of money around, their image will turn around and their products will improve.
So aggressive pricing and better included specs would attend to that, as well as possibly account for the cryptic "lower margins" talk.
So much typing, yet no relevant or accurate content.
You're nearly at 6000 posts. With no relevant or accurate content you'll soon blitz that and be on your way to 10,000 posts. Your succinct approach is a clear winner.
Lemon Bon Bon.
You're nearly at 6000 posts. With no relevant or accurate content you'll soon blitz that and be on your way to 10,000 posts. Your succinct approach is a clear winner.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Well, there is that.
No. There's a few things wrong with Apple's approach. I can't say many people on these boards would deny Apple's 'good things'. (And you'd need more fingers on hands and toes on feet to count them all...)
However, there are things that Apple could fix.
Ultimately the problem with your screed is its limited point of view. You are looking at Apple strictly from the view of techie spec sheets and benchmarks. A business is run from the point of view of sales, revenues, and profits.
You miss that connection. How would these incremental updates improve sales, revenues, and profits. In light of Apples stellar year over year growth. Its difficult to prove incremental updates would have made much difference.
How would incremental updates offer much overall improvement to OS X or the Mac itself. How has these updates helped Vista?